it would be awesome if nintendo said the same thing.

maybe the 360 exclusives not being able to win any GOTY awards really got to him

he's really shut up about "metacritic" scores lately.

3rd party developers can't afford not to release on at least 2 of the major platforms.
IF they are using a development system/process geared towards multi platform they should get higher profits by doing so. Those who develop without regard for more than 1 system, will of-course have a high cost porting the game to other systems. Here is where the 3rd party developers should focus in these financially unstable times. They should use multi platform development system making it possible to sell their games on 2-3 platforms without much extra man power. The exceptions are of-course those developers who KNOW their games will sell 3 million or more on one platform, but even those developers loose out on potential profits. It' makes business sense.

@kowenicki

The question isn't about the 360 dominating PS3 sales

the question is about the OP & thread title

why would you ignore a console which will have a userbas of 30 Million by the end of the year.

The question is that 1 $100 price cut....whenever it will be will lead to PS3 outselling 360 just as the latter is now

don't forget 360 has reached the mass market price now....it is at the price point as M$ says 70% of console sales are done

Ps3 still isn't at the price point were according to Microsoft themselves a consoles 70% of sales are done.

Have none of my fellow posters taken into account the concept of development cycle. High profile games take at least two years to develop. So the high profile games you will get this year were for the most part beginning life two years ago when the PS3 was struggling mightily to survive. When development began on these games there were a lot of reasons to develop an exclusive title for the 360. Least of which is Microsoft was probably willing to offer some bank roll. They probably were able to do it for a song.

Oh you guys with the short memory. Two years ago the PS3 was on deaths door. The console was failing in the sales department, the channels were getting glutted, the public perception had gone right to hell, and there were even books being written about the debacle. The only option for Sony was a lot of grand yet delayed promises, and two hundred dollars worth of price slashing. Not to mention Sony probably didn't share their pricing strategy with every Tom, Dick, and Harry developer. Who for their part probably did feel the sky was getting a little too close for comfort.

I would honestly expect Sony to have a great deal fewer third party exclusives this year. Microsoft knows this, and they are playing on that. The fact that Sony had a shitty first year is mostly due to what Sony did to themselves. No reason that Microsoft should refuse to play to that, or even imply their current losing trend will generate the same benefit down the line. In the end it will look like they are damned prophetic.

Sony could do something about this, but as with the majority of this generation they have been played. They cannot talk about the fact that they have not only lost the support battle for every year, but the fact that their launch year being utter dog shit, and that is probably going to be worse this year. Though it should be better next year. Games for that year are less likely to be exclusive.

For those saying that the economy justifies games not being exclusive you are wrong, and it shows a fundamental lack of understanding. That shit might fly for massive companies such as Electronic Arts, but smaller companies are very much at the whim of lenders. Be those banks or venture capitalists. Those parties right now are concerned with two things. How little they have to spend, and how fast they might expect a return. In this economy there is a lot of danger so thrift and speed are the name of the game. Not how much money can I make.

I know that is counter intuitive, but it is easier to get a smaller line of credit especially with a quick turn around then it is to get a large one with a longer turnaround. Making a game for multiple platforms increased production cost and production time. To put it mildly more lenders will cover a 360 exclusive then they will fund a game for multiple platforms. Hell with the way Microsoft works you might get them to undersign for an ambitious project. Which is all aces with the lender. After all its Microsoft with vaults of cash.

Anyway yes it will lead to more third party exclusives it has throughout this generation, and will continue to do so. I know a lot of posters think in binary. Ones and zeroes, yes and no. That is not reality Microsoft has been stripping Sony of third party support all generation long. What do you think Square is about, or hell what about 2K. Losing support does not equate to abandonment. In gaming it usually means less games total, and less exclusives. He is right whether you like it or not. Microsoft wracking up hardware wins is only going to exacerbate the losses for Sony. When the smaller developers are backed into corners and can only go one way the more Microsoft wins the more likely they are to go with Microsoft.

You know its kind of like well duh when you think about it. It isn't bullshit its just the way things work. I think its kind of sad the Sony didn't have this kind of logic going before this generation. It is the More, Faster, Cheaper philosophy at work, and before you say its a bad philosophy its the same one that NASA uses for their robotic space program, and it has been an unmitigated success.

Does the average person even know who greenburg is ?

I hope one day Old Pink Shirts Kaz gives him a nasty bitch slap across the face

@Dodece

So you just basically told us what we already knew. Thanks, but I didn't really need a highlight :P. Nice post none-the-less.

I still am not giving up on Sony :P

Probably not, but the average person might read this in the news.

PS3 losing third party support would come at the expense of the Wii gaining exclusives, not the 360.