I am here not talking abt AAA games or big serious games but just games, normal everyday no grand name games... i mean PS3 has like hardly 100 games... and a dozen or so games on the network  and its already out for over a yr and a quarter... so there should be constant trickle of some no name titles every week... is it now only big huge software developers r only risking for building a console game.. why people r afraid to invest in a low budget low graphic fun and creative game for PS3.?

or is it the Sony attitude towards the developer not helping them to take low risk projects.? to me it seems as although the total investment on console software development has clearly increased but may be the number of projects on consoles have reduced drastically.

current PS3 software or title size is in no way a collection at all.... i mean a PS3 owner should be able to have some options for selecting a game.

This is why killing BC is a bad choice for Sony. Unless they come up with a software only emulator, they are hurting themselfs. The developers are either going to stick with PS2 or switch to wii. With no BC in the PS3, they are more likely to switch to wii.

I'm not to worried about whether the PS3 has countless games avaliable or not. I have a PS3 that currently sits at home collecting dust. I own Resistance: Fall of Man, MotorStorm, Uncharted: Drakes Fortune, Warhawk and a few PS2 games I play on the console every now and then. My gaming taste has drastically changed meaning the Wii and DS is satisfying my gaming.

360 is a nice system but all I can play is Halo 3 and a couple of sports titles.

There is a sort of drought how countless games are not coming to the PS3, but I think PS3 users don't mind as long as the big name games release (i.e.MGS4, FFXIII).

i would rather 1 good game than 10 shit games

@ Noobie

There are plenty of options for PS3 owners. And many of them still do have b/c, and they can have it in the eighty gig, and there are many PS3 games worth playing. I'm not going to name them, because all that will happen is you will rip them apart, and explain why they suck, and this thread will turn into every other thread like this.

This thread = Flamebait.

I've got too many games on my ps3 to get caught up!!!!

I still haven't had time to play Folklore, Ratchet & Clank, Assassin's Creed, Uncharted OR DMC4....how much time do some of you people have to play games AND come to the forums? My goodness, are you a jobless high school dropout?

I just finished CoD4 and am currently playing Unreal Tournament 3 & Rock Band....I seriously can't keep up with the influx of games! My goodness...

I was thinking about this myself and I disagree about this thread being flame bait. In order to expand userbase you have to appeal to everyone even if the games are less than stellar. Like the OP said it is not just about "AAA" games as some of the games I personally have would not be defined as such in blue dragon, DDR, crackdown, saints row etc yet are games I enjoyed. Not all games have to sell 500k to make a profit as they can be made cheap and just to appeal to a certain audience. So far in 2008 the 360 and Wii have had a more varied lineup then the PS3 mainly because it has just released more games. As I mentioned some will call out the crappy reviews since they may not be the usual 85%+ but you can get some good games at 70% that appeal to some people. Just saying the lack of variety of games and just plain releases compared to the Wii and 360 hurts the PS3.

??? the PS3 will most likely have the same number of games as the 360 2008. So I do not understand the question.

Yah I agree with one of the above posters, I have too many games to play now with not enough time ;-;. All with a TON of variety :x With Playstation network titles being so diverse also, I already see too much future, for once I'd like to be able to finish the damn games before having to pick up another xD

Nothing new from Sony on this GDC either.... ??? or have they announced and i have missed it?