If you mean figuratively speaking, I already am.  If literally, well, I will be a year from now

There has to be some quantitive method of determining what is a AAA game if we are going to have any discussions about AAA games.

If we dont, then there remains a very valid argument that any game could be labelled AAA, as the odds are that there is someone out there that will love the game to bits.  Even if it is Ninjabread man.......... 

starcraft said: DMeisterJ said: I'm going to be tongue-in-cheek, and do exclusive games 90% plus on metacritic. Sorry starcraft! Thats ok, I like having your tongue in my cheek. Wait, what? ;) At the end of the day, the 360 simply has a tonne of amazing games that cannot be played on any other console. People like Makingmusic can argue the PC technicallity all day, but the fact is consoles are far more mainstream and accessible, and this has shown in the 360's huge improvement over the Xbox.

Technicality? How is it a technicality that on a $600 PC I play most of the best 360 games better than you do? That's not a technicality, that's a major issue for the 360 and a large market that it's mostly unable to tap. PC gamers looking for a console aren't going to pick one that has nothing but the same games we already play in much higher quality versions, and despite your (ridiculously inaccurate) assumptions that the PC market is small, it's not. The fact that the 360 fails to appeal to the PC gamers is shown very clearly in its weakness in the strongest PC market: Europe.

starcraft said: DMeisterJ said: I'm going to be tongue-in-cheek, and do exclusive games 90% plus on metacritic. Sorry starcraft! Thats ok, I like having your tongue in my cheek. Wait, what? ;) At the end of the day, the 360 simply has a tonne of amazing games that cannot be played on any other console. People like Makingmusic can argue the PC technicallity all day, but the fact is consoles are far more mainstream and accessible, and this has shown in the 360's huge improvement over the Xbox.

Far more mainstream?

*looks at Crysis which sold a million in three months, despite it's insane hardware requirements*

Oh really?

The PC is already far more mainstream than the ps3, and is probably far more mainstream than the 360 at this point in it's life. Should we not count consoles in these comparisons until they have sold X amount of hardware and software, lest they not be "mainstream" enough for you?

Edit:  Honestly, this entire comparison revolves around sales, correct?  You can't just ignore a platform that sells millions of units of software each year to suit your own personal needs. 

Not to mention Xbox Live has what? 10 million total registered users and maybe 1/3 of that who actually have gold accounts and play online. Steam has 15 million active users and is by default a completely free online gaming service.

Yeah, PC is a small platform. /sarcasm

Own personal needs?  Exactly how does MY signature involve anyone ELSE'S personal needs? What I have simply said is that PC gaming is not nearly as big a business as console gaming and for most people is beyond what they would be willing to pay for an equivelant experience.

In any case I'll say again, what about my signature is factually inaccurate? 

Who said anything about anybody else? I said YOUR needs. You ignore an entire platform to make your favored console look better than it really is. This is cherry picking.

And you can't compare PC gaming to all of console gaming, because that's unfair. The PC is a platform, just like the ps3, 360, and Wii are all individual platforms. When comparing platform to platform, PC is easily the largest. As Naz said, Steam has over 15 million ACTIVE users, and that's not including PC gamers that prefer to use services like Xfire, or none at all.

Also, no, your sig is not factually inaccurate. However, the comparison being made is completely useless. It has no real world meaning.