So when Sony pops up in another person's mind, do you seriously expect them to remember every game that makes Sony's gaming brand what it is?

I think you're just refusing to ackowledge that the 360's success isn't relying heavily on the Halo series like the Xbox1 did. Onyx made a perfectly good point - he made a list of great games on the 360 yet you still end up trying to counter it, simply because Halo/Gears are the first things that come to your mind when you think of the Xbox. Besides, it shouldn't be surprising that Halo 3 is still going strong. It's got tons of ways to play with friends.

Quality games with a good amount of social features often end up having a long lifespan.

Uh...no. Thats just it, Its most of the time a different game. I rarely hear two fans have the same game that they feel defines the playstation while one usually does for the XBOX or Nintendo system. I see gamers in their most vulnerable state on a regular basis, while they are buying games. Customers frequently ask me or an associate, "can you find me a game like...?" for whatever system they own. The FIRST thing that pops out of majority 360's owners mouth's are Halo and Gears. Wii owners its Mario, Zelda, Wii Sports. This trend does not follow with the Playstation systems. More often then not customers come in looking for some niche titles that I have never heard before.

The only reason I even took the job that I have now is to do marketing research, such as this particular topic.

And I am not refusing to believe anything. I just don't agree with it, which is different with being a stubborn ass.

Way to be ignorant, I've probably been playing FPS since you were born, and I prefered 3rd person view in UT GOTY as it was much more accurate to me for the modes I played (Instagib LMS and DM). FPS on Consoles are disgraceful enough until recently. They should have stayed on computers.

And yes, I've finished all 3 halos with friends just because they loved it. I've played quite a bit online also, its horrible. NO DEPTH.

Gears is a much better game, and really did a great job with the whole TPS, just wasn't my particular cup of tea, hence my opinion.

You sound surprised. Are you sure they're even gamers? You should keep in mind that casuals sometimes make their decision based on what their friends have. This is definitely often the case when they're deciding on which console to buy.

I know plenty of non-gamers that happen to own a 360 with Halo 3. I'm talkin about people that barely do any gaming at all. It might not be the game suits their tastes, but they at least know that they'll be able to play online with people they know personally.

Many will agree - playing with friends is usually much funner than playing with strangers.

At OP: I sure as hell hope not.

On their own, Uncharted and KZ2 are fantastic games, and would be a welcome addition to any companies games library.

But when you pit them against Gears (which has a fun and diverse multiplayer, something uncharted doesn't have) and Halo 3 (a much more expanded multiplayer, with currently much better support), you'll find that game wise and sales wise, it'll be Gears and Halo 3 that pulls them in, and keeps them longer. (judging by sales and longevity).

BUT also take into account that Uncharted doesn't have multiplayer and KZ2's only been out for 2 months, but I believe even if we judged them on the same day for all the games, Gears and Halo will come out on top (in terms of sales, hours clocked in the game, importance to company etc).

As for which one is more fun? I personally prefer the 360 pair, but that's a subjective call and I can easily see how a person could go for either pair.

dcIKeeL said:
ur right...sony was a platform defined by this great variety but news...the ps2 days are over...some of these arent viable ips and although sony still boasts a considerably healthy diversity in it's library the quality of these games is waning...and 360 and wii have just as diverse if not more(as is the case with 360)IMO

Halo 3, gears 1 and 2, left for dead, mass effect, bioshock(until recently) fable 2, pgr, oblivion, tales of vesperia, star ocean 4, halo wars, lego indiana jones, fallout (dl content) banjo kazooie: nuts and bolts, DDR, call of juarez, lips, infinite undiscovery, the lost planet franchise

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Way to list tons of games that AREN'T exclusive. As for being a fanboy, thats odd considering I just recently bought my PS3 after getting rid of a boring 360. Everything I personally liked was already on a far superior system, THE PC. Most the games you are trying to list are either sad excuses for the genre, or actually PORTED to the 360. Bioshock (since release fyi), Oblivion, LEFT FOR DEAD, FALLOUT, and Lost Planet are all superior on the PC. Lost Planet isn't even that good of a game. Banjo Kazooie is way past it's prime and is horrible now, halo wars is just like Halo, an embarrassment to it's genre. RTS/FPS should be kept to PC, PERIOD.


Also, DDR for console? Seriously, are you THAT sad to even attempt to list that? If you play DDR and are in anyway half way competant at it, you play at the arcade and the arcade only. Shoot, most ppl don't even play it anymore because it's so boring and easy now. The only fanboyism going on is yourself trollin in the Sony forums.

I dont beleive sales dictate what defines a console. Plenty of games sell well but that doesnt mean that they are a gamer's favorite series. That just means many people played it.

check my other post to Parasitic to see how I conclude what games defines a system.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

unbiased doesn't mean I don't have a preference or that I cannot decide between two opposing views.

I like Playstation, big surprise. But I like Playstation because for me it gives me more bang for my buck. I have an all access media player which rarely gives me proprietary mumbo jumbo, a gaming system that offers me some of the most robust and quality titles around, and at a reasonable price(exspensiveness gauged by what Im getting for my dollar). It also gives me free online. I love the fact Sony seems to work against the grain just to get out what I want in a game. It is not irrational or imcomprehensible.

I dont hate the 360, I do hate Microsoft, a company that has spent it's entire lifespan sucking up smaller more talented companies and ruining their quality with mediocre content. I hate the fact that the 360 has such an outrageous failure rate, forces proprietary accessories on you(a step back from the XBOX) with the illussion that you save more money on the system. I hate the fact that you have to pay for live, even though MS is one of the wealthiest companies in the world.

I may not own a Xbox or 360, but I have thought about purchasing them. I initially was going to get a Xbox after years of only owning a PS2. Yet that was annexed after MS stopped supporting it just aftere the 360's release. I also thought about owning a 360, then I saw the failure rate. In my mind, I gave them both a chance.

I can make a decision and still be fair about it...

What's so bad about 360 is most of what's even considered good on it, I can buy for my PC and have a much better looking version with a much better resolution and graphical display, and cheaper to boot. Farcry 2 looks like complete garbage on BOTH consoles in comparison to the PC, same with Oblivion and Bioshock and many other titles. 360's big games seem to usually get ported from PC, which is why I happily bought my PS3.

I can't think of 1 game I'd want on 360 that I can't have on my PS3 or PC. And I still think Halo is horrible.

2nd note, bringing up the DDR thing again, who in the right mind would EVER pay for DDR when you can get Stepmania for free, legally... seriously...

While YOU give a valid point....

if people who are not accustomed to gaming only hear about Halo or Mario, doesnt that in turn kind of define the system?