for Xbox 360 exclusives in comparison to previous years.

you can't deny that the 360 had an excellent 2006 and 2007. 2008 pretty much had only Gears 2 and Fable 2, but even those two made up for 2008.

this year, however, was kind of pathetic.

it's not that the games were bad, but this entire year simply felt like the filler episode of a TV show: not much substance, and is just tiding you over until the next episode.

2010 is looking rather good for the 360 on the exclusive front, but it's just a fact of the industry that Sony has 20 first and second party developers that are producing games, while Microsoft has roughly 6 first and second party developers producing games.

we are finally starting to see what happens when you don't have a strong first and second party plan in place. especially now that pretty much EVERY 3rd party developer is multi-platform.

the only reason they supported the 360 exclusively is because, for the longest time, it was the only console on the market.

once the PS3 released, and the developers were brought up to scratch on how the PS3 architecture worked, EVERY game not tied down by some sort of exclusive publishing deal has gone multi-plat.

when that happens, it all boils down to the exclusive titles that push the console and show us what it can do.

as i said before, the 360 has a strong lineup next year, what with Mass Effect 2, Splinter Cell: Conviction, Alan Wake, Fable 3, and Halo: Reach, but Sony has more titles hitting in quarter 1 2010 than MS has ALL YEAR. and those titles aren't made by some hacky upstart devs, but some of the best in the business.

if Microsoft is really serious about being market leader, they need to start ACTING like a market leader and investing in more than just 6 first and second party studios and relying on 3rd parties, who can take their IPs anywhere (ie, Bioshock; this should have, and could have, been a 360 exclusive franchise, but MS didn't bite: Mass Effect and Gears could easily go multi-platform, and MS can't do anything about it, because Epic Games and Bioware/EA own the rights to those franchises, respectively.

the only 360 game i bought this year was Shadow Complex (which i loved).

i'm not a racing or Halo fan, so Forza 3, Halo Wars, and Halo 3: ODST, no matter how good they are, weren't on my list. Left4Dead 2 is fun, because killing zombies never gets old, but it is rather shallow, truth told.

games like Star Ocean 4 and Ninja Blade were jokes, despite being in my two favorite genres (RPG and Action/Adventure).

Microsoft needs a new strategy, because throwing a Halo and Gears game out every other year (and in some cases, every year), and pimping multi-platform games as exclusives will only get you so far when the competition is about to start releasing exclusive after exclusive on a near monthly basis for the next 12 months.

even if they only opened up an additional 3 or 4 studios, that'd be 3 or 4 more new games 360 owners like myself can look forward to.

Sony knows that not all of their audience likes the same games, so they make sure they cover a broad spectrum of genres and demographics. not every PS3 owner will dig Heavy Rain, and not every PS3 owner will dig God of War 3 or Gran Turismo 5 (as beautiful as GT5 is, i'm not a racing game fan, so that's not on my list, but Heavy Rain and GoW3 most certainly are).

MS is relying too much on one demographic and two or three franchises to keep them competitive, and when they were supported exclusively by 3rd parties early on in the generation, that worked to their benefit. the fact that the PS3 cost $600 certainly didn't hurt MS pushing 360s.

but NOW? now that the PS3 is $300, has a built in Blu Ray player, built in HDD in every unit, built in Wi Fi, free online gaming, and, of course, a rather large number of quality games, three of which received some significant accolades this year (Demon's Souls, Killzone 2, and Uncharted 2).

the PS3 has the momentum, the price, and the software to push it through 2010 no problem.

i'm interested to see how Microsoft counters the massive amount of software the PS3 is pimping in 2010.

hopefully their answer is more games, and not more price cuts. the damn thing is $199 now. i already own one, so all i want now are games to pop into the disc drive. i could care less about price cuts for the 360 or PS3. give me the games.

this wasn't a horrible year for 360 gaming, but it certainly wasn't it's best. from my experiences, 2006 and 2007 were the high points for Xbox 360 gaming software. 2010 is looking to challenge that. lets hope Microsoft delivers. View

will the 360 fanboys finally admit that Insomniac is one of the best developers in the industry?

it's no denying that, over the past 3 years, since Resistance: Fall of Man debuted on the PS3 at launch, that a large portion of the 360 fanboy community have sh*t all over Insomniac and their games.

personally, i think this story is BS, since Sony will no doubt have first crack at anything Insomniac produces, and will more than likely publish it. Sony doesn't publish games they don't own the copyright to, and they are always looking to expand their software library (read: establishing new franchises, now that some of their legacy franchises are getting long in the tooth).

besides, Insomniac has spent the last 4 years creating a Playstation 3 specific engine (one that utilizes it's unique architecture). to go into Xbox 360 development, they'd have to build an entirely new engine from scratch, requiring new R&D, which is costly.

anything is possible, but you have to really be stretching logic to imagine that Insomniac's next title is anything but Playstation 3 exclusive.

they've invested too much into development to start all over again with a new console, and not only that, but lock down a publisher that's not Sony (there's no way Sony is going to publish a multi-platform game).

this article is baseless and done to generate hits. there was no real information or facts presented here, just the good ol' "our sources." View

and i agree: don't let the jackasses on the internet sway you from picking up a game you were interested in playing.

if i actually listened to what people had to say about games like Heavenly Sword, Folklore, and Uncharted, i'd have missed out on some of the best games of 2007.

like i said before, after 7+ hours of FFXIII the other day, i am EXTREMELY excited to get my hands on it in March. at first, i was like, "i can wait to pick it up after March, i'm in no hurry." now, however, i'm afraid i'm going to have to buy it day one, right along with God of War 3.

the internet is full of non-stop negativity, and these people are some the hardest to please people in the world it seems.

if they think that FFXIII is "bad," then i can't imagine what they think of games like Turok, Legendary: The Box, and others which are genuinely sh*tty games in all areas (visuals, controls, level design, narrative, etc). there's just no pleasing some of the people on the internet (in particular the folks at Neogaf; i often wonder if they like games at all, considering how no game can possibly live up to their elitist, impossible standards)

any fan of RPGs should enjoy FFXIII. despite being in Japanese, me and my buddy were so surprised at how playable it was without a guide. it's a very intuitive game in that regard. we were only stuck on one part, but it didn't take us long to realize what we had to do, and we passed it soon after.

and just so i'm on topic: the visuals in Heavy Rain just keep improving every time i see it. i thought it looked fantastic before, and anything would have been a step up from Indigo Prophecy, but holy crap does it look amazing. i can't wait to see this thing running on my 40" 720p Samsung! View

i admit i didn't go into it too much in my long post, but in short, it goes a little something like this:

1) Game Publisher spends $5-$10 million dollars for the production of a video game. this budget covers everything from producers, to designers, to programmers, to qa teams, to marketing to manufacturing.

2) The money has already been allocated. they don't sell the game, and then pay off all of the various people that had something to do with the creation/marketing of the game. they've already spent the $5-$10 million.

3) The sales of the game are simply the publisher's attempt to recoup the money they've already spent on the game. the film industry is the same way.

if the publisher doesn't make back, at the LEAST, the $5-$10 million they spent on the production of the game, then that's not a good thing.

BUT, if they make MORE than what they spent, then they've netted a profit.

again, they don't hold off paying everybody until the project ships. people do the work and they get paid.

the point of my earlier post was to illustrate that not all games are costing $40 million to make like a GTAIV or MGS4, and that selling 1 million units isn't vital to the success of a game. it simply increases the margin of profit that a publisher makes.

a $10 million game that sells 250,000 units still netted the publisher a profit of $5 million dollars (250,000 times $60 a pop equals $15,000,000 minus the $10 million they spent on the project).

lets go back to that 250,000 unit sold number. so the dev has made a profit of $5,000,000. maybe the next game costs $5,000,000 to make instead of $10,000,000 because they have an engine in place that makes development more cost effective, that'd net them a profit of $10,000,000 if it sells 250,000. that'll let them make an additional 2 games.

what if they release 5 $5 million games a year (that'd be $25,000,000 budget total for all 5 games) that sell 250,000 units each.

total profit for those 5 games is $50,000,000.

most publishers out there try to release multiple games a year for that very reason.

like i said before, Activision and EA post profits of over $900,000,000 a year because they release a large number of games a year, and many of them are tied to franchises known to sell in the millions, so that any "risky" endeavors like Brutal Legend don't hurt their bottom line.

i doubt Brutal Legend cost $40 million to make, but due to the success of licensed games like Harry Potter, and yearly games like Madden, EA could absorb any potential profit loss from Brutal Legend, and i guarantee they still post a hefty profit for 2009 at the end of their fiscal year in March.

the same with Activision with Modern Warfare 2 and Guitar Hero franchises. even if you don't factor in the fact that WoW brings in an insane amount of profit for Activision, they'd still post huge earnings next March anyway.

the point isn't that these companies pocket the full $60 from a games sell, but that they carefully allocate their budgets so they can maximize profit despite not selling 1, 2, or 3 million units.

most games fall into the "under 500,000 units sold" category.

mostly franchise series and licensed titles reach the 1 million or more mark. new IPs have a rougher time, although, depending on the timing of their release, they can do surprisingly well (see Assassin's Creed, Dead Space, inFAMOUS, and even Uncharted 1).

once those new IPs become franchises, the next title, which will cost significantly less than the original (again, see Assassin's Creed 2 and Uncharted 2), will more than likely have an easier time reaching the 1 million unit mark than it's predecessor, IF the first title even reaches 1 million units at all.

it's all about how you position your new IP that will guarantee exposure and therefore, a better chance at netting a large enough audience to help make a profit.

Uncharted is a great example, because the first title, despite releasing during the year of PS3 hate that was 2007, garnered decent day one sales. enough to make a profit for Naughty Dog, and warrant a sequel. it took Uncharted 1 a few months to reach 1 million units as word of mouth was slow. Uncharted 2 releases, and sells 1 million units within the first MONTH of release, because the series made a name for itself.

considering that we are 4+ years into this generation, and publishers/developers have been making games on the Xbox 360 and PS3 for 4 years now, it's silly to think that producing games has gotten MORE expensive than at the START of the generation, when the history of game development have shown us that development costs get CHEAPER, no matter how advanced the technology at the time is.

this article is taking one company KNOWN for producing high profile games (ie, the GTA series and it's generally star studded; read COSTLY; cast), and using it as a means to illustrate how 1 million units sold isn't enough for the industry at large.

it's poorly conducted "journalism." View

but for the love of GOD don't let the BS you read on the internet deter you from getting FFXIII.

my best friend had his brother send it to him from Japan, and it arrived yesterday, so we spend a good 7+ hours playing it, and it is absolutely AMAZING.

i didn't expect to be as impressed as i was going in, but everything from the visuals, to the battle and level up system is fantastic.

i'm really impressed by the battle system, because just when you think you've got a handle on it, there's another addition to it. after 7 hours of play, we still hadn't even gotten to summoning yet.

it's extremely well paced in that regard, and the story seems interesting enough, if anything because the set pieces and cutscenes are so jaw-dropping (both in game and the CGI; the majority are in game, however) are so intense and epic that you can't help but imagine the story that goes along with it is also epic.

PS3 Owners: don't worry that the game has been gimped because it's multi-plat. i'm here to tell you from first hand experience with the JP version that the game:

1) Supports 1080p
2) Looks amazing (in particular the character models: environment textures aren't the best, but they aren't bad either)
3) The battle system is excellent
4) The level up system is very interesting (more like the license board in FFXII, i suppose)
5) There is no install
6) Load times are practically non-existent (outside of initially starting up the game and beginning it, and at the end of "chapters" there is usually a 5 or so second pause to ask if you want to save before beginning the next "chapter.")

ON TOPIC:

that trailer was amazing.

Heavy Rain, God of War 3, and now Final Fantasy XIII are my must have purchases for Quarter 1 2010. if WKC hits then also, i'll snag that one too (i also imported the JP version, and it is also quite awesome).

those trying to downplay Heavy Rain: stop being assholes. if you played Indigo Prophecy or are over the age of 18, you'd probably understand why the majority of us are excited for this game.

believe me, if it was multi-plat, i'd still be psyched for it, because Indigo Prophecy was such a fantastic and unique experience, and Heavy Rain looks like it's taken what Quantic Dream learned from the development of IP, and really took it to the nines.

just because this game doesn't have copious amounts of blood, shooting, guts, and tits and ass (actually, it DOES have the T&A part, lol), doesn't make it any less of a compelling game.

grow the f*ck up. View

the majority of games on store shelves don't cost $40 million to make. that is a fact.

in fact, the budget for most games this generation is $5-$10 million.

at $60 (USD) a pop, if a game sells 250,000 copies, it will bring in $15 million (USD).

most games don't reach the 400,000 unit sold mark in their entire LIFETIMES, let alone day, week, month 1.

don't let the media continue to feed you garbage. at the start of this generation, it WAS expensive, because you had developers jumping over to knew technology and development methods.

we are 4+ years into this generation, and developers/publishers have already done the necessary R&D needed for versatile game engines (or using a middleware solution like Unreal Engine 3), so that producing games NOW is a lot cheaper.

take for example, Assassin's Creed and Assassin's Creed 2. Assassin's Creed was the first title in the series, and on the hardware. Ubisoft allocated a large budget to the game's development because they had to build an engine from scratch. that took resources/manpower.

once the engine was in place, creating Assassin's Creed 2 wouldn't require the same amount of R&D. instead, most of the budget more than likely went to: voice talent, programmers, artists, qa testing, marketing, and manufacturing.

please keep in mind that it's not insanely expensive to manufacture the actual game discs and ship them out to retailers.

not every game is like Halo 3, with a $30 million marketing budget. many have barely $1 million budgets for marketing.

most games with celebrity actors will more than likely have a higher development budget, but don't think that those celebs are commanding million dollar salaries.

a game that cost less than $10 million to make doesn't need to sell 1 million units to be profitable. anything over 250,000 is pretty good.

if selling less than 1 million units was so bad, there would be a lot less games on the shelves, and a LOT less developers making games.

this foolish, irresponsible game "journalism" needs to stop.

as i said before, not every game cost $40 million dollars. not even $20 million.

this story is just inaccurate.

don't get me wrong, there ARE games that cost that much, but they are truly few and far between.

it's kind of silly to assume that every developer in the industry (of which there are hundreds) have budgets of $10-$20 million to spend on gaming).

outside of companies like EA and Activision, which generally post profits of over $900 million a year, most other developers/publishers are making a modest profit yearly, and are allocating their budgets accordingly.

1 million most certainly won't be enough for game that cost $40 million to make, but 1 million for a $5-$10 million game is more than enough.

this article is simply spreading false information to an audience that is quick to believe them because they assume they are experts.

i am by no means an expert, but i HAVE worked in the gaming industry for a few years, and have gotten to learn a lot about the development of games, and how budgets are allocated to those games.

this article is assuming that every game produced features the same pomp as an EA and Activision title. they have the money to burn on things like marketing, because they produce so many games a year that at least one or two of them is bound to make them a profit.

devs like Insomniac, Sucker Punch, Obsidian Entertainment, and others not owned by a particular publisher are a lot more conscientious of how they manage their budgets. View

i've played this year, if not this generation in terms of it's polish, gunplay, and additions to the FPS genre (the cover system, and mix and max class system in online).

the only problem i have with the Killzone games, and in particular 2, is how little of the world they cover in the games. reading all the backstory of the Killzone universe reveals an insane attention to detail and development, but sadly, that doesn't appear in the games.

the cast of Killzone 2 is no different than the cast in Gears of War: Shallow, cliche, meatheads with guns. Gears however, gets a pass, while it's suddenly called out as if it's the worst thing in the world in KZ2.

watch Saving Private Ryan, or any other quality war movie; are character motivations REALLY explored that much when you sit back and think about it? the performances of the actors are top notch, but in the end, they are simply a rag tag bunch of soldiers with a job to do.

Killzone 2, and Gears 2 is no different, so why fault one and not the other. it's not like the characters curse any more or less than in Gears, it's not like the dialogue is so Shakespearean in Gears that it embarrasses Killzone 2.

in the end, the Gears and Killzone franchises are excellent games. they are fun.

Killzone 2 delivered an unrivaled FPS experience. how many FPS games released this generation can boast the visual, audio, and game play fidelity of Killzone 2?

it strove to produce something different (ie, not your standard, "floating gun," aim assisted FPS that tries to mimic mouse and keyboard controls with a controller).

i've played all the major FPS games released this generation, from Halo 3, to CoD4 and MW2, to Resistance 1 and 2 and Killzone 2, and Killzone 2 stands above them all in all areas.

i was playing Modern Warfare 2, and there is absolutely NO CHARACTERIZATION in any way, shape, or form, and yet that game wasn't called out for it like Killzone 2.

the controls were tight, but still, the auto-aim and lock on feature make it a decidedly more casual affair than Killzone 2.

the setpieces in KZ2 were also more epic and even the minor skirmishes were intense.

this isn't trying to downplay MW2, which is a good game (it's the same as CoD4, so how could it be anything less than good?), but the effort in which the gaming media has gone to downplay Killzone 2 and what it's done right, and brought to the FPS genre is disgusting.

just because it came out at the start of this year isn't any reason to snub it.

just because it embarrassed a lot of the gaming media by proving them wrong about the PS3's graphical capabilities after "The Target Render," doesn't make it any less of an excellent FPS.

name me an FPS series that has deep, complex characters and a truly engaging plot.

don't try and pretend that Killzone 2 is on the same level of truly mediocre and generic FPS fair like Blacksite: Area 51, Turok, Fronlines: Fuel of War, Conflict: Denied Ops, and Legendary: The Box.

it's a sorry generation we live in when people try to pretend that games like Killzone 2, Uncharted, Ratchet and Clank, and inFAMOUS are MEDIOCRE.

Killzone 2 most certainly deserves shooter of the year, as Uncharted 2 deserves game of the year.

i still don't give a flying f*ck what Gamespot has to say, as it doesn't simply erase the past 3 years of FUD and misinformation they spewed regarding the PS3, but i will give them credit for at least acknowledging that Sony brought the thunder this year in regards to not just software quantity, but QUALITY. View

let's see:

The best graphics of a console FPS to date: Check

Deep, addictimg Multi-player buoyed by a unique "cross-class" system which allows players to mix and match class badges to create a character more suited to their play style: Check

32 player online with graphical fidelity on par with the SP campaign: Check

a First Person cover system which hasn't been seen in an FPS game, and actually works extremely well: Check

and the thing that garnered so much attention in the first place: graphics that were damn close, and even surpassed, the "BS" target render that started this whole mess.

Killzone 2 delivered. period. it was an excellent FPS, and in my opinion, the best released this year.

anyone who thought KZ2 was overhyped in comparison to, i think, the most overhyped game of the generation so far: Halo 3, was simply expecting more than what Guerrilla Games themselves said the game was going to be.

also: overhyped does not mean "bad game." not in the least.

games like Halo 3 and Modern Warfare 2 were GROSSLY overhyped by the gaming media and fanboys, but they are far from bad games.

play Legendary: The Box, Blacksite: Area 51, Turok, and Frontlines: Fuel of War if you need to be reminded of what truly bland, uninspired game design and game play is.

this generation is too spoiled when games like Killzone 2, inFAMOUS, Ratchet and Clank, Demon's Souls, and Uncharted are flagged as boring and uninspired.

that's about as ridiculous as calling Gears of War boring. i'm not even a Gears of War fan, but there's no way in hell i'd call it a bad game, or generic, or boring.

people have let their fanboyism get in the way of properly evaluating/covering games this generation. games that are genuinely fine examples of their genre get nitpicked to death (ie, Killzone 2), while slightly improved carbon-copies of other games get passes (ie, Left4Dead 2) and heaps of praise for keeping the status quo.

if a PS3 exclusive ever kept the status quo, it would be reamed and given low marks. if a multi-plat or 360 exclusive keeps the status quo (ie, Gears of War 2), it is praised and given high marks, and lauded for "delivering more of the game play we know and love!!"

the PS3 has to go above and beyond the call of duty just to get AVERAGE marks. no wonder the games are hyped like they are. it's the only way to get some kind of response from the spoiled gamer masses that go "yawn, it looks like >insert 360 title here< so i'll pass."

every time a new PS3 title is revealed, it's downplayed as being either a carbon copy of a 360 game (which is what happened with Crackdown and inFAMOUS), or they pull the old "i don't get it, so it's probably going to be lame" card (which is what happened with Little Big Planet, Heavy Rain, and The Last Guardian) in an attempt to defuse any interest in the title.

believe me, if the 360 was also host to games like Killzone 2, inFAMOUS, Little Big Planet, Heavy Rain, God of War 3, The Last Guardian, and Uncharted 2, no one would complain and downplay them.

i didn't mean to go on a tangent, but my original point is that hype is just a marketing tool. it's not the hypers fault if you fall for it and then get pissed when it doesn't do everything from make your bed, to cook your food and rub your belly.

i tend to have moderate expectations about games unless it's coming from an extremely reputed developer (ie, Bioware, Kojima Productions, Naughty Dog, Sucker Punch, etc).

despite knowing that games like Killzone 2 and MGS4 and Mass Effect and Bioshock were extremely hyped at the time of their release, i still love those games and consider them quality.

"overhyped" does not equal "bad game," and maybe if some of you guys weren't so god damned jaded with gaming in the first place, you'd enjoy more games, DESPITE any hype they may have surrounding them.

i'm just as excited about Crackdown 2 and Alan Wake as the next guy, but i'm certainly not going to cry if/when they fail to live up the absurd expectations the gaming media is placing on them.

corrupt journalism/gaming coverage is the real enemy here, not the games. View

out of it's ass now, and realize that the Xbox 360 market isn't that interested in JRPG.

Namco-Bandai also.

they threw their money in with the Xbox 360, and even in NA, they don't sell well. that's why games like Tales, Eternal Sonata, and Star Ocean have come/are coming, to the PS3.

i'm not saying they should drop 360 support, as there are certainly a number of RPG fans on the 360, but NOTHING compared to the RPG fanbase on the PS3 (or Playstation consoles in general).

i hate sales talk, and sales aren't important, but i find it interesting how a high profile RPG on the PS3 has sold more than most of the high profile RPGs on the 360 nearly combined. and that's only in JAPAN!

has any 360 JRPG reached 1 million units? i think Lost Odyssey did, but i'm not sure. i don't think Tales, Eternal Sonata, or Star Ocean did.

in either case, a game has to sell 250,000 units to net a company $15 million (USD), so either way, i'm sure they still made money on the 360 units, but if 250,000 will net them $15 million, what will 1 million net them? pure profit, as RPGs don't cost $40 million to make (and in truth, most games this generation cost under $10 million to make, with a few exceptions like MGS4 and Killzone 2, but they were more R&D games, with technology that will be used in more games, lowering the production costs of future PS3 games even more, meaning more profit for the developers/publishers in the end).

i'm sure FFXIII cost a pretty penny to make, but they most certainly made that back in just 4 days on the PS3. lifetime and worldwide sales of FFXIII should be very good for Square-Enix across both platforms.

i think we're getting close to the end of the 360 exclusive JRPG (not including the ones published by Microsoft, naturally) from companies like Namco-Bandai and Square-Enix. View

and failing miserably, but my statement is only the facts surrounding my current software library for the PS3 and 360.

i have a BC PS3, so i have the entire PS2 library to play with (not to mention PS1 BC, which is still standard across all PS3s).

i never owned that many Xbox games (i pretty much just got an Xbox for KOTOR 1 and 2, Jade Empire, Fable, and Ninja Gaiden), and i don't own that many Xbox 360 games. as i stated before, i only own Mass Effect and Fable 2, because those are the only two games that i've enjoyed on the 360 this generation (also Crackdown, which was a lot of fun).

i'm not a Gears fan. i'm not a Halo fan. i'm not a CoD fan, and if i was, i'd get it on the PS3 because i refuse to pay to play online.

the majority of the 360's best games are either shooters or multi-plats. unfortunately, i'm not the biggest shooter fan (i enjoy them, but i'm tired of the standard military shooters permeating the industry these days).

my favorite genres are Action/Adventure and RPGs. the 360 has had some decent RPGs, but nothing that i really enjoyed. and i've played Blue Dragon, Tales of Vesperia, Eternal Sonata, and a few of the other good RPGs on the 360. in general, the JRPG genre is a bit lacking currently barring a few exceptions (like Valkyria Chronicles, Demon's Souls, and White Knight Chronicles: i imported the Japanese version of WKC, and it was really good).

the PS3 tends to represent the Action/Adventure and RPG genres rather well (with the RPG genre being it's weakest at the moment), but it's looking to be improving over the next few months.

games like Uncharted, MGS4, LBP, Ratchet, GoW3, God of War Collection, Heavenly Sword, Folklore, Warhawk, Resistance, Killzone 2, inFAMOUS, Heavy Rain, White Knight Chronicles, The Last Guardian, etc are more my style of game than the Halos, Gears, and Splinter Cells on the 360.

oh, i don't think those games suck or anything, not in the least, they just aren't my style. i'm more interested in the Alan Wakes, Mass Effects, Fable 3s, and Crackdowns. those are the games that keep me from ditching my 360.

different strokes for different folks. i simply shared my gaming library with the folks here, and, naturally, it's not going to be exactly like everyone elses.

i know you were trying to call me out for some sort of fanboy thing, and while i certainly prefer my PS3, i wouldn't own a 360 if i felt some sort of vendetta against it. it has some good games that i enjoy playing, and some upcoming games i'm excited for. i just so happen to be interested in more of the released and upcoming Playstation 3 games, and i prefer to play multi-plats on the PS3 because i like the controller more than the 360 version, and for online stuff like Borderlands, i don't have to pay just to play for an hour or two a week with friends (i'm not a hardcore online player, so i barely play online in a capacity that makes me want to pay for an online service). View

and 5 Xbox games (three of them Xbox 1 games: Fable: The Lost Chapters, and KOTOR 1 and 2; the actual 360 games i own are Mass Effect and Fable 2: what can i say, i'm a Bioware and Lionhead fan. lol; although they didn't make KOTOR 2, that was Obsidian)

the majority of the 20 PS3 games are exclusive, with a handful being multi-plat (like Fallout 3, Oblivion, Borderlands, Prince of Persia, Assassin's Creed 2, etc).

i prefer the PS3 for my gaming needs, and pretty much just stick to only exclusives on the 360 (i'm currently anticipating Mass Effect 2, Crackdown 2, Alan Wake, and Fable 3; i won't list my PS3 anticipation list for next year; it's a bit...extensive). View

with GTA, but i made sure in my post to specify consoles.

as for Mafia, it eventually ended up on the consoles (in 2004), but not until after GTA3 had made it's mark and set the bar(which released on the PS2 in (2001).

Mafia on the PC released in 2002, for the record. View

for MICROSOFT, as it single handedly legitimized their first foray into the gaming market, and paved the way for it to make the 360 the success it is today.

i think that, of all the games released in the past 10 years, Grand Theft Auto 3 is the single most important game. it literally changed the face of console gaming, and we haven't been the same since.

there would be no Saints Row, Crackdown, inFAMOUS, Prototype, Spider-Man, Just Cause, Assassin's Creed, Borderlands, etc, as the concept of creating a huge, living environment that players are free to do whatever they please within that world (to a limit, of course) wasn't fully realized until Grand Theft Auto 3.

after it hit, the gaming industry stood up and took notice, and many a developer has cited GTA3 as one of their influences for their game design. later GTA's refined the formula, and many games STILL haven't managed to produce what GTA: San Andreas has, including GTAIV.

Halo popularized FPS games on consoles, but it is hardly the most important game of the decade. games like CoD, Medal of Honor, Half Life, etc, would still exist if there was no Halo. Goldeneye 64 and Perfect Dark 64 from RARE would have more than likely took the place of Halo in terms of influencing the FPS genre, as Halo is simply a more polished version of what those two N64 games did in the 90's.

it's just my opinion, but i think GTA3 is one of the most influential games since Pacman on the Atari, Super Mario Bros on the NES, Final Fantasy 6 on the SNES, and Metal Gear Solid on the Playstation. it not only defined the Playstation 2, but the entire generation last gen (after GTA3 hit, how many games moved to open world design when before they would have been level based?).

*shrugs* i think, in the end, it's all subjective, and Halo is certainly an important franchise in the gaming landscape, but there are other games that have done more for gaming as a whole this generation, as opposed to just one genre or platform. View

the majority of the younger audience that didn't care for it's more political story.

being 30, and having played the 8 bit and 16 bit FFs (as well as the PS1 FFs), i found FFXII's story rather intriguing and maturely handled.

no, 6 is still the best in the series, but XII did a damn fine job in more than just it's art design. i loved the battle system, i loved the visuals, and i loved the story.

is it my favorite FF? no, but to say it was crap is to pretend that FFVIII and X-2 don't exist. i rate XII very much over those titles.

but hey, different strokes for different folks. although sometimes i think people on the internet dislike something just to have something to dislike, or because it's popular with a larger group of the internet. gaming forums aren't the only place that does it either (my wife is addicted to the Miss Manners forums, and honestly, the same personality types you see on N4G are there, just b*tching and whining about a different subject. lol).

as for how well FFXIII will do in comparison to the others? who cares? FFX and FFXII have released already. they've been out for YEARS now. FFXIII has been out for 24 hours. who's to say what it's final sales will be, and why does it matter if it beats the day one or day two sales of X and XII?

we've been waiting for FFXIII for a LONG time now, and it's finally arrived in Japan (i'd buy it from the store across the street from my house, but i'm willing to wait 3 months for the English version), and it will be reaching English-speaking territories in a few months.

anything to downplay how well it's doing on the PS3 in Japan, i guess.

so what, is selling 1 million bad again? i get confused about that some times; it tends to flip flop depending on the console being discussed at the moment... View

but i'd absolutely KILL for more PS2 games given HD remakes

Kingdom Hearts series
MGS series
Silent Hill series
Ratchet series
Jak series
Sly Cooper series
Ico and SOTC
Mark of Kri and Rise of the Kasai
Ape Escape
Dark Cloud series w/Rogue Galaxy bonus
War of the Monsters, Primal, and Ghosthunter pack (under-appreciated classics collection)
GTA series
Final Fantasy X and XII (although i'm sure they'd put X-2 on there too)
even a Gran Turismo collection (feature 3 and 4, and maybe 1 and 2 as bonuses) would look amazing with HD visuals and anti-aliasing.

it doesn't matter that i can play them at any time on my PS2, the GoW Collection has shown me that PS2 games with locked down framerates, anti-aliasing, and Trophies is incredible.

i own GoW 1 and 2. even being upscaled by my PS3, it doesn't hold a candle to the collection. GoW2 especially practically rivals ANY of the early HD games this generation.

the PS2 had some amazing games that really pushed the hardware, but HD remakes serve to remind a new generation of exactly WHY the PS2 dominated the industry. it certainly wasn't sales numbers, but the quality gaming experiences it brought to the table that weren't available anywhere else, with a rather surprising amount of them being first and second party.

since the GoW Collection did rather well, i expect we'll be seeing other companies hopping on the bandwagon.

a Resident Evil Collection (ALL of them), with high resolution backgrounds (still the 2D, fixed backgrounds for the games that had them), and improved character models (using HD models), would be awesome.

it's a great way to introduce the series to a new generation turned off by their old school looks (ie, the HD whores like myself, who bought an HDTV to play HD games), and a way to give the hardcore fans of the series a fresh take on games and game play they remember fondly.

God of War Collection is like playing the series with Rose-colored glasses on. it's like how i REMEMBER the games looking and playing through the haze of nostalgia.

i'm willing to double dip on more than just God of War for that feeling with other series i love. View

Localization Tester.

Fun project. I loved the battle system, but the actual story was as cliche and contrived as any RPG starring an idealistic but world-naive boy from a small village/town who is swept away on a world-saving adventure when he meets a mysterious and somehow magical girl (conveniently his own age) one fateful night/day.

what made the project even more interesting is that, for the first few months, it was entirely in Japanese. so i had to learn the game without any understanding of what the hell was going on.

when we finally started getting English versions, it was definitely a shock to see what the actual story of the game was (when it was in Japanese, i was imagining all this epic dialogue, and it turned out to be the same ol' stuff. lol) View

video games. View

is very subjective, but what is FACT for me, personally, is that my wish list for the PS3 is bigger than my wish list for the 360:

my PS3 wish list:

God of War 3
Yakuza 3
Heavy Rain
The Last Guardian
Mod Nation Racers
Final Fantasy XIV (if it's any good)
White Knight Chronicles (i LOVED the Japanese import, so i'm expecting good things for when i can finally understand what the hell is going on)
DC Universe Online
3D Dot Game Heroes
Resistance 3 (if it hits next year as expected)
Agent (if it hits next year and is any good; it's Rockstar North, so chances are it will be quality)

my wish list for the Xbox 360:

Mass Effect 2
Alan Wake
Crackdown 2
Fable 3

so yeah, for me, personally, next year looks more promising on the PS3.

i know i left out games like Gran Turismo 5, MAG, EyePet, and The Agency on the PS3, because i'm not interested in those (although GT5 is rather tempting).

i know i left out Halo Reach, Splinter Cell: Conviction, and Gears of War 3 (if released next year as expected), because i'm not interested in those franchises either. View

there are differences between the 360 and PS3 demographics.

most of the PS3 owners out there now are coming off of the PS2 era, in which Action/Adventure games, Platform Games, and RPGs were the dominant genres.

most of the 360 owners out there now are coming off of the Xbox era (or jumping in with the 360), where Shooters and Multi-Player were the dominant genres.

some folks get upset when people generalize 360 gamers as being shooter fans, but the obscene sales of shooters like CoD4, Halo 3, Modern Warfare 2, and Gears of War, and the anemic sales of non-shooter franchises (Fable 2 excluded, but seriously, what else besides Gears 2 came out last fall for the 360?).

the PS3 sales of single player action/adventure games like Batman, Uncharted, AC2, Ratchet, etc, illustrate that those genres are the strongest on that platform. shooters do pretty well (Killzone 2, CoD4, MW2, Resistance 1 and 2, etc, most certainly sold well on the PS3, but not like they do on the 360).

it's not about one console being "better" than the other, it's about there genuinely being a difference in demographics for those two platforms. View

it deserves.

personally, Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 were the best games i've played this generation,followed by inFAMOUS and Ratchet and Clank Future: ACIT.

if anything, i don't mind KZ2 beating out UC2 in instances like this, because UC2 is getting so much praise, while most people have swept Killzone 2 under the rug, as if it wasn't an amazing console FPS (and i more than just visuals). View