So xbox 360 has been out for 21 months and the ps3 has been out for 9 months.So do you people claim ownage that your 21 month old console has more games than a 9 month old console.But what do we do?
Hmmm so the 360 was out a whole year early than the ps3.Why dont we see what sony's console was offering in that 1 year.Oh ya how many games did the ps2 have in that 1 year and then add it to the ps3 total and that will be a very fair comparasion.
It isnt ps3 vs 360,it's sony's consoles vs microsoft's consoles.The original xboxwas not getting anything after the 360 launch but obviously the ps2 was still getting plenty of games after the 360 launch.
The camparasion that we do between the ps3 and 360 is just illogical.360 has been out for 21 months and it obviously needed more games to keep those customers happy who bought their console at launch.As for the ps3 it obviously needed less games because it's been only 9 months since people have started buying the ps3.You need time to play games andalthough choice is better sometimes there are so many games that time and money become an issue.If ps3 decides to release 10 quality games every month(now i am not saying that sony can do it if they want to) in order to catch to 360,people will just not have the time and money to play those games.
And comon,isnt it about sony vs microsoft or playstation vs xbox.Yup the latter will do.So i think we should add the ps2 games between the 360 launch and ps3 launch to the playstation library whenever we want to compare the playstation with the 360.This only makes things fairer.
Log in to comment