First off, I don't know what he's talking about with pc/ps3 doing crappy but 360 doing well (?), but what is your basis for claiming gears 2 would do better on ps3/pc and as compared to what, 360/pc? (if you are comparing those two...read on...)

Sounds ridiculous to me...ps3s install base is no where near xbox's install base (NA particularly). PS3's online network, at this point in time, cannot compare to xboxs (and i doubt it will even be on par with it before the end of the year) which was a major selling point for the original gears of war. And, gears already has an installled based with its 360 users. Tell me why install base on ps3 would buy more gears 2 than the install base of 360.

I love it when the REAL fanboys call others fanboys, especially when their arguments consist of non-factual, baseless conclusions, derived from complete and total bias! Oh, and Gears would not have done better on the PS3, you are a fool to think that.

Gosh, most of the people that posted now are totally in the dark. UT3 for the PS3 flopped hard. it sold less than 120k up till now, nowhere near the amount that Epic needs to recoup their losses from making the game.

With that in mind it would seem a good idea on MS's side to fight for the 3rd GOW title for their console. They just have a very good reason for that title to be on the xbox and not on the PS3, a supposed AAAAA+ title (as stated by Leo-j and a few others) just turned out to have awful sales for the PS3. Doesn't matter if the franchise is or isn't popular like some of you people say, this game should've sold more than it has, regardles of it's public status.

By your logic, there is no such thing as a sleeper hit (which everyone knows they indeed exist) and by that same "flawless" logic every big budget title is a winner (which everyoneknows is indeed not true).

EDIT: You should also note that you're comparing the next install of a critically acclaimed and highly established franchise to a single game....  

@twesterm: Actually considering they have an unreal engine sitting there (so they don't need to develop that) as well as the game mechanics of Gears of War pretty much "complete" in the first game (thus not needing to run as many trials on the combat/shooter system) development time should take less then the original. I do agree that a 2 year development cycle is a little short, but saying FFXIII who have a new engine built from the ground up as well as development for a new platform, will come first, is a bit of a stretch. You say that Epic is meticulous in their development, I'm sure the same can be said of Square Enix when it comes to the FF titles in the main series (I to X and then XII). Also, just because they show trailers, doesn't mean that game is definitely ahead in development compared to a game that doesn't show much (or at all), I mean look at the more recent extreme cases Duke Nukem and S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

To all the knobs that said that I said UT3 would have sold well on the 360...READ MY OPENING POST!!! I said "Though some of this may be recuperated through a 360 version, it is still unlikely to be profitable."

In other words I think that UT is a dying franchise WHEREVER it is released. What I'm saying is that Microsoft and their customers have been VERY good to Epic through Gears of War, and that Microsoft should leverage this as Gears is now Epic's only successful franchise.

So to halil23 and Aj_Habfan... if you ever want to have ANY credibility on these forums, your going to have to start reading peoples post's before you respond to them, and drop your blatant, fact-twisting Sony fanboyism.

1.  Actually, budget titles are often "winners" since all a game needs to be to be considered a success is if it makes money.  But moot point so whatever.
2. While agree that development on the engine side will be easier, that doesn't mean the game will really be that much easier over all.  It still takes just as long to make the levels and unless they want to reuse all the art (and I admit they will reuse some) it will still take art just as long.  Also, the programming side isn't just making the engine.  I guarantee you they will be adding/removing things constantly and fixing the problems from last game.

I just saw two commercials for UT3 last night. It looks pretty cool. Kind of Gears of Warish based on the commercial. I have never played a UT game, so ??? maybe it is completely different. but, from the commercial, I at first thought I was viewing an ad for Gears 2.

Either way, it looks good so I'm surprised it has sold so poorly. Maybe PS3 fanbase just isn't big enough. That doesnt' make sense. Its bigger than the 360's base was when Gears released.

I would say that Gears3 exclusivity would be more debatable when Gears2 releases. If it makes Epic a ton of cash, as Gears has, then I could see Gears3 being exclusive. I don't think the performance or lack of UT3 would have anything to do with it.

To clarify neither version has flopped. PC gaming in America is garbage and is the reason why America isn't apart of the top 5 countries/regions for PC gaming, Europe is #1 followed by Asia. The PS3 version has also only been released in America and in limited quantities.

Neither the PC nor PS3 version has been released outside of the USA.

The funny thing here is that people are saying UT3 'flopped hard' when it has only currently been released in the US... Yet again i find myself telling people that there is a whole world outside the US!

I remember when people were calling Uncharted a 'major folp' till it was released in the world outside the US and it is coming along nicely to be a Million seller for the PS3! I won't deny that UT3 is doing much worse than expected but save your judgements till the game is released everywhere...

So much fanboyism on both sides of the fence.

The only problem I have with the original post is the suggestion that developers licensed UE3 after seeing Gears of War. That is simply not true. Each successive iteration of UE is a hotly anticipated event, and UE3 had been licensed to developers long before Gears was released (e.g. Rainbow 6: Vegas, which uses the engine, was released around the same time).

I think you need to take a look at the number of games that have used the Unreal Engine ever since it's first incarnation. Let's just say it's a sh*tload, and I'll wager that licensing the engine has been Epic's primary source of income for over decade.
They would turn a profit even if they didn't release their own games at all.