Fine....add the non-AAA and casual titles to  a list. I doubt that will help any in anyones argument against Sony when comparing it to Microsoft. It actually makes things worse. The majority of Sonys titles are on the core front where as Microsofts are mainly on the casual, so that makes it ten times worse. The core get thrown like 2-3 shooters a year from Microsoft to keep them happy. I need variety in my life on a core front. I dont compare AAA's for fun you know. I do it because I became accustomed to how people compare years of their consoles by throwing out the highly rated and high budget titles. In truth this is more accurate because they are the draw of the console. Hell...thats the reason there is even the name AAA. When you look at gamestops website, its all AAA offerings on the front page because the bulk of their money comes from that.

Casual titles are titles where there is little complexity or learning curve. Core titles have a longer learning curve. Games on the Wii or move could be considered more core than Kinect, starting with the fact that they have controls with buttons. The rest is left up to the developer. I've met plenty of casuals who will watch a core gamer play GOW3 or UFC 11 but wont play the game because of the complexity and learning curve of controllers, but they will marvel at the title in action. If Microsoft can find a dev who can give you a immersive controller-like experience without the buttons, that is truly core. Ryse is not core, which is why all the people who thought it would be an MMO were let down. This is how I feel right now, but we will see in the future. As I said before, only the future will tell because Microsoft is taking a huge risk in saying there is a kinect core audience. Watch Bonus Round Microsoft to see what I am saying. As I said before If the general audience saw the roller coaster ride that was Kinect the show would've gotten A pluses all around, but instead Microsoft marketed it to the core as if they wanted it too. It may not have dropped your expectations but it dropped a whole lot of other peoples expectations. Michael Pachter was saying that Microsoft needs to push the core too, but he knows they will throw more kinect on the table come this E3. What happened? Exactly what he said. Ryse will be lucky to sell over a 1.5 million. I doubt it will even sell a million but thats about the highest it will do with commercial backing.

So you need buttons to play core titles?

Leave. Go.

@Michael, I am not satisfied at all, it could have been much better in terms of games offered, because quite frankly anything that can approach "decent" in my eyes is the Minecraft and Ryse for Kinect compatible, which isn't that much. Thought it'd be much more filled by now, with more E3 announcements for the remained of the year/start of 2012.

Ryse is not core? I bet you it will be much harder for someone like you or me to pick up and learn the controls. This is just insane, then how is Sly core, but Ryse not? Think about it, M rated game built where you can gouge someones eyes out, or cell-shaded platformer?

I watch all Bonus rounds, what you say is your interpretation. They never say MS has given up on the non-kinect user base, they just say that that userbase is getting a lot smaller now, at least on the 360.

I'm sorry, but your definition of a "core" title removes a lot of core games like Super Mario Galaxy, Donkey Kong Country, Mario Kart, Sly, etc. None of these games have complicated learning curces (with DKCR it's just move and jump).

You're picking and choosing games to include in a debate based off preference. Fable Kinect is as much of a core title as Fable, the only difference between the games is The Journey has no controller. Ryse is also an M rated game, definatly not something built for casual gamers. That would be like calling Killzone a casual game, just insane.

When you use youre definition of core, you basically eliminate Wii's entire lineup except Metroid and Zelda, and that's complete BS. Ryse is as much of a core game as Starhawk, it was built by Crytek, for the core audience. Just because you're not interested, doesn't mean it's not a game "core" gamers can experience on the 360, but not the PS3.

Wait....what AAA titles does Sony have coming out? The only high profile game announced at E3 this year was Halo 4, did I miss something big?

If you only debated core AAA games, then MS psns Sony. Forza 4, Gears 3, The Witcher 2, and Halo 4 next year, and Sony has Uncharted 3, Resistance 3 and The Last Guardian next year. However, like I always say, 1 or two game difference, who gives a hoothoot.

Thing is you debate "core" games, but then ignore "core" games that you're not interested in. Fable: The Journey, and Ryse being key ones. Also casual or not, Just Dance 2 is a fun ass game, and definatly should count in any silly comparisions. You complain about 360 not having enough variety, and then you dismiss the variety given, make up your mind.

It wont be hard to learn Ryse, hence why its called casual. Secondly you pick and choose games by prefrence. As I said before, I could list the whole Sony lineup for 2011, but you would disregard it because of your preference in waiting for Q4 releases when all the only 360 AAA  titles come out for the year. You chose to disregard that Sony has been giving giving out quality titles year round.

Secondly, my definition of core does NOT remove Super Mario Galaxy, Donkey Kong or Mario Kart, because all of those games have a learning curve, and it seems like you dont remember our old conversation because this the same thing you accused me of before. My definition of core seems to be the media idea as well. Secondly I've told you already that Microsoft and Sony already seem to have similar audience of taste in their core section, who mainly play based on preference of system or have both. The Wii has its own loyal core fanbase, whom are loyal to their first party IP's complex or not. Nintendo stands out, hence why this gen turned out this way and Sony and Microsoft followed suit. Nintendo is the only company who can appeal to everyone with a gimmick. Kinect has none and Microsoft have none and Sony definitely doesn't have Crash (Sony's highest selling casual exclusive) or Spyro anymore whom the casuals remember so well from two gens ago when the Playstation was sucking up third party exclusives. Much like Nintendo said at E3 they are contradiction.

http://www.casualgamesassociation.org/faq.php

Look at the casual games associations concept of what a casual title is.

Here you go again listing only Q4 of the year instead of the year as a whole. Our argument is Microsoft and Sonys year as a whole. Microsoft PWNed nothing. I have too many friends who had to sit and watch (and still are) me play my PS3 because their 360 has no exclusives. Then we all go and play third party games and talk about it. Ok...you want to add Halo four to the list ? A game coming next year? This makes the argument sadder and easier. Make a list right now of the top 360 exclusives between this year and next year and I will open up some hurt by listing the 2011-2012 Sony list. This is where I love Sony's theory on having stronger first party is correct. I cannot wait for the list. Since you like creating lists show me this years exclusives and next years. You have a very contradictory style now talking about AAA exclusives and then agreeing with the other guys that casual titles should be added to the list.  Either way....its still a loss.

STOP QUOTING SUCH LONG THREADS OF QUOTES! Sheesh, express some maturity, people.

Why does every thread have to end in an argument?

This is the internet, it has been scientifically proven that people are biologically incapable of expressing their opinions without resorting to mud-slinging.  It's science, you can't explain that!