By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - How long until good games are released?

windbane on 26 April 2007
Legend11 said:

Why is it fair to add the PS2 numbers? Just curious... This discussions was basically a comparison of PS3 games vs. Xbox 360 games. Are you next going to claim that the PS3 is outselling the Xbox 360 in the U.S. because it's only fair to add in the sales of PS2 consoles when you're adding up PS3 sales? Seriously your logic makes no sense. Chances are people are going to buy a $500-$600 dollar console to play next generation games, why would they buy one simply to play PS2 games, wouldn't it have been cheaper for them to buy a $99 PS2? It's like people buying HD-DVD players and then mentioning dvd movies to the list of movies people would have bought it for. Chances are they bought one to play HD-DVD movies otherwise they would have stuck with their existing dvd player.


I stated my reasons. Why would someone want to buy a $400 console that then charges for online play when you can play the same game on the PS2? It's the same arguement. The fact is that a lot of those 360 games listed had slightly improved graphics and some even left out features from the previous gen games (all those EA sports games). If you include 360 games that are also on the PS2 and aren't much improved, then you have to include the fact that the PS3 can play those games.

But hey, after this year it won't matter since the PS3 will have its own versions of all those games that I was referrencing on the PS2.



Around the Network
NorthStar on 26 April 2007
Legend11 said:

Why is it fair to add the PS2 numbers?  Just curious...  This discussions was basically a comparison of PS3 games vs. Xbox 360 games.  Are you next going to claim that the PS3 is outselling the Xbox 360 in the U.S. because it's only fair to add in the sales of PS2 consoles when you're adding up PS3 sales?  Seriously your logic makes no sense.  Chances are people are going to buy a $500-$600 dollar console to play next generation games, why would they buy one simply to play PS2 games, wouldn't it have been cheaper for them to buy a $99 PS2?  It's like people buying HD-DVD players and then mentioning dvd movies to the list of movies people would have bought it for.  Chances are they bought one to play HD-DVD movies otherwise they would have stuck with their existing dvd player.


wow as a personal note why is it fair to use gamerankings? Resistance got a 7.9? who the hell made that score but gave call of Duty 2 9+? and Kameo? I'll get my game scores from something published like GI or Gamepro because these numbers seem a bit off



Legend11 on 26 April 2007


windbane on 26 April 2007

Legend11...I listed games that I meant. Madden took out features. King Kong was criticized for NOT looking better on the 360.

Call of Duty 3 is on the PS3, so yeah, I think that's the same experience as the 360.

Not all of the games on the 360 last year looked a LOT better, because some developers (EA) ported from PS2.

And, like I said, a lot of those games are now on the PS3 anyway.

Finally, if graphics are all that matter then why is anyone buying any multi-platform on the Wii? You have not addressed my arguement that the games I mentioned that are not that superior on the 360 are easier to play on the PS2 because it's cheaper.

If you want to just throw a blanket on the situation and say all games on 360 must look a lot better than the PS2 version then you are leaving out facts. Some do, some don't. But, either way, 2007 is even so far.

 



HappySqurriel on 26 April 2007
NorthStar said:
 

wow as a personal note why is it fair to use gamerankings? Resistance got a 7.9? who the hell made that score but gave call of Duty 2 9+? and Kameo? I'll get my game scores from something published like GI or Gamepro because these numbers seem a bit off


I (personally) use gamerankings or metacritic mainly because it eliminates arguments about how biased the source is (towards platform, genre, or content). Generally speaking, I find that the rankings produced by this site for a particular console are very fair but it does not make a great cross-platform comparison; to make it work cross-platform you generally have to demonstrate a wide gap (10%) between the average scores of two games.



Around the Network
windbane on 26 April 2007
HappySqurriel said:
NorthStar said:
 

wow as a personal note why is it fair to use gamerankings? Resistance got a 7.9? who the hell made that score but gave call of Duty 2 9+? and Kameo? I'll get my game scores from something published like GI or Gamepro because these numbers seem a bit off


I (personally) use gamerankings or metacritic mainly because it eliminates arguments about how biased the source is (towards platform, genre, or content). Generally speaking, I find that the rankings produced by this site for a particular console are very fair but it does not make a great cross-platform comparison; to make it work cross-platform you generally have to demonstrate a wide gap (10%) between the average scores of two games.


Indeed, such as the terrible port of F.E.A.R. for the PS3. 84% on 360, 75% on PS3. I think Day 1 Studios (who wikipedia says developed both console versions) really hates the PS3.