How Come When We Compare Forza 3 and GT5, The Sales Dont matter but....

k?

I think we should argue about .39 of a percent from a website guys.

[QUOTE="TheArmyGuy48"]

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]and likely will get delayed till about october 2010 cause its not perfect enough. Cicatraz_ESP

Nice crystal ball you have there:roll:

I think Forza > GT5 right now, but we really have to wait and see how GT5 actually turns out. AS it stands for what we know, Forza 3 >GT5.

As for Killzone 2 and Halo 3, I think they are about even.

Killzone 2 has a bit better graphics, but Halo 3 has better online. The single player campaign is about even. The controls slightly better for Halo 3, I don't think one is overly greater then the other.

Why would Killzone 2 be beating Halo 3 in either one of those scenarios?

You do know that Halo 3 has outscored and outsold KZ2 by quite a large margin, right?

Scores will always be more important than sales

If you owned both consloes you could enjoy all 4 games.

If you owned both consloes you could enjoy all 4 games.

druggyjoe3000

If you owned both consloes you could enjoy all 4 games.

druggyjoe3000

A couple of things to consider in this debate for lems:

1. All three Forza games will release between GT4 and GT5, so to say "Forza blows GT out of the water in quality" is kind of a joke when you consider Gran Turismo has not really responded yet (prologue isn't a full game). Forza 1 and GT4 were a virtual deadlock in quality when they released. Overall, Forza ekked out a slightly higher overall score, mostly due to the fact that damage and online play, two things many wanted in GT4, were available in Forza and left out of GT. Again, before we say "Forza is way better" as some have said, let's see what GT does in this generation (same goes for you Cows who swear GT5 will be better).

2. Halo is not universally acclaimed as being better than Killzone 2. Killzone averages a 90 on gamerankings and Halo 3 averages a 93, hardly a landslide win. Gamepro gave a full breakdown on why KZ2 is a cut above Halo, and 1Up said that KZ2 was a game of the year contender. Also, please remember that Killzone 2 released almost TWO YEARS after Halo 3. As time goes on, expectations go up. Do you think Halo 3 would receive the same score releasing in 2009 that it received in 2007? No way. Especially since COD4 came out AFTER Halo 3 and WELL BEFORE Killzone 2. I am not saying KZ2 is leagues better, because I don't think it is. I think the single player is definitely better in KZ2, but that's just me.

So TC is reverting back to using whatever source gives him a mathematical edge in critical acclaim, go figure. You also lost your KZ2 argument since Halo beats it in all 3 catagories, even though I prefer to use personal experience over critical acclaim.

I'm not saying it's justified, what lemmings do, but cows do it constantly too. ODST gets 9.0 and cows were saying how much it sucked.

Another thing that I just thought about that might explain it, is that every time a FPS comes out that's a PS3 exclusive, cows call it the "Halo Killer". Either way, both are great games.

They do matter, otherwise we wouldn't discuss it. GT demo sold the same amount of Forza 2, no one denies it.

I do think it is funny when Cows and Lems argue over games that haven't been released yet... why don't we just get into a giant debate about Resistance 3 vs. Halo Reach while we are at it?

Why are you pointing out Lemmings??

Cows do the same thing, only in reverse.... GT >>> FOrza because it sells more..... Killzone >>> Halo regardless of Halo selling many more copies.

Oh RIIIIIGHT.... I forgot.......

YOU ARE A COW.

I do think it is funny when Cows and Lems argue over games that haven't been released yet... why don't we just get into a giant debate about Resistance 3 vs. Halo Reach while we are at it?

rpawloski2458

Because we already know Halo Reach will own Resistence 3....

Fanboys are hypocrites, news at 11.

As others have pointed out, interesting how you point out the failings of the lemmings while trying to hide behind the exact same argument you critique.

First off, Halo 3 IS the more successful game than Killzone 2, in sales and scores (going by Gamespot, Metacritic, and Gamerankings). So this hardly helps your case ArmyGuy.

Forza 2 may not have sold as well as GT 4, the game that was released in the same window, but it did outscore it. So of course when comparing Forza and GT,. do the cows compare games in the same release cycle? Of course not, they fall back on a game from EIGHT YEARS AGO, and no matter what, still proclaim it/s 9.4 >>> 9.2.

Which brings me to my next point. ArmyGuy, you want to talk about hypocrisy??? What about the double standards of aging of games? Cows want to insist that Halo 3's 9.5 doesn't measure up to Killzone 2's 9.0, because of "progressing standards". Which is fair enough. So why does this same principle not apply to the Forza vs GT argument? Then all of the sudden, GT3's 9.4 score is etched in stone and retains its value for... 8... 15... hell even 40 years as far as cows are concerned!

Of course they have to use a game not only from EIGHT YEARS AGO, but also the last GT game that was out before there was any other sim racer competiton on consoles (Forza) for reviewers to have anything to compare the standards for. They will always use that 9.4 from 4 years prior to Forza 2 with its 9.2, just because they want to have a better number to use.

So Halo 3's score, still in the same generation, doesn't hold up to KZ2 in "changing standards", but GT3, a game from a whole previous gen, can ALWAYS be used against Forza 2 to say it's actually better.

Ain't that just grand :roll::roll:

Another thing that I just thought about that might explain it, is that every time a FPS comes out that's a PS3 exclusive, cows call it the "Halo Killer". Either way, both are great games.

RobbRipken

Please stop saying that cows hype fps to be a halo killer. Cows have stopped that because they know there going to get burned, only fakeboys or extreme fanboys call things "Halo killers". Some cows might say that Killzone 2 is better than Halo 3 but they know better than to say that Halo was "killed".

Halo 3 beat KZ2 and R1/R2 in reviews. 9.5.

FM3 will do the same.

The critical acclaim is just a bonus.

First off, Halo 3 IS the more successful game than Killzone 2, in sales and scores (going by Gamespot, Metacritic, and Gamerankings). So this hardly helps your case ArmyGuy.

Forza 2 may not have sold as well as GT 4, the game that was released in the same window, but it did outscore it. So of course when comparing Forza and GT,. do the cows compare games in the same release cycle? Of course not, they fall back on a game from EIGHT YEARS AGO, and no matter what, still proclaim it/s 9.4 >>> 9.2.

Which brings me to my next point. ArmyGuy, you want to talk about hypocrisy??? What about the double standards of aging of games? Cows want to insist that Halo 3's 9.5 doesn't measure up to Killzone 2's 9.0, because of "progressing standards". Which is fair enough. So why does this same principle not apply to the Forza vs GT argument? Then all of the sudden, GT3's 9.4 score is etched in stone and retains its value for... 8... 15... hell even 40 years as far as cows are concerned!

Of course they have to use a game not only from EIGHT YEARS AGO, but also the last GT game that was out before there was any other sim racer competiton on consoles (Forza) for reviewers to have anything to compare the standards for. They will always use that 9.4 from 4 years prior to Forza 2 with its 9.2, just because they want to have a better number to use.

So Halo 3's score, still in the same generation, doesn't hold up to KZ2 in "changing standards", but GT3, a game from a whole previous gen, can ALWAYS be used against Forza 2 to say it's actually better.

Ain't that just grand :roll::roll:

AdobeArtist

Very well said. I agree 100%.

First off, Halo 3 IS the more successful game than Killzone 2, in sales and scores (going by Gamespot, Metacritic, and Gamerankings). So this hardly helps your case ArmyGuy.

Forza 2 may not have sold as well as GT 4, the game that was released in the same window, but it did outscore it. So of course when comparing Forza and GT,. do the cows compare games in the same release cycle? Of course not, they fall back on a game from EIGHT YEARS AGO, and no matter what, still proclaim it/s 9.4 >>> 9.2.

Which brings me to my next point. ArmyGuy, you want to talk about hypocrisy??? What about the double standards of aging of games? Cows want to insist that Halo 3's 9.5 doesn't measure up to Killzone 2's 9.0, because of "progressing standards". Which is fair enough. So why does this same principle not apply to the Forza vs GT argument? Then all of the sudden, GT3's 9.4 score is etched in stone and retains its value for... 8... 15... hell even 40 years as far as cows are concerned!

Of course they have to use a game not only from EIGHT YEARS AGO, but also the last GT game that was out before there was any other sim racer competiton on consoles (Forza) for reviewers to have anything to compare the standards for. They will always use that 9.4 from 4 years prior to Forza 2 with its 9.2, just because they want to have a better number to use.

So Halo 3's score, still in the same generation, doesn't hold up to KZ2 in "changing standards", but GT3, a game from a whole previous gen, can ALWAYS be used against Forza 2 to say it's actually better.

Ain't that just grand :roll::roll:

AdobeArtist

Jesus Christ, never have I seen such ownage in System Wars. You utterly destroyed Armyguy's arguments. +1 to you

First off, Halo 3 IS the more successful game than Killzone 2, in sales and scores (going by Gamespot, Metacritic, and Gamerankings). So this hardly helps your case ArmyGuy.

Forza 2 may not have sold as well as GT 4, the game that was released in the same window, but it did outscore it. So of course when comparing Forza and GT,. do the cows compare games in the same release cycle? Of course not, they fall back on a game from EIGHT YEARS AGO, and no matter what, still proclaim it/s 9.4 >>> 9.2.

Which brings me to my next point. ArmyGuy, you want to talk about hypocrisy??? What about the double standards of aging of games? Cows want to insist that Halo 3's 9.5 doesn't measure up to Killzone 2's 9.0, because of "progressing standards". Which is fair enough. So why does this same principle not apply to the Forza vs GT argument? Then all of the sudden, GT3's 9.4 score is etched in stone and retains its value for... 8... 15... hell even 40 years as far as cows are concerned!

Of course they have to use a game not only from EIGHT YEARS AGO, but also the last GT game that was out before there was any other sim racer competiton on consoles (Forza) for reviewers to have anything to compare the standards for. They will always use that 9.4 from 4 years prior to Forza 2 with its 9.2, just because they want to have a better number to use.

So Halo 3's score, still in the same generation, doesn't hold up to KZ2 in "changing standards", but GT3, a game from a whole previous gen, can ALWAYS be used against Forza 2 to say it's actually better.

Ain't that just grand :roll::roll:

AdobeArtist

And with this post, the thread comes to a finish.

[QUOTE="AdobeArtist"]

First off, Halo 3 IS the more successful game than Killzone 2, in sales and scores (going by Gamespot, Metacritic, and Gamerankings). So this hardly helps your case ArmyGuy.

Forza 2 may not have sold as well as GT 4, the game that was released in the same window, but it did outscore it. So of course when comparing Forza and GT,. do the cows compare games in the same release cycle? Of course not, they fall back on a game from EIGHT YEARS AGO, and no matter what, still proclaim it/s 9.4 >>> 9.2.

Which brings me to my next point. ArmyGuy, you want to talk about hypocrisy??? What about the double standards of aging of games? Cows want to insist that Halo 3's 9.5 doesn't measure up to Killzone 2's 9.0, because of "progressing standards". Which is fair enough. So why does this same principle not apply to the Forza vs GT argument? Then all of the sudden, GT3's 9.4 score is etched in stone and retains its value for... 8... 15... hell even 40 years as far as cows are concerned!

Of course they have to use a game not only from EIGHT YEARS AGO, but also the last GT game that was out before there was any other sim racer competiton on consoles (Forza) for reviewers to have anything to compare the standards for. They will always use that 9.4 from 4 years prior to Forza 2 with its 9.2, just because they want to have a better number to use.

So Halo 3's score, still in the same generation, doesn't hold up to KZ2 in "changing standards", but GT3, a game from a whole previous gen, can ALWAYS be used against Forza 2 to say it's actually better.

Ain't that just grand :roll::roll:

SpinoRaptor24

And with this post, the thread comes to a finish.

Score one for the good guys...

[QUOTE="SpinoRaptor24"]

[QUOTE="AdobeArtist"]

First off, Halo 3 IS the more successful game than Killzone 2, in sales and scores (going by Gamespot, Metacritic, and Gamerankings). So this hardly helps your case ArmyGuy.

Forza 2 may not have sold as well as GT 4, the game that was released in the same window, but it did outscore it. So of course when comparing Forza and GT,. do the cows compare games in the same release cycle? Of course not, they fall back on a game from EIGHT YEARS AGO, and no matter what, still proclaim it/s 9.4 >>> 9.2.

Which brings me to my next point. ArmyGuy, you want to talk about hypocrisy??? What about the double standards of aging of games? Cows want to insist that Halo 3's 9.5 doesn't measure up to Killzone 2's 9.0, because of "progressing standards". Which is fair enough. So why does this same principle not apply to the Forza vs GT argument? Then all of the sudden, GT3's 9.4 score is etched in stone and retains its value for... 8... 15... hell even 40 years as far as cows are concerned!

Of course they have to use a game not only from EIGHT YEARS AGO, but also the last GT game that was out before there was any other sim racer competiton on consoles (Forza) for reviewers to have anything to compare the standards for. They will always use that 9.4 from 4 years prior to Forza 2 with its 9.2, just because they want to have a better number to use.

So Halo 3's score, still in the same generation, doesn't hold up to KZ2 in "changing standards", but GT3, a game from a whole previous gen, can ALWAYS be used against Forza 2 to say it's actually better.

Ain't that just grand :roll::roll:

MizFitAwesome

And with this post, the thread comes to a finish.

Score one for the good guys...

Do the good guys still get to use guns?

[QUOTE="tehsystemwarior"]Oh, you have the sales number from Forza 3 and GT 5? Can I see? Please? And can I bother your time machine? I wanna go into the future till when they find MJ is still alive again,TheArmyGuy48

[QUOTE="AdobeArtist"]

First off, Halo 3 IS the more successful game than Killzone 2, in sales and scores (going by Gamespot, Metacritic, and Gamerankings). So this hardly helps your case ArmyGuy.

Forza 2 may not have sold as well as GT 4, the game that was released in the same window, but it did outscore it. So of course when comparing Forza and GT,. do the cows compare games in the same release cycle? Of course not, they fall back on a game from EIGHT YEARS AGO, and no matter what, still proclaim it/s 9.4 >>> 9.2.

Which brings me to my next point. ArmyGuy, you want to talk about hypocrisy??? What about the double standards of aging of games? Cows want to insist that Halo 3's 9.5 doesn't measure up to Killzone 2's 9.0, because of "progressing standards". Which is fair enough. So why does this same principle not apply to the Forza vs GT argument? Then all of the sudden, GT3's 9.4 score is etched in stone and retains its value for... 8... 15... hell even 40 years as far as cows are concerned!

Of course they have to use a game not only from EIGHT YEARS AGO, but also the last GT game that was out before there was any other sim racer competiton on consoles (Forza) for reviewers to have anything to compare the standards for. They will always use that 9.4 from 4 years prior to Forza 2 with its 9.2, just because they want to have a better number to use.

So Halo 3's score, still in the same generation, doesn't hold up to KZ2 in "changing standards", but GT3, a game from a whole previous gen, can ALWAYS be used against Forza 2 to say it's actually better.

Ain't that just grand :roll::roll:

SpinoRaptor24

And with this post, the thread comes to a finish.

I agree...I think Champs party is still going on....See whats going on over there...

[QUOTE="MizFitAwesome"]

[QUOTE="SpinoRaptor24"]

And with this post, the thread comes to a finish.

treedoor

Score one for the good guys...

Do the good guys still get to use guns?

THIS one does :twisted:8)

And my work here is done.
*rides off into the sunset*

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="TheArmyGuy48"] I didnt know forza had 2 games in the top 50 at gamerankings/metacritic:roll:

Hell, I didnt know they even had ONE game in the top 50 at Gamerankings/Metacritic.

Only in this imaginary world we call system wars, forza is more acclaimed than GT. Off to the real world now;)

SilverChimera

Im pretty sure EVERY single Forza game was AAA :|

IGN scores dont matter over here,this is Gamespot.

[QUOTE="SilverChimera"][QUOTE="PAL360"]

Im pretty sure EVERY single Forza game was AAA :|

jessesalinas

IGN scores dont matter over here,this is Gamespot.

[QUOTE="TheArmyGuy48"]

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]and likely will get delayed till about october 2010 cause its not perfect enough. The_Game21x

Nice crystal ball you have there:roll:

As far as i know 0 times...
Its just rumours that its gonna get released in 2008, 2009 etc. Sony said it had a probably release date in December 2009. And after releasing GT5P PD said they are gonna release full GT5 probably in 2010...

I don't care about neither Forza 3 or GT5. Nor do I care about sales or counting A's. Also, I think Killzone 2 is much better than Halo 3.

no choice for battlefield > halo & killzone and dirt 2 > gt5 and f3?

cuz thats the one i vote for

[QUOTE="comeonthehoops"]Except Halo 3 also has better critical acclaim than Killzone 2, along with better sales. Therefore your point automatically fails :|TheArmyGuy48

[QUOTE="bubnux"]

If sales matter, I guess Wii play>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Halo 3. Oh, but that's when sales don't matter here in SW= anytime you compare halo to anything that sells better. So, when sales count Wii>360 & WiiFit/Play/Sports>Halo... If you wanna play the sales game you have to run all the bases.

TheArmyGuy48

no choice for battlefield > halo & killzone and dirt 2 > gt5 and f3?

cuz thats the one i vote for

Riverwolf007

You're missing the option GT5 > Forza3 and Killzone 2 > Halo 3 which is the correct one :)RedruM_I

of course, based solely on the fact that halo isnt on the ps3

You're missing the option GT5 > Forza3 and Killzone 2 > Halo 3 which is the correct one :)RedruM_I

I don't understand the 2nd option of this poll. Scratch that. I don't understand this poll at all.

[QUOTE="Peiner09"][QUOTE="PAL360"]

How about both Forza and Halo series are more critically aclaimed series than Killzone and GT?

TheArmyGuy48

Hell, I didnt know they even had ONE game in the top 50 at Gamerankings/Metacritic.

Only in this imaginary world we call system wars, forza is more acclaimed than GT. Off to the real world now;)

GranTurismo(PSX) - 8.6

GranTurismo2(PSX) - 8.5

GranTurismo3(PS2) - 9.4

Gran Turismo 4(PS2) - 8.9

GranTurismo5 P(PS3) - 7.5

Gran Turismo PSP(flop) - 7.5

so it looks like Forza is a AAA Series that plays way better than a bumper car sim.