PS3 has nice 09 exclusives, but at $400 its still hard to justify a purchase.

Why spend $400 + 60 for a PS3 and KZ2 when you can spend $200 + 40/60 for a 360 Arcade and a copy of Halo 3/Gears 2.

The PS3 does have MGS4, anyone who says that one is not a "must-own" title for the PS3 is very brave. As I said GT5 is the must have game, that franchise sells systems. FACT.

 GT5 is a system seller but I wouldnt exactly call MGS4 a must own title. Its a good buy for the core gamers, but casuals have next to 0 desire to play the genre, much less to learn the complex storyline.

Games like Halo and Gran Turismo however, appeal to more then core gamers.

Yes, as a matter of fact I did. The reason my choices were so similar to yours is because I used a different criteria, and the correct one. You argue that must own games are "must own"because of their attach rates or the percentage of the userbase that has bought them. If so, why did you list Ocarina of Time over Super Mario 64 for the N64? That's only one example, and probably the most noticeable one. Super Mario 64 was played by more people and had a higher attach rate. It pioneered the 3D platforming genre and kept Mario popular even in Nintendo's downfall. And you list Ocarina of Time as the must own title for the N64? Hey, whatever floats your boat. My list was, as I mentioned, flagship games. Not games you deem as "must own," but rather games that gave the system the powerful image it has in people's minds now. My list was just for fun, and maybe you should have read the criteria first. Wii Sports has certainly defined the Wii more than Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime hasn't defined the Wii whatsoever, and if you're going to argue that Link is the champion of the Nintendo 64 then you'd be wrong. I'm just going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't bother to read the whole post.

33% is an incredible attach rate, there's no arguing about that. But the hypocrisy is that you list no "must have" games for the Wii when Wii Play has a much higher attach rate. And when you said that Super Mario Galaxy wasn't a must own title, you claimed that it wasn't so because "most" Wii owners didn't buy it. Well, wouldn't that be true with Halo 3 as well? Unless 50% or more of 360 owners bought Halo 3, than most 360 owners didn't buy it. If 33% of 360 owners bought the game, that means the minority bought the game and it's certainly not a must have. If Halo 3 was supposed to be the must own game that pushed the 360, it did a pretty pitiful job at it (just look at 07 holiday numbers).

Garnett: Please, just read next time. I said the series wasn't big on the Playstation 1 (look at Grand Theft Auto 2 sales numbers for further clarification). The PS2 era of the series may have had timed exclusivity, but in the fifth generation, the Grand Theft Auto games also saw release on the PC and Gameboy (if memory serves).

I did say hype has a lot to do with it but you have to look at reviews and more importantly forums with real gamers opinions on the game.

Take this site as an example where a certain mod done a gears 2 review which had high praise for the game with a few niggles about online.

When I read the review I just said this review says what I feel about the game and I knew it didnt come from some overpayed hack.

So in my conclusion gears actually lived up to the hype which surrounded it and that ican be very hard to do.

Now will Killzone 2 live up to that hype who knows maybe it will maybe it wont.

If it doesnt will that mean the analyst was right?

A high end console like PS3 needs to start standing out from the crowd with its price tag would you not agree.

Neither did the PS1 or PS2.  The Playstation brand has never been about ONE game.   It's always about many good games that appeal to different fanbases.  The PS1 and PS2 both sold over 100 million consoles.  How many "must have" games were there on those 2 systems where 90% of the install base owned?  ZERO.  Very few games even had a 10% attach rate on the PS1 or PS2.  The business strategy of Sony for their consoles is fundamentally different from that of Nintendo's and Microsoft's.  So the fact that the author failed to see that invalidates any credibilty to his article.

Because a....

400+ 60(Killzone 2) + 60(LittleBigPlanet) + Free Online=520

While...

200+60(Gears of War 2) + 40(Halo 3) + 20-30(Controller batteries) + 50 a year(Live) =370++++(Depending on how long you keep it.)

Lets say you keep them equally for 3 years....

PS3 gaming= 520 still

360 gaming= 520+

Plus Killzone is twice the game Gears 2/Halo 3 is lol (JK JK! Please don't FLAME me!)

Well, if you want to play Halo 3/Gears 2 then it's kind of dumb to just buy the 360 Arcade since it doesn't come with an internal HDD.  So how exactly are you going to store your maps/saved games/game updates?

Wow you have seen the finished product

Anyway sure game will be good.