Sorry--This Might Hurt

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has 45 AA-AAA titles

The PS3 has 14

The Wii has 7

Discuss.

(More here.)

You make too many post TRUTH!:Pkingpoopa84

Haha.  I'll change the title.  It's all marketing, baby.

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away. 

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away. 

Killer_Wuggles

Nice wording...you might have also wrote:  "The 360 has been out for 17 1/2 months" or, "just below a year-and-a-half" instead of spinning it in your favor.

The 360 has not been out for almost two years, sir.

360 is doing good and that is a Fact but it has been out a year longer better hope it dont lose momentum.

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away.

Killer_Wuggles

[QUOTE="Killer_Wuggles"]

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away.

CubeJL

Nice wording...you might have also wrote: "The 360 has been out for 17 1/2 months" or, "just below a year-and-a-half" instead of spinning it in your favor.

The 360 has not been out for almost two years, sir.

So? The point is that the 360 has had a long time to build up that massive library. Did you honestly expect the PS3 and Wii to have 40+ AAA's and AA's in 5 months?

What you should have done was comare games by the consoles time period, and only include 360 games reviewed by or before April 19th 2006 because the full 360 lifespan isn't a fair comparison. Although if you did go by time period, the 360 would still win.

[QUOTE="Killer_Wuggles"]

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away.

CubeJL

Nice wording...you might have also wrote: "The 360 has been out for 17 1/2 months" or, "just below a year-and-a-half" instead of spinning it in your favor.

The 360 has not been out for almost two years, sir.

It's ironic how you try on purpose to find the smallest, teeniest flaw in my post rather than focus on the central topic... SIR. 

How many AA-AAA titles did 360 have when it was only 5 1/2 months old?IAmRodyle

I went and counted, the 360 had 15 AA-AAA games within it's first 5 1/2 months. Which puts it at...

360 - 15
PS3 - 15
Wii -    7

So the 360 got 30 AA-AAA diring it's 1 year head start. The number of games are now closer than before making it more fair. the Wii has less, so it will have to step things up a bit.

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has 45 AA-AAA titles

The PS3 has 14

The Wii has 7

Discuss.

CubeJL

Which one has a full year lead?

Thread over. 

[QUOTE="IAmRodyle"]How many AA-AAA titles did 360 have when it was only 5 1/2 months old?88Ghost89

I went and counted, the 360 had 15 AA-AAA games within it's first 5 1/2 months. Which puts it at...

360 - 15
PS3 - 14
Wii - 7

So the 360 got 30 AA-AAA diring it's 1 year head start. The number of games are now closer than before making it more fair. the Wii has less, so it will have to step things up a bit.

Yes, that's not terrible though, I mean you do have to consider that most developers thought it was a joke... untill it destroyed E3.

[QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="Killer_Wuggles"]

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away.

goblaa

Nice wording...you might have also wrote: "The 360 has been out for 17 1/2 months" or, "just below a year-and-a-half" instead of spinning it in your favor.

The 360 has not been out for almost two years, sir.

So? The point is that the 360 has had a long time to build up that massive library. Did you honestly expect the PS3 and Wii to have 40+ AAA's and AA's in 5 months?

Guys, guys, guys.  Is it MS's fault that Nintendo and Sony waited until 2006 to launch their new systems?  No?  Then why are holding it to this ridiculous double standard.

Part of the reason the 360 launched early was for this very reason--to have 45 AA-AAA games while the "other guys' worked out the kinks.  It's all part of the strategy.

The only thing that matters today is "what games are out now"--not tomorrow, not next month, not next year.  End of story.

How many AA-AAA titles did 360 have when it was only 5 1/2 months old?IAmRodyle

Here is your answer:

AAA and AA Titles Available 5-6 Months Post-Release           

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

Xbox 360

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

Number of AA Titles                                        12

Number of AAA Titles                                       3

Average Score of AA-AAA Titles                         8.613

Power Score**                                                129.2

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

Number of AA-AAA Exclusives                            5

Average Score of AA-AAA Exclusives                   8.66

Click here for even more in depth analysis.

[QUOTE="88Ghost89"]

[QUOTE="IAmRodyle"]How many AA-AAA titles did 360 have when it was only 5 1/2 months old?GundamGuy0

I went and counted, the 360 had 15 AA-AAA games within it's first 5 1/2 months. Which puts it at...

360 - 15
PS3 - 15
Wii - 7

So the 360 got 30 AA-AAA diring it's 1 year head start. The number of games are now closer than before making it more fair. the Wii has less, so it will have to step things up a bit.

Yes, that's not terrible though, I mean you do have to consider that most developers thought it was a joke... untill it destroyed E3.

I went and counted the PS3s list, the TC was off by one it also has 15. But yeah, with the recent wave of game announcements for the Wii and will sales bringing more games, It will get more games and although there will be alot of **** there will be alot of good games aswell, it will catch up im sure.

Yeah, thats true who Cube said.. but I'd rather have a close to .5% failure rate than the 360 with a super high fail rate... Idc what Gamespot gives to games.. its about my opinions... not GS.

In the end the person who goes by his instincts wins.

In my case, Ill buy a PS3 and a 360.. Win Win Situation. 

[QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="Killer_Wuggles"]

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away.

CubeJL

Nice wording...you might have also wrote: "The 360 has been out for 17 1/2 months" or, "just below a year-and-a-half" instead of spinning it in your favor.

The 360 has not been out for almost two years, sir.

So? The point is that the 360 has had a long time to build up that massive library. Did you honestly expect the PS3 and Wii to have 40+ AAA's and AA's in 5 months?

Guys, guys, guys. Is it MS's fault that Nintendo and Sony waited until 2006 to launch their new systems? No? Then why are holding it to this ridiculous double standard.

Part of the reason the 360 launched early was for this very reason--to have 45 AA-AAA games while the "other guys' worked out the kinks. It's all part of the strategy.

The only thing that matters today is "what games are out now"--not tomorrow, not next month, not next year. End of story.

I agree. MS was very smart to get out a year early. But if you and I are running a race, and you start 5 min before me, that does not make you the better runner. 

[QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="Killer_Wuggles"]

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away.

goblaa

Nice wording...you might have also wrote: "The 360 has been out for 17 1/2 months" or, "just below a year-and-a-half" instead of spinning it in your favor.

The 360 has not been out for almost two years, sir.

So? The point is that the 360 has had a long time to build up that massive library. Did you honestly expect the PS3 and Wii to have 40+ AAA's and AA's in 5 months?

Guys, guys, guys. Is it MS's fault that Nintendo and Sony waited until 2006 to launch their new systems? No? Then why are holding it to this ridiculous double standard.

Part of the reason the 360 launched early was for this very reason--to have 45 AA-AAA games while the "other guys' worked out the kinks. It's all part of the strategy.

The only thing that matters today is "what games are out now"--not tomorrow, not next month, not next year. End of story.

I agree. MS was very smart to get out a year early. But if you and I are running a race, and you start 5 min before me, that does not make you the better runner. 

I admire your effort.  But, in your scenario, you're implying an early start.  What MS did was not "break the rules" by starting early.  MS started when the gun went off...the PS3 and Wii started 12 months afterwards.

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away.

Killer_Wuggles

your like those people who try and use the slight of words to put things in ur favor, how is less than a year and a hald 2 years, but the wii and PS3 u actually put the month and day,,,no1 is falling for that, its been out a year more and had a LOT of great titles...its not a debate 

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away.

Killer_Wuggles

i see this too many times okay so according to you this dosent matter because the 360 has been out longer now of course thats why it has more but how long do we have to wait until the ps3 gets there ummmm 2, 3 years. yeah just keep on waiting

[QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="Killer_Wuggles"]

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away.

CubeJL

Nice wording...you might have also wrote: "The 360 has been out for 17 1/2 months" or, "just below a year-and-a-half" instead of spinning it in your favor.

The 360 has not been out for almost two years, sir.

So? The point is that the 360 has had a long time to build up that massive library. Did you honestly expect the PS3 and Wii to have 40+ AAA's and AA's in 5 months?

Guys, guys, guys.  Is it MS's fault that Nintendo and Sony waited until 2006 to launch their new systems?  No?  Then why are holding it to this ridiculous double standard.

Part of the reason the 360 launched early was for this very reason--to have 45 AA-AAA games while the "other guys' worked out the kinks.  It's all part of the strategy.

The only thing that matters today is "what games are out now"--not tomorrow, not next month, not next year.  End of story.

Thats exactly what I was gonna say, sony is competing with these games at the moment. In simple terms the 360 has more high end games for it. The fact that the PS3 is only 5 months old is irrelevent, most people when buying a console aren't going to say "It's unfair the 360 has more games, it got a head start"

[QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="Killer_Wuggles"]

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away.

goblaa

Nice wording...you might have also wrote: "The 360 has been out for 17 1/2 months" or, "just below a year-and-a-half" instead of spinning it in your favor.

The 360 has not been out for almost two years, sir.

So? The point is that the 360 has had a long time to build up that massive library. Did you honestly expect the PS3 and Wii to have 40+ AAA's and AA's in 5 months?

Guys, guys, guys. Is it MS's fault that Nintendo and Sony waited until 2006 to launch their new systems? No? Then why are holding it to this ridiculous double standard.

Part of the reason the 360 launched early was for this very reason--to have 45 AA-AAA games while the "other guys' worked out the kinks. It's all part of the strategy.

The only thing that matters today is "what games are out now"--not tomorrow, not next month, not next year. End of story.

I agree. MS was very smart to get out a year early. But if you and I are running a race, and you start 5 min before me, that does not make you the better runner.

Maybe not but he would win the race and thats all that matters isnt it? 

[QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="Killer_Wuggles"]

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away.

ApocalypseXIVV

Nice wording...you might have also wrote: "The 360 has been out for 17 1/2 months" or, "just below a year-and-a-half" instead of spinning it in your favor.

The 360 has not been out for almost two years, sir.

So? The point is that the 360 has had a long time to build up that massive library. Did you honestly expect the PS3 and Wii to have 40+ AAA's and AA's in 5 months?

Guys, guys, guys. Is it MS's fault that Nintendo and Sony waited until 2006 to launch their new systems? No? Then why are holding it to this ridiculous double standard.

Part of the reason the 360 launched early was for this very reason--to have 45 AA-AAA games while the "other guys' worked out the kinks. It's all part of the strategy.

The only thing that matters today is "what games are out now"--not tomorrow, not next month, not next year. End of story.

I agree. MS was very smart to get out a year early. But if you and I are running a race, and you start 5 min before me, that does not make you the better runner.

Maybe not but he would win the race and thats all that matters isnt it? 

Doesn't matter.  It's not that MS got an early start, folks...Sony and Nintendo got a late one.

[QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="Killer_Wuggles"]

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away.

ApocalypseXIVV

Nice wording...you might have also wrote: "The 360 has been out for 17 1/2 months" or, "just below a year-and-a-half" instead of spinning it in your favor.

The 360 has not been out for almost two years, sir.

So? The point is that the 360 has had a long time to build up that massive library. Did you honestly expect the PS3 and Wii to have 40+ AAA's and AA's in 5 months?

Guys, guys, guys. Is it MS's fault that Nintendo and Sony waited until 2006 to launch their new systems? No? Then why are holding it to this ridiculous double standard.

Part of the reason the 360 launched early was for this very reason--to have 45 AA-AAA games while the "other guys' worked out the kinks. It's all part of the strategy.

The only thing that matters today is "what games are out now"--not tomorrow, not next month, not next year. End of story.

I agree. MS was very smart to get out a year early. But if you and I are running a race, and you start 5 min before me, that does not make you the better runner.

Maybe not but he would win the race and thats all that matters isnt it? 

But wouldnt the 360s life end a year before the Wii and PS3? Meaning they would get back their year then?

[QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="goblaa"][QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="Killer_Wuggles"]

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has been out for almost two years.

The PS3 has been out for 5 1/2 months.

The Wii has been out for 5 1/2 months.

Go away.

freshfighter83

Nice wording...you might have also wrote: "The 360 has been out for 17 1/2 months" or, "just below a year-and-a-half" instead of spinning it in your favor.

The 360 has not been out for almost two years, sir.

So? The point is that the 360 has had a long time to build up that massive library. Did you honestly expect the PS3 and Wii to have 40+ AAA's and AA's in 5 months?

Guys, guys, guys.  Is it MS's fault that Nintendo and Sony waited until 2006 to launch their new systems?  No?  Then why are holding it to this ridiculous double standard.

Part of the reason the 360 launched early was for this very reason--to have 45 AA-AAA games while the "other guys' worked out the kinks.  It's all part of the strategy.

The only thing that matters today is "what games are out now"--not tomorrow, not next month, not next year.  End of story.

Thats exactly what I was gonna say, sony is competing with these games at the moment. In simple terms the 360 has more high end games for it. The fact that the PS3 is only 5 months old is irrelevent, most people when buying a console aren't going to say "It's unfair the 360 has more games, it got a head start"

Exactly.

That's it.  Why do we have to play the whole "lets wait for everyone to get up to speed"?  When this generation ends, do you think everybody will end it individually? No, it will end all at once.  Why does everyone think that the beginning is any different?  This gen started when the 360 was released, there should be no excuses coming from anyone else.

This is the very reason why the PS2 stomped a mudhole in the GC and the OG Xbox, because it got out the gate first and provided a solid platform that developers were willing to develop for.

That's it.  Why do we have to play the whole "lets wait for everyone to get up to speed"?  When this generation ends, do you think everybody will end it individually? No, it will end all at once.  Why does everyone think that the beginning is any different?  This gen started when the 360 was released, there should be no excuses coming from anyone else.

This is the very reason why the PS2 stomped a mudhole in the GC and the OG Xbox, because it got out the gate first and provided a solid platform that developers were willing to develop for.

Ultimas_Blade

Another enlightened soul.  My heart tingles with glee.

[QUOTE="Ultimas_Blade"]

That's it.  Why do we have to play the whole "lets wait for everyone to get up to speed"?  When this generation ends, do you think everybody will end it individually? No, it will end all at once.  Why does everyone think that the beginning is any different?  This gen started when the 360 was released, there should be no excuses coming from anyone else.

This is the very reason why the PS2 stomped a mudhole in the GC and the OG Xbox, because it got out the gate first and provided a solid platform that developers were willing to develop for.

CubeJL

Another enlightened soul.  My heart tingles with glee.

What does everyone think of Sony's current situation?  Summed up in one word I would say: Precarious.  Right now they are at the doors of being 'dreamcasted', and it seems there is little they can do but depend solely on the customers.  The Dev's aren't helping them out with all the new high profile multiplats (FFXIII and DMC4) and complaints.  Media generally hasn't been too generous.  Sony can't even help themselves as much of their PR backfires on them.

Nintendo's climbing up, Microsoft's on top but on shakey ground, and Sony's slipping...

:lol: Fanboy :|

The 360 has been out for almost two years, and the PS3 only has 2 AAE, and 0AAAE.  /topic. 

:lol: Fanboy :|

The 360 has been out for almost two years, and the PS3 only has 2 AAE, and 0AAAE.  /topic. 

Tylendal

What?

Here ya go.

[QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="Ultimas_Blade"]

That's it.  Why do we have to play the whole "lets wait for everyone to get up to speed"?  When this generation ends, do you think everybody will end it individually? No, it will end all at once.  Why does everyone think that the beginning is any different?  This gen started when the 360 was released, there should be no excuses coming from anyone else.

This is the very reason why the PS2 stomped a mudhole in the GC and the OG Xbox, because it got out the gate first and provided a solid platform that developers were willing to develop for.

Ultimas_Blade

Another enlightened soul.  My heart tingles with glee.

What does everyone think of Sony's current situation?  Summed up in one word I would say: Precarious.  Right now they are at the doors of being 'dreamcasted', and it seems there is little they can do but depend solely on the customers.  The Dev's aren't helping them out with all the new high profile multiplats (FFXIII and DMC4) and complaints.  Media generally hasn't been too generous.  Sony can't even help themselves as much of their PR backfires on them.

Nintendo's climbing up, Microsoft's on top but on shakey ground, and Sony's slipping...

Well, I agree with most of what you say---except the anology regarding the Dreamcast.  I think the PS3's situation is worse...the Drreamcast was actually affordable.  The PS3, on the other hand, well....yeah.

Sony needs a price drop.

ps2 has 604356 aaaa games

thread

GermanShepard06

Ok.

[QUOTE="Ultimas_Blade"][QUOTE="CubeJL"][QUOTE="Ultimas_Blade"]

That's it.  Why do we have to play the whole "lets wait for everyone to get up to speed"?  When this generation ends, do you think everybody will end it individually? No, it will end all at once.  Why does everyone think that the beginning is any different?  This gen started when the 360 was released, there should be no excuses coming from anyone else.

This is the very reason why the PS2 stomped a mudhole in the GC and the OG Xbox, because it got out the gate first and provided a solid platform that developers were willing to develop for.

CubeJL

Another enlightened soul.  My heart tingles with glee.

What does everyone think of Sony's current situation?  Summed up in one word I would say: Precarious.  Right now they are at the doors of being 'dreamcasted', and it seems there is little they can do but depend solely on the customers.  The Dev's aren't helping them out with all the new high profile multiplats (FFXIII and DMC4) and complaints.  Media generally hasn't been too generous.  Sony can't even help themselves as much of their PR backfires on them.

Nintendo's climbing up, Microsoft's on top but on shakey ground, and Sony's slipping...

Well, I agree with most of what you say---except the anology regarding the Dreamcast.  I think the PS3's situation is worse...the Drreamcast was actually affordable.  The PS3, on the other hand, well....yeah.

Sony needs a price drop.

The only thing Sony can do for itself at this point is make some system selling 1st party titles, because 3rd party titles aren't reliable now-a-days.  If they leave this war to the customers, the $600 tag will do them in for sure.

Well The Xbox 360 will die off a yeat before the other systems...and if you add the VC games you get 15 AA+ games not that those count. And also its only AA+ according to GS sooooo... that can count for more or less for all systems.gotdangit

I completely disagree that the 360 will "die off a year sooner"--why do you say that?

If we include VC games, we must include XBLA games--then the argument would REALLY go South for you.  Best we leave those out.

early launch ftwomarguy01

Exactly.

[QUOTE="gotdangit"]Well The Xbox 360 will die off a yeat before the other systems...and if you add the VC games you get 15 AA+ games not that those count. And also its only AA+ according to GS sooooo... that can count for more or less for all systems.CubeJL

I completely disagree that the 360 will "die off a year sooner"--why do you say that?

If we include VC games, we must include XBLA games--then the argument would REALLY go South for you. Best we leave those out.

No you should include both XblA and VC games, you should have a with and with out. For comparison. 

ha ha. I never noticed that.

Welcome to calcwars! the home of fake buisness-analytics. njpj

[QUOTE="CubeJL"]

[QUOTE="gotdangit"]Well The Xbox 360 will die off a yeat before the other systems...and if you add the VC games you get 15 AA+ games not that those count. And also its only AA+ according to GS sooooo... that can count for more or less for all systems.GundamGuy0

I completely disagree that the 360 will "die off a year sooner"--why do you say that?

If we include VC games, we must include XBLA games--then the argument would REALLY go South for you. Best we leave those out.

No you should include both XblA and VC games, you should have a with and with out. For comparison. 

The reason I left them out was because we cannot assume that all console owners have a high speed connection.  I deemed it best to leave the DLC out.  Maybe I'll amend that tomorrow.

[QUOTE="GundamGuy0"][QUOTE="CubeJL"]

[QUOTE="gotdangit"]Well The Xbox 360 will die off a yeat before the other systems...and if you add the VC games you get 15 AA+ games not that those count. And also its only AA+ according to GS sooooo... that can count for more or less for all systems.CubeJL

I completely disagree that the 360 will "die off a year sooner"--why do you say that?

If we include VC games, we must include XBLA games--then the argument would REALLY go South for you. Best we leave those out.

No you should include both XblA and VC games, you should have a with and with out. For comparison.

The reason I left them out was because we cannot assume that all console owners have a high speed connection. I deemed it best to leave the DLC out. Maybe I'll amend that tomorrow.

You don't need a high speed conection. You can download them just fine with 56k, it would just take longer.  

[QUOTE="njpj"]Welcome to calcwars! the home of fake buisness-analytics. Ultimas_Blade

I forgot to bring my PhD in Systems Wars with me.  But, rest assured, it's simple math.