Im curious what you guys think. 360 seems to of really caught on in America, despite having less features and exclusives than PS3. What could it be that attracts American gamer to 360 and what do you think Sony should do to become big with U.S. again. I personally think 360 is riding the coat tails of the sheep effect. There are more reasons to own a PS3 than 360 when they are compared on paper. MS needs to announce some kickass exclusive games because I don't get what U.S. is seeing in 360 as of now. Its like going with just a cup of water and passing up a meal and a cup of water:| Thoughts?
Does 360 deserves its sucess in America?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Of course it deserves its success. Just because MS has only two announced first party titles that don't involve Kinect or XBLA for 2011 doesn't mean the 360 is some bad gaming machine. It's been going strong for five years with a great line-up of games, a solid online service and it is an improvement over the original Xbox by finally getting Xbox owners their fair share of JRPGs through Microsoft's own efforts no less. And Mass Effect ended up multiplatform because EA bought up BioWare, but Microsoft clearly had a plan with their exclusives. Sure a few things backfired on them like BioWare and Bungie, but to act like the 360 and Microsoft haven't done anything of merit is just silly.
It's a great console with great games.
As far as the PS3, it's also a great console with great games. But you can blame Sony's stumbling start before they got their marketing together. I would. :P
Short answer, yes, yes it does. It's an excellent console, and it deserves all the success that it's getting.charizard1605
It is a good console no doubt, but what makes it deserve to top PS3 in U.S.? It has less exclusive franchiss, a last gen disc player, and its AAA games has much less variety than PS3s does.
Exclusives don't matter as most people only have one console, and play mostly multiplats. Xbox 360 is great for this type of gamer. Xbox live is so much better than PSN as well, imo anyway.i5750at4Ghz
Exclusives do matter to an extent. They're what made 360 what it is today. I doubt that Xbox live could be the reason 360 is leading in U.S. If gamers wanted the best online experience, they would use Steam. PSN and XBL are the same besides cross game chat, I doubt that could be the reason. Why is it that exclusives matter years ago when 360 had them, but now its suddenly irrelevant once PS3 has them?
[QUOTE="charizard1605"]Short answer, yes, yes it does. It's an excellent console, and it deserves all the success that it's getting.1Stark1
It is a good console no doubt, but what makes it deserve to top PS3 in U.S.? It has less exclusive franchiss, a last gen disc player, and its AAA games has much less variety than PS3s does.
You need to understand, to most people, exclusives don't matter at all. What matters is the overall strength of the library, and the 360 has that nailed. Combine XBLA titles, and you've got an unstoppable force right there. Also, most people don't care that it doesn't have Blu Ray- individual Blu Ray players can be had for less than $100 now, and the 360 has Netflix for high definition movie watching anyway. One last thing that the 360 has is perception- brands like Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, Halo, Gears of War- on other words, the biggest brands this generation- are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand, meaning that to the average consumer, the Xbox is effectively the only place to play those games. Also, the Xbox has Xbox LIVE. THAT is the Xbox 360's biggest exclusive,[QUOTE="charizard1605"]Short answer, yes, yes it does. It's an excellent console, and it deserves all the success that it's getting.1Stark1
It is a good console no doubt, but what makes it deserve to top PS3 in U.S.? It has less exclusive franchiss, a last gen disc player, and its AAA games has much less variety than PS3s does.
Last gen? DVD is still the preferred format. And the 360 doesn't have less variety of games. The 360 got to people first and it gave them what they wanted faster. Thats why it's more successfull. You can argue the PS3 is the superior choice now, but it wasn't in 2006, 2007 and 2008. Just because the PS3's 2009 and 2010 were marginally better doesn't mean everyone is going to dump their 360 and act like the PS3 is the best game console ever. Moral of the story - Making a good first impression is important. Most people aren't going to buy consoles as investments. If theres something better right now they'll go with that and you really can't blame them for it.The 360 is a great game console, it's deserving of it's success.
[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"]Exclusives don't matter as most people only have one console, and play mostly multiplats. Xbox 360 is great for this type of gamer. Xbox live is so much better than PSN as well, imo anyway.1Stark1
Exclusives do matter to an extent. They're what made 360 what it is today. I doubt that Xbox live could be the reason 360 is leading in U.S. If gamers wanted the best online experience, they would use Steam. PSN and XBL are the same besides cross game chat, I doubt that could be the reason. Why is it that exclusives matter years ago when 360 had them, but now its suddenly irrelevant once PS3 has them?
Didn't matter then either. Price and release date were what mattered.It DID at some point, now, not really, we had seen the best of the X360 games wise, it just stopped being better, the PS3 keeps getting better everyday, in a perfect world the PS3 should have gotton these sales and imo better, but that's NA we are talking about.
[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"]Exclusives don't matter as most people only have one console, and play mostly multiplats. Xbox 360 is great for this type of gamer. Xbox live is so much better than PSN as well, imo anyway.1Stark1
Exclusives do matter to an extent. They're what made 360 what it is today. I doubt that Xbox live could be the reason 360 is leading in U.S. If gamers wanted the best online experience, they would use Steam. PSN and XBL are the same besides cross game chat, I doubt that could be the reason. Why is it that exclusives matter years ago when 360 had them, but now its suddenly irrelevant once PS3 has them?
I hate when people say exclusives made Xbox what it is today.
Two games made Xbox what it is today. Halo and Call of Duty. The best selling exclusive and the best selling multiplat. If you want to make it seem like exclusives matter that much than consider this: only on the Xbox can people have access to the two most popular shooters available with the best online service out of all of the consoles. Sure you can play Call of Duty elsewhere, but MS gets the maps and downloads first. MS shows off the game first, running on their platform.
Two games have defined the Xbox in the U.S., Halo and Call of Duty.
If we're talking in terms of quality releases, MS and the 360 have done really well this gen. But if you're so curious to know how the 360 is doing well and sticking to the exclusives argument know that Halo is the catalyst and with the combined power of Call of Duty it's enough to keep people online playing with their friends, jumping across games and forming parties.
[QUOTE="1Stark1"][QUOTE="charizard1605"]Short answer, yes, yes it does. It's an excellent console, and it deserves all the success that it's getting.charizard1605
It is a good console no doubt, but what makes it deserve to top PS3 in U.S.? It has less exclusive franchiss, a last gen disc player, and its AAA games has much less variety than PS3s does.
You need to understand, to most people, exclusives don't matter at all. What matters is the overall strength of the library, and the 360 has that nailed. Combine XBLA titles, and you've got an unstoppable force right there. Also, most people don't care that it doesn't have Blu Ray- individual Blu Ray players can be had for less than $100 now, and the 360 has Netflix for high definition movie watching anyway. One last thing that the 360 has is perception- brands like Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, Halo, Gears of War- on other words, the biggest brands this generation- are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand, meaning that to the average consumer, the Xbox is effectively the only place to play those games. Also, the Xbox has Xbox LIVE. THAT is the Xbox 360's biggest exclusive,Gears of war, one of the biggest brands this gen? You can put MGS4, GT5, and Uncharted in that same boat then. Cod and Assassins Creed are virtually split between the PS3 and 360. Its not like the 360 version of these games are outselling the PS3 counterpart in a 6:2 ratio:(
It is indeed like some of the other posters have mentioned, the 360 does indeed deserve its sucess, it is a console that was: fairly priced at launch, have a good catalogue of games, so very near the PS3 in terms of performance, Have better online then the PS3 (Worse then the PC, but it is none the less a good alternative).
The way I see it MS did a whole lot of rights with the 360, and a single wrong. The rights were that when you look at the 360 and the PS3, the price difference between to two, was not justified in any way whatsoever, the 360 had nearly everything the PS3 had, apart from the extra none gaming things the PS3 had (Blu ray player were a big plus for the PS3, The rest were a detractor in my opinion, making it more like a gimped PC, with a high Pricetag).
The 360 Had a good set of exclusives and timed exclusives, which ultimately mattered very little, consideringjust how many devs went multiplat this gen.
The wrong was the shotty build, the failurerate of the old models was simply unacceptable, an error I doubt they would make again.
So yeah, from my standpoint(not enthusiast console gamer), the 360 and PS3 were and are so very similar, but the launch prices had so rediculousof a price difference that it was laughable. MS started out with a good buisness mind, Sony did NOT, in too many ways.
If you ask now? They are basicly priced the same now where I live, at that pricepoint, the PS3 would win out, but when we are 3-4 years into a console generation it is both too little and too late.
Personally I would like the next gen of consoles to take a good look in the mirror and repeat after me "We will not make a cross between a gimped PC and a console next gen, OR we should make a true entertainment centre and support it better" For the obvious reasons, you cant sell a 699$ Console, which Devs complain about coding for (for a 2 year stretch) for gamers it would be cheaper if they got rid of some of the things only the most hardcore fans use, for a lower entry price, OR pretty much make something that can replace every single piece of electronics near your TV (in the average home) Such as a really good sound system (which none of them are), optical media player (which they both in theory are, and PS3 still is) online rental service (both are) And built halfway like a tank, With a remote (which you could argue Kinect is). That way I would consider buying a 600$ console next cycle :P
I got WAY off track, diddnt I?
You need to understand, to most people, exclusives don't matter at all. What matters is the overall strength of the library, and the 360 has that nailed. Combine XBLA titles, and you've got an unstoppable force right there. Also, most people don't care that it doesn't have Blu Ray- individual Blu Ray players can be had for less than $100 now, and the 360 has Netflix for high definition movie watching anyway. One last thing that the 360 has is perception- brands like Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, Halo, Gears of War- on other words, the biggest brands this generation- are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand, meaning that to the average consumer, the Xbox is effectively the only place to play those games. Also, the Xbox has Xbox LIVE. THAT is the Xbox 360's biggest exclusive,[QUOTE="charizard1605"][QUOTE="1Stark1"]
It is a good console no doubt, but what makes it deserve to top PS3 in U.S.? It has less exclusive franchiss, a last gen disc player, and its AAA games has much less variety than PS3s does.
1Stark1
Gears of war, one of the biggest brands this gen? You can but MGS4, GT5, and Uncharted in that same boat then. Cod and Assassins Creed are virtually split between the PS3 and 360. Its not like the 360 version of these games are outselling the PS3 counterpart in a 6:2 ratio:(
Look at the total sales of Gears of War. 16 million units. Across two games. Uncharted? 6 million, across two games. GT5? 6 million. MGS4? Last I checked, 4 million. To the average consumer, all those games you listed are unknown names, whereas Gears is a brand with considerable mass appeal. I'm not saying it's better, I'm saying that more people on the street will know about Gears of War than they will about Uncharted or Metal Gear. And as for Call of Duty, you don't understand- it's identified with the 360. Most people see it as an Xbox game. Like GTA last generation? It was also available on the Xbox, but to most people, it was a PS2 game. Same thing with Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed. And as for the sales, yes, the Xbox version of those games almost always outsells the PS3 version by a very considerable margin,especially Call of Duty.How can people say 360 deserves its success when MS doesn't want to compete when it comes to exclusives:? You guys can say it doesn't matter but don't you guys want exclusives for your machine. I know i want exclusives for my 360. I haven't seen a reason to play it since Alan Wake. I just can't make excuses for companies that ditch its core audience to cater to people that dont really play games. Even Nintendo is delivering the exclusive hard core games. MS has more money, yet they choose to fund a huge campaign for kinect over getting awesome exclusives. If Sony did the same thing, i would bad mouth them as well.
Because at this point, exclusives don't matter at all. TheXbox has a solid library of exclusives and multiplats built already, which the PS3 is catching up to. And no, it doesn't matter to me if there aren't any exclusives for the Xbox- simply because of Xbox Live, it would be my go to machine for multiplats. I'd rather use my PS3 and Wii for exclusives, let the Xbox be for multiplats. If you don't feel that way, I can understand. Just understand that not many feel like you, which is obviously why the console is so successful at all.How can people say 360 deserves its success when MS doesn't want to compete when it comes to exclusives:? You guys can say it doesn't matter but don't you guys want exclusives for your machine. I know i want exclusives for my 360. I haven't seen a reason to play it since Alan Wake. I just can't make excuses for companies that ditch its core audience to cater to people that dont really play games. Even Nintendo is delivering the exclusive hard core games. MS has more money, yet they choose to fund a huge campaign for kinect over getting awesome exclusives. If Sony did the same thing, i would bad mouth them as well.
1Stark1
Exclusives aren't as system selling as they used to be.
[QUOTE="1Stark1"][QUOTE="charizard1605"] You need to understand, to most people, exclusives don't matter at all. What matters is the overall strength of the library, and the 360 has that nailed. Combine XBLA titles, and you've got an unstoppable force right there. Also, most people don't care that it doesn't have Blu Ray- individual Blu Ray players can be had for less than $100 now, and the 360 has Netflix for high definition movie watching anyway. One last thing that the 360 has is perception- brands like Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, Halo, Gears of War- on other words, the biggest brands this generation- are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand, meaning that to the average consumer, the Xbox is effectively the only place to play those games. Also, the Xbox has Xbox LIVE. THAT is the Xbox 360's biggest exclusive,charizard1605
Gears of war, one of the biggest brands this gen? You can but MGS4, GT5, and Uncharted in that same boat then. Cod and Assassins Creed are virtually split between the PS3 and 360. Its not like the 360 version of these games are outselling the PS3 counterpart in a 6:2 ratio:(
Look at the total sales of Gears of War. 16 million units. Across two games. Uncharted? 6 million, across two games. GT5? 6 million. MGS4? Last I checked, 4 million. To the average consumer, all those games you listed are unknown names, whereas Gears is a brand with considerable mass appeal. I'm not saying it's better, I'm saying that more people on the street will know about Gears of War than they will about Uncharted or Metal Gear. And as for Call of Duty, you don't understand- it's identified with the 360. Most people see it as an Xbox game. Like GTA last generation? It was also available on the Xbox, but to most people, it was a PS2 game. Same thing with Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed. And as for the sales, yes, the Xbox version of those games almost always outsells the PS3 version by a very considerable margin,especially Call of Duty.16 million, where did you pull that figure? I thought the games sold about 6 mil each. Uncharted sold about 8 mil across both games. The sales are close enough, so i wouldn't put Gears in the same boat as Halo and COD.
How can people say 360 deserves its success when MS doesn't want to compete when it comes to exclusives:? You guys can say it doesn't matter but don't you guys want exclusives for your machine. I know i want exclusives for my 360. I haven't seen a reason to play it since Alan Wake. I just can't make excuses for companies that ditch its core audience to cater to people that dont really play games. Even Nintendo is delivering the exclusive hard core games. MS has more money, yet they choose to fund a huge campaign for kinect over getting awesome exclusives. If Sony did the same thing, i would bad mouth them as well.
1Stark1
You're nagging about a 2011 release schedule aimed at you specifically.
You ask why the 360 deserves success, you get answers. You use exclusives, you're given a reply and then you say it should matter.
The fact of the matter is that you own multiple platforms and are probably more in tune to playing games than the average person that only owns an Xbox. For them they could care less about exclusives. Also keep in mind that Kinect is selling like crazy. That also means MS knew what they were doing and again deserve the financial success that they tapped into.
Just because the 360's current line-up of first party titles doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean that the system that helped push this gen and through competition make Sony step up their game from "giant enemy crabs" to "VP of Awesome" doesn't deserve the success that it has had. Are you seriously telling me that you won't play on your 360 for certain games just because there aren't first party releases? I don't buy that for an instant. They matter to a degree, but exclusives are not what they were in previous gens. The best games are typically multiplatform with a few exceptions. Not to mention, since you don't game on a PC (I'm going by your sig here so correct me if I'm wrong) there are plenty of 360/PC only releases that for you personally should count as exclusives that you may not have played yet.
The system deserves the success because over the years it has earned it. That's all there is to it.
Look at the total sales of Gears of War. 16 million units. Across two games. Uncharted? 6 million, across two games. GT5? 6 million. MGS4? Last I checked, 4 million. To the average consumer, all those games you listed are unknown names, whereas Gears is a brand with considerable mass appeal. I'm not saying it's better, I'm saying that more people on the street will know about Gears of War than they will about Uncharted or Metal Gear. And as for Call of Duty, you don't understand- it's identified with the 360. Most people see it as an Xbox game. Like GTA last generation? It was also available on the Xbox, but to most people, it was a PS2 game. Same thing with Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed. And as for the sales, yes, the Xbox version of those games almost always outsells the PS3 version by a very considerable margin,especially Call of Duty.[QUOTE="charizard1605"][QUOTE="1Stark1"]
Gears of war, one of the biggest brands this gen? You can but MGS4, GT5, and Uncharted in that same boat then. Cod and Assassins Creed are virtually split between the PS3 and 360. Its not like the 360 version of these games are outselling the PS3 counterpart in a 6:2 ratio:(
1Stark1
16 million, where did you pull that figure? I thought the games sold about 6 mil each. Uncharted sold about 8 mil across both games. The sales are close enough, so i wouldn't put Gears in the same boat as Halo and COD.
I stand corrected, but so do you. Gears of War has sold 12 million copes so far. Uncharted, however, has sold 6 million. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_game_franchises No, they don't both belong in the same boat. And at this point, with the multiplats, it's just useless arguing. More people own an Xbox. OBVIOUSLY, multiplat sales will be better on the Xbox. What's so hard to understand?[QUOTE="1Stark1"][QUOTE="charizard1605"] You need to understand, to most people, exclusives don't matter at all. What matters is the overall strength of the library, and the 360 has that nailed. Combine XBLA titles, and you've got an unstoppable force right there. Also, most people don't care that it doesn't have Blu Ray- individual Blu Ray players can be had for less than $100 now, and the 360 has Netflix for high definition movie watching anyway. One last thing that the 360 has is perception- brands like Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, Halo, Gears of War- on other words, the biggest brands this generation- are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand, meaning that to the average consumer, the Xbox is effectively the only place to play those games. Also, the Xbox has Xbox LIVE. THAT is the Xbox 360's biggest exclusive,charizard1605
Gears of war, one of the biggest brands this gen? You can but MGS4, GT5, and Uncharted in that same boat then. Cod and Assassins Creed are virtually split between the PS3 and 360. Its not like the 360 version of these games are outselling the PS3 counterpart in a 6:2 ratio:(
Look at the total sales of Gears of War. 16 million units. Across two games. Uncharted? 6 million, across two games. GT5? 6 million. MGS4? Last I checked, 4 million. To the average consumer, all those games you listed are unknown names, whereas Gears is a brand with considerable mass appeal. I'm not saying it's better, I'm saying that more people on the street will know about Gears of War than they will about Uncharted or Metal Gear. And as for Call of Duty, you don't understand- it's identified with the 360. Most people see it as an Xbox game. Like GTA last generation? It was also available on the Xbox, but to most people, it was a PS2 game. Same thing with Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed. And as for the sales, yes, the Xbox version of those games almost always outsells the PS3 version by a very considerable margin,especially Call of Duty.Also, MGS4 sold 5 million. Gears sold 1 million more. 1 million is the difference from unknown to mass appeal?? Also, COD sales are virtually split. I believe MW2 sold about 3 million more on 360, its not really a huge difference like with GTA. GTA was on xbox like 1 year later whereas COD was on PS3 day one.
It did? 150 million units sold, what more could you want?For those who are saying the X360 is selling coz of the overall library, if this was the case then the PS2 should be having all the sales in the world !!! right ?!
omho88
[QUOTE="1Stark1"]
How can people say 360 deserves its success when MS doesn't want to compete when it comes to exclusives:? You guys can say it doesn't matter but don't you guys want exclusives for your machine. I know i want exclusives for my 360. I haven't seen a reason to play it since Alan Wake. I just can't make excuses for companies that ditch its core audience to cater to people that dont really play games. Even Nintendo is delivering the exclusive hard core games. MS has more money, yet they choose to fund a huge campaign for kinect over getting awesome exclusives. If Sony did the same thing, i would bad mouth them as well.
NeonNinja
You're nagging about a 2011 release schedule aimed at you specifically.
You ask why the 360 deserves success, you get answers. You use exclusives, you're given a reply and then you say it should matter.
The fact of the matter is that you own multiple platforms and are probably more in tune to playing games than the average person that only owns an Xbox. For them they could care less about exclusives. Also keep in mind that Kinect is selling like crazy. That also means MS knew what they were doing and again deserve the financial success that they tapped into.
Just because the 360's current line-up of first party titles doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean that the system that helped push this gen and through competition make Sony step up their game from "giant enemy crabs" to "VP of Awesome" doesn't deserve the success that it has had. Are you seriously telling me that you won't play on your 360 for certain games just because there aren't first party releases? I don't buy that for an instant. They matter to a degree, but exclusives are not what they were in previous gens. The best games are typically multiplatform with a few exceptions. Not to mention, since you don't game on a PC (I'm going by your sig here so correct me if I'm wrong) there are plenty of 360/PC only releases that for you personally should count as exclusives that you may not have played yet.
The system deserves the success because over the years it has earned it. That's all there is to it.
I do game on my Alienware laptop, but I only use it for a few games. Alsoanswer me this one question. If PS3 released at the same price as 360, would 360 be in this position in U.S? Im not doubting 360 is a great machine, Alan Wake and Tales of Vesperia are two of my favorite games this gen. Its just that I dont see what 360 offers over PS3 for 360 to dominate in the NPD like this. I think the most sales should go to the company that working the hardest to give us games only on the platform. Not knocking anyone elses opinon, just laying mines out there.For those who are saying the X360 is selling coz of the overall library, if this was the case then the PS2 should be having all the sales in the world !!! right ?!
omho88
As someone already mentioned it sold 150 million. Most people already played those games by now and they are buying next gen consoles. Did you really have to ask???
[QUOTE="NeonNinja"]
[QUOTE="1Stark1"]
How can people say 360 deserves its success when MS doesn't want to compete when it comes to exclusives:? You guys can say it doesn't matter but don't you guys want exclusives for your machine. I know i want exclusives for my 360. I haven't seen a reason to play it since Alan Wake. I just can't make excuses for companies that ditch its core audience to cater to people that dont really play games. Even Nintendo is delivering the exclusive hard core games. MS has more money, yet they choose to fund a huge campaign for kinect over getting awesome exclusives. If Sony did the same thing, i would bad mouth them as well.
1Stark1
You're nagging about a 2011 release schedule aimed at you specifically.
You ask why the 360 deserves success, you get answers. You use exclusives, you're given a reply and then you say it should matter.
The fact of the matter is that you own multiple platforms and are probably more in tune to playing games than the average person that only owns an Xbox. For them they could care less about exclusives. Also keep in mind that Kinect is selling like crazy. That also means MS knew what they were doing and again deserve the financial success that they tapped into.
Just because the 360's current line-up of first party titles doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean that the system that helped push this gen and through competition make Sony step up their game from "giant enemy crabs" to "VP of Awesome" doesn't deserve the success that it has had. Are you seriously telling me that you won't play on your 360 for certain games just because there aren't first party releases? I don't buy that for an instant. They matter to a degree, but exclusives are not what they were in previous gens. The best games are typically multiplatform with a few exceptions. Not to mention, since you don't game on a PC (I'm going by your sig here so correct me if I'm wrong) there are plenty of 360/PC only releases that for you personally should count as exclusives that you may not have played yet.
The system deserves the success because over the years it has earned it. That's all there is to it.
I do game on my Alienware laptop, but I only use it for a few games. Alsoanswer me this one question. If PS3 released at the same price as 360, would 360 be in this position in U.S? Im not doubting 360 is a great machine, Alan Wake and Tales of Vesperia are two of my favorite games this gen. Its just that I dont see what 360 offers over PS3 for 360 to dominate in the NPD like this. I think the most sales should go to the company that working the hardest to give us games only on the platform. Not knocking anyone elses opinon, just laying mines out there.I think if the PS3 released at the same price as the 360 we would be in a different situation right now with perhaps continued sales dominance by Sony just as last-gen.
Sony dropped the ball. Not only did they release a $600 system, but they got cocky. They said things like "we want you to feel like you have to work to earn a PS3" and other silly crap. So if the PS3 released at the same price while still pioneering Blu-ray out of the box hell yeah Sony would have made a name for themselves quickly. On top of the price and poor attitude, MS released Gears of War and stole the new console thunder for the holiday season. It took a couple of years for Sony to get their game face on. I'd say 2008 was when they got their act together and you can thank Microsoft for making them realize they were screwing up.
Sure, Sony is the better first party publisher, and yes, at this moment in 2011 I'd say they deserve more success for putting more games out there. But that does not mean that the 360's previous five years of excellence are to be ignored and to say it doesn't deserve its success. MS earned it. Nintendo earned it even more for tapping into a whole new market, but that's a conversation for a different topic. :P
As you said, that is only on paperIm curious what you guys think. 360 seems to of really caught on in America, despite having less features and exclusives than PS3. What could it be that attracts American gamer to 360 and what do you think Sony should do to become big with U.S. again. I personally think 360 is riding the coat tails of the sheep effect. There are more reasons to own a PS3 than 360 when they are compared on paper. MS needs to announce some kickass exclusive games because I don't get what U.S. is seeing in 360 as of now. Its like going with just a cup of water and passing up a meal and a cup of water:| Thoughts?
1Stark1
Short answer, yes, yes it does. It's an excellent console, and it deserves all the success that it's getting.charizard1605
It is a good console no doubt, but what makes it deserve to top PS3 in U.S.? It has less exclusive franchiss, a last gen disc player, and its AAA games has much less variety than PS3s does.
You need to understand, to most people, exclusives don't matter at all. What matters is the overall strength of the library, and the 360 has that nailed. Combine XBLA titles, and you've got an unstoppable force right there. Also, most people don't care that it doesn't have Blu Ray- individual Blu Ray players can be had for less than $100 now, and the 360 has Netflix for high definition movie watching anyway. One last thing that the 360 has is perception- brands like Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, Halo, Gears of War- on other words, the biggest brands this generation- are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand, meaning that to the average consumer, the Xbox is effectively the only place to play those games. Also, the Xbox has Xbox LIVE. THAT is the Xbox 360's biggest exclusive, hmmm, since when AC is synoymous with XBOX brand ?!!! and since when CoD exclusive? it may be more popular on X360, but it's a multiplatform and Gears isn't Halo or CoD !![QUOTE="omho88"] It did? 150 million units sold, what more could you want?charizard1605[QUOTE="xsatyr86"]
[QUOTE="omho88"]
For those who are saying the X360 is selling coz of the overall library, if this was the case then the PS2 should be having all the sales in the world !!! right ?!
As someone already mentioned it sold 150 million. Most people already played those games by now and they are buying next gen consoles. Did you really have to ask???
Based on the analogy the PS2 should be selling infinitively, right?
[QUOTE="charizard1605"] You need to understand, to most people, exclusives don't matter at all. What matters is the overall strength of the library, and the 360 has that nailed. Combine XBLA titles, and you've got an unstoppable force right there. Also, most people don't care that it doesn't have Blu Ray- individual Blu Ray players can be had for less than $100 now, and the 360 has Netflix for high definition movie watching anyway. One last thing that the 360 has is perception- brands like Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, Halo, Gears of War- on other words, the biggest brands this generation- are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand, meaning that to the average consumer, the Xbox is effectively the only place to play those games. Also, the Xbox has Xbox LIVE. THAT is the Xbox 360's biggest exclusive,omho88hmmm, since when AC is synoymous with XBOX brand ?!!! and since when CoD exclusive? it may be more popular on X360, but it's a multiplatform and Gears isn't Halo or CoD !!
Hmm...
hmmm, since when AC is synoymous with XBOX brand ?!!! and since when CoD exclusive? it may be more popular on X360, but it's a multiplatform and Gears isn't Halo or CoD !![QUOTE="omho88"][QUOTE="charizard1605"] You need to understand, to most people, exclusives don't matter at all. What matters is the overall strength of the library, and the 360 has that nailed. Combine XBLA titles, and you've got an unstoppable force right there. Also, most people don't care that it doesn't have Blu Ray- individual Blu Ray players can be had for less than $100 now, and the 360 has Netflix for high definition movie watching anyway. One last thing that the 360 has is perception- brands like Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, Halo, Gears of War- on other words, the biggest brands this generation- are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand, meaning that to the average consumer, the Xbox is effectively the only place to play those games. Also, the Xbox has Xbox LIVE. THAT is the Xbox 360's biggest exclusive,waltefmoney
Hmm...
Read the last 3 lines.Read the last 3 lines.omho88
meaning that to the average consumer, the Xbox is effectively the only place to play those games.charizard1605
I did. He didn't say CoD is exclusive.
[QUOTE="omho88"]Read the last 3 lines.waltefmoney
meaning that to the average consumer, the Xbox is effectively the only place to play those games.charizard1605
I did. He didn't say CoD is exclusive.
The XBOX is effectively the only place to play those games !!!!! almost = Exclusive ...... he also said " are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand" .. you still defending his post ?!! the ads campains doesn't change facts, most the X360 games he mentioned are multiplatform, so that's not really a reason for the X360 advantage.The XBOX is effectively the only place to play those games !!!!! almost = Exclusive ...... he also said " are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand" .. you still defending his post ?!! the ads campains doesn't change facts, most the X360 games he mentioned are multiplatform, so that's not really a reason for the X360 advantage.omho88
Uhm, what? So you're saying it's not possible for a game that is not exclusive to a certain platform to help said platform sell?
No i don't think it does.
I thought the PS3 was right from the start a much better choice.
Hardware quality, it had its own identity and more exclusive games... No hidden costs, more of an open platform.
And even though some things have changed over the years, you see PSN plus giving you a lot of sweetness, and Move actually working and being supported by games we like. I still would say the PS3 is the better deal.
But that is personal. I have friends who (would love to) have a 360.
What i think really made 360 succesful is the online community (having your friends play it on 360), a lot of the costs being hidden and consumers being unaware of the hardware problems it had.
[QUOTE="charizard1605"]Short answer, yes, yes it does. It's an excellent console, and it deserves all the success that it's getting.1Stark1
It is a good console no doubt, but what makes it deserve to top PS3 in U.S.? It has less exclusive franchiss, a last gen disc player, and its AAA games has much less variety than PS3s does.
It has less exclusives but most multiplatform games run better on it than the PS3, and there are WAY more multiplatform games than exclusives, and i mean WAY more! Also, you say it lacks features from the PS3... XBL and cross game chat do exist. Then theres Kinect, which although doesn't have any 'hardcore games' yet, is still selling amazing. It deserves it all.My question to you is, what makes you think Sony should be on top, and what would MS have to do to beat PS3 in Asia?
[QUOTE="omho88"]The XBOX is effectively the only place to play those games !!!!! almost = Exclusive ...... he also said " are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand" .. you still defending his post ?!! the ads campains doesn't change facts, most the X360 games he mentioned are multiplatform, so that's not really a reason for the X360 advantage.waltefmoney
Uhm, what? So you're saying it's not possible for a game that is not exclusive to a certain platform to help said platform sell?
It isn't considered an advantage, that's what I am saying. Look at TC Q, I dunt think you can say CoD is what makes the X360 desrves its sales, it may help the console sells but it doesn't make it worthy of its sales.[QUOTE="omho88"]
meaning that to the average consumer, the Xbox is effectively the only place to play those games.charizard1605
I did. He didn't say CoD is exclusive.
The XBOX is effectively the only place to play those games !!!!! almost = Exclusive ...... he also said " are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand" .. you still defending his post ?!! the ads campains doesn't change facts, most the X360 games he mentioned are multiplatform, so that's not really a reason for the X360 advantage. From my post: '... are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand It's like, the average consumer believes that Apple invented touch screen phones, which is complete balderdash. But does that matter? Hell no! What matters is what the consumer PERCEIVES. Most people instantly associate Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed with the Xbox- therefore, the first thought that comes to their minds if they want to play those games and don't own a console yet is 'let's buy an Xbox so I can play CoD/Assassin's Creed.' Effectively, these games act as exclusives even though they aren't. Does that make it clear? Jeez, I don't know what it is with you guys. I mean, I'm not really saying anything that's hard to follow, it's common sense and basic psychology. Marketing matters, consumer perception matters. The Xbox brand rolls over the Playstation in that department, at least this generation.Based on the analogy the PS2 should be selling infinitively, right?omho88Definitely. If there was an infinite number of gamers in the world, and if it was still current gen, and therefore relevant.
[QUOTE="charizard1605"][QUOTE="omho88"] [QUOTE="xsatyr86"][QUOTE="omho88"]
For those who are saying the X360 is selling coz of the overall library, if this was the case then the PS2 should be having all the sales in the world !!! right ?!
omho88
As someone already mentioned it sold 150 million. Most people already played those games by now and they are buying next gen consoles. Did you really have to ask???
Based on the analogy the PS2 should be selling infinitively, right?The analogy is for current gen though. PS2 games have alreay been played by most gamers. There are still people who have not bought into this gen so earlier games for 360 and ps3matter to them. Plz stop being so dense.
[QUOTE="omho88"][QUOTE="waltefmoney"]The XBOX is effectively the only place to play those games !!!!! almost = Exclusive ...... he also said " are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand" .. you still defending his post ?!! the ads campains doesn't change facts, most the X360 games he mentioned are multiplatform, so that's not really a reason for the X360 advantage. From my post: '... are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand It's like, the average consumer believes that Apple invented touch screen phones, which is complete balderdash. But does that matter? Hell no! What matters is what the consumer PERCEIVES. Most people instantly associate Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed with the Xbox- therefore, the first thought that comes to their minds if they want to play those games and don't own a console yet is 'let's buy an Xbox so I can play CoD/Assassin's Creed.' Effectively, these games act as exclusives even though they aren't. Does that make it clear? Jeez, I don't know what it is with you guys. I mean, I'm not really saying anything that's hard to follow, it's common sense and basic psychology. Marketing matters, consumer perception matters. The Xbox brand rolls over the Playstation in that department, at least this generation.I did. He didn't say CoD is exclusive.
charizard1605
Yeah, right, ads and massive campains makes less worthy machines more popular than actually good ones.
[QUOTE="omho88"][QUOTE="charizard1605"]
As someone already mentioned it sold 150 million. Most people already played those games by now and they are buying next gen consoles. Did you really have to ask???
Based on the analogy the PS2 should be selling infinitively, right?The analogy is for current gen though. PS2 games have alreay been played by most gamers. There are still people who have not bought into this gen so earlier games for 360 and ps3matter to them. Plz stop being so dense.
This is my 2nd post regarding the analogy, how could I be suddenly so dense?!From my post: '... are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand It's like, the average consumer believes that Apple invented touch screen phones, which is complete balderdash. But does that matter? Hell no! What matters is what the consumer PERCEIVES. Most people instantly associate Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed with the Xbox- therefore, the first thought that comes to their minds if they want to play those games and don't own a console yet is 'let's buy an Xbox so I can play CoD/Assassin's Creed.' Effectively, these games act as exclusives even though they aren't. Does that make it clear? Jeez, I don't know what it is with you guys. I mean, I'm not really saying anything that's hard to follow, it's common sense and basic psychology. Marketing matters, consumer perception matters. The Xbox brand rolls over the Playstation in that department, at least this generation.[QUOTE="charizard1605"][QUOTE="omho88"] The XBOX is effectively the only place to play those games !!!!! almost = Exclusive ...... he also said " are all perceived to be synonymous with the Xbox brand" .. you still defending his post ?!! the ads campains doesn't change facts, most the X360 games he mentioned are multiplatform, so that's not really a reason for the X360 advantage.omho88
Yeah, right, ads and massive campains makes less worthy machines more popular than actually good ones.
And where did I say that? Moreover, who decides which machine is 'more worthy?'Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment