Sorry--This Might Hurt

The Wii, like the DS is at an automatic disadvantage in this category with the majority of reviewing sites (including GS to the max) because of its technical inferiority. 

AA-AAA doesn't mean anything any more when you're talking about the Wii and the DS.  It's, "Is the game worth buying?"  Apparently, more people think the games for the DS are worth buying than for anything else, and the Wii isn't doin too shabby either.

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

Fun ^_^ 

[QUOTE="CubeJL"][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.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.

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

You're a real stickler.  As far as I know, doesn't the Wii only offer a broadband connection? 

In any case, we cannot assume that all console owners have an internet connection, period.  But like I said, I think it would make interesting debate, so I'll amend it soon enough.

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

You're a real stickler. As far as I know, doesn't the Wii only offer a broadband connection?

In any case, we cannot assume that all console owners have an internet connection, period. But like I said, I think it would make interesting debate, so I'll amend it soon enough.

I don't know. I don't have a Wii. But yes it doesn't hurt to give as many numbers as possible.  

The Wii, like the DS is at an automatic disadvantage in this category with the majority of reviewing sites (including GS to the max) because of its technical inferiority. 

AA-AAA doesn't mean anything any more when you're talking about the Wii and the DS.  It's, "Is the game worth buying?"  Apparently, more people think the games for the DS are worth buying than for anything else, and the Wii isn't doin too shabby either.

i_like_pizza

I don't think the Wii/DS are at an automatic disadvantage because: fun is fun is fun no matter what system it is on.

[QUOTE="i_like_pizza"]

The Wii, like the DS is at an automatic disadvantage in this category with the majority of reviewing sites (including GS to the max) because of its technical inferiority. 

AA-AAA doesn't mean anything any more when you're talking about the Wii and the DS.  It's, "Is the game worth buying?"  Apparently, more people think the games for the DS are worth buying than for anything else, and the Wii isn't doin too shabby either.

Ultimas_Blade

I don't think the Wii/DS are at an automatic disadvantage because: fun is fun is fun no matter what system it is on.

No DS game on GS has received a 10 in graphics.  I don't know about sound for sure, but I'm pretty sure that no DS game has received a 10 in sound, either.

That's a disadvantage.

[QUOTE="i_like_pizza"]

The Wii, like the DS is at an automatic disadvantage in this category with the majority of reviewing sites (including GS to the max) because of its technical inferiority. 

AA-AAA doesn't mean anything any more when you're talking about the Wii and the DS.  It's, "Is the game worth buying?"  Apparently, more people think the games for the DS are worth buying than for anything else, and the Wii isn't doin too shabby either.

Ultimas_Blade

I don't think the Wii/DS are at an automatic disadvantage because: fun is fun is fun no matter what system it is on.

Agreed.

The 360 definitely has the most quality games and given its time on the market it should.  Unfortunatley, the sales just aren't there, it doesn't appeal to anybody but the more hardcore gamers and that's why it will finish third this gen.Gamer46

Couldn't disagree more. 

The ONLY mitigating factor is a PS3 price drop.  Barring that, the PS3 is on its way out.

[QUOTE="Ultimas_Blade"][QUOTE="i_like_pizza"]

The Wii, like the DS is at an automatic disadvantage in this category with the majority of reviewing sites (including GS to the max) because of its technical inferiority. 

AA-AAA doesn't mean anything any more when you're talking about the Wii and the DS.  It's, "Is the game worth buying?"  Apparently, more people think the games for the DS are worth buying than for anything else, and the Wii isn't doin too shabby either.

CubeJL

I don't think the Wii/DS are at an automatic disadvantage because: fun is fun is fun no matter what system it is on.

Agreed.

^^^^^^

I agree that a *responsible* reviewer would hold the consoles to a different standard, but the reality is that they don't

[QUOTE="Ultimas_Blade"][QUOTE="i_like_pizza"]

The Wii, like the DS is at an automatic disadvantage in this category with the majority of reviewing sites (including GS to the max) because of its technical inferiority. 

AA-AAA doesn't mean anything any more when you're talking about the Wii and the DS.  It's, "Is the game worth buying?"  Apparently, more people think the games for the DS are worth buying than for anything else, and the Wii isn't doin too shabby either.

i_like_pizza

I don't think the Wii/DS are at an automatic disadvantage because: fun is fun is fun no matter what system it is on.

No DS game on GS has received a 10 in graphics.  I don't know about sound for sure, but I'm pretty sure that no DS game has received a 10 in sound, either.

That's a disadvantage.

[QUOTE="i_like_pizza"][QUOTE="Ultimas_Blade"][QUOTE="i_like_pizza"]

The Wii, like the DS is at an automatic disadvantage in this category with the majority of reviewing sites (including GS to the max) because of its technical inferiority. 

AA-AAA doesn't mean anything any more when you're talking about the Wii and the DS.  It's, "Is the game worth buying?"  Apparently, more people think the games for the DS are worth buying than for anything else, and the Wii isn't doin too shabby either.

Ultimas_Blade

I don't think the Wii/DS are at an automatic disadvantage because: fun is fun is fun no matter what system it is on.

No DS game on GS has received a 10 in graphics.  I don't know about sound for sure, but I'm pretty sure that no DS game has received a 10 in sound, either.

That's a disadvantage.

It has been 2 and a half years.  You're dead wrong.  There are a handful of games which deserved it.  MP: H, Nintendogs, NSMB, Castlevania, MarioKart, just to name a few.  It should have happened already, and it hasn't.  Eventually, there might be a ten, but it's going to have to do much more than it should have had to do in order to get that ten. 

[QUOTE="Ultimas_Blade"][QUOTE="i_like_pizza"][QUOTE="Ultimas_Blade"][QUOTE="i_like_pizza"]

The Wii, like the DS is at an automatic disadvantage in this category with the majority of reviewing sites (including GS to the max) because of its technical inferiority. 

AA-AAA doesn't mean anything any more when you're talking about the Wii and the DS.  It's, "Is the game worth buying?"  Apparently, more people think the games for the DS are worth buying than for anything else, and the Wii isn't doin too shabby either.

i_like_pizza

I don't think the Wii/DS are at an automatic disadvantage because: fun is fun is fun no matter what system it is on.

No DS game on GS has received a 10 in graphics.  I don't know about sound for sure, but I'm pretty sure that no DS game has received a 10 in sound, either.

That's a disadvantage.

It has been 2 and a half years.  You're dead wrong.  There are a handful of games which deserved it.  MP: H, Nintendogs, NSMB, Castlevania, MarioKart, just to name a few.  It should have happened already, and it hasn't.  Eventually, there might be a ten, but it's going to have to do much more than it should have had to do in order to get that ten. 

Right, but in the editors' defense, you have to consider how difficult it must be to flip flop between machines without carrying somewhat of an ever-rising standard of quality. 

Tough business.

[QUOTE="i_like_pizza"][QUOTE="Ultimas_Blade"][QUOTE="i_like_pizza"][QUOTE="Ultimas_Blade"][QUOTE="i_like_pizza"]

The Wii, like the DS is at an automatic disadvantage in this category with the majority of reviewing sites (including GS to the max) because of its technical inferiority. 

AA-AAA doesn't mean anything any more when you're talking about the Wii and the DS.  It's, "Is the game worth buying?"  Apparently, more people think the games for the DS are worth buying than for anything else, and the Wii isn't doin too shabby either.

CubeJL

I don't think the Wii/DS are at an automatic disadvantage because: fun is fun is fun no matter what system it is on.

No DS game on GS has received a 10 in graphics.  I don't know about sound for sure, but I'm pretty sure that no DS game has received a 10 in sound, either.

That's a disadvantage.

It has been 2 and a half years.  You're dead wrong.  There are a handful of games which deserved it.  MP: H, Nintendogs, NSMB, Castlevania, MarioKart, just to name a few.  It should have happened already, and it hasn't.  Eventually, there might be a ten, but it's going to have to do much more than it should have had to do in order to get that ten. 

Right, but in the editors' defense, you have to consider how difficult it must be to flip flop between machines without carrying somewhat of an ever-rising standard of quality. 

Tough business.

Sure, I realize that... that's exactly what I'm saying.  I'm saying the DS (and Wii) is at a technical disadvantage, and it is evident in its reviews. 

The reason why it is at a technical advantage is obviously that the editors have seen and heard better.

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

The Wii, like the DS is at an automatic disadvantage in this category with the majority of reviewing sites (including GS to the max) because of its technical inferiority. 

AA-AAA doesn't mean anything any more when you're talking about the Wii and the DS.  It's, "Is the game worth buying?"  Apparently, more people think the games for the DS are worth buying than for anything else, and the Wii isn't doin too shabby either.

i_like_pizza

I don't think the Wii/DS are at an automatic disadvantage because: fun is fun is fun no matter what system it is on.

No DS game on GS has received a 10 in graphics.  I don't know about sound for sure, but I'm pretty sure that no DS game has received a 10 in sound, either.

That's a disadvantage.

It has been 2 and a half years.  You're dead wrong.  There are a handful of games which deserved it.  MP: H, Nintendogs, NSMB, Castlevania, MarioKart, just to name a few.  It should have happened already, and it hasn't.  Eventually, there might be a ten, but it's going to have to do much more than it should have had to do in order to get that ten. 

Right, but in the editors' defense, you have to consider how difficult it must be to flip flop between machines without carrying somewhat of an ever-rising standard of quality. 

Tough business.

Sure, I realize that... that's exactly what I'm saying.  I'm saying the DS (and Wii) is at a technical disadvantage, and it is evident in its reviews. 

The reason why it is at a technical advantage is obviously that the editors have seen and heard better.

Yeah, I was agreeing with you, actually.  I should have quoted the gentleman you were disputing with, I suppose.

Good job on pointing out that the PS3 is a worthless console and isnt even worth owning.  I guess people should only buy the 360 and the Wii. MasterChumly

Haha.  Well, I'm none too impressed with the Wii in terms of games, either.  Sales--who can hate on the Wii?  Yet, I don't think sales is the issue here.

[QUOTE="MasterChumly"]Good job on pointing out that the PS3 is a worthless console and isnt even worth owning. I guess people should only buy the 360 and the Wii. CubeJL

Haha. Well, I'm none too impressed with the Wii in terms of games, either. Sales--who can hate on the Wii? Yet, I don't think sales is the issue here.

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="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 - 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.

Yeah exactly.

I mean, TC I agree with you by all means.  But if you're trying to sport the 360 (which is great by the way, RB6Vegas ftw) you can't compare it thus far to the PS3 and Wii (Zelda for the bigger win).

But as the poster I quoted said, dev's got their FINAL kits less than a year ago.  Not only that, but they also thought the Wii would be unsuccessful. 

There was this huge long article on the Wii boards I believe that discusses the developers creating teams for the Wii to meet the hype to bring their best franchises to the system (that were NOT ports).

The games will come, it'll be a few months, but they're coming.  So don't judge just yet.

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has 45 AA-AAA titles

The PS3 has 14

The Wii has 7

Discuss.

(More here.)

CubeJL

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has 45 AA-AAA titles

The PS3 has 14

The Wii has 7

Discuss.

(More here.)

CubeJL

The PS3 has no AAA games coming for 1.5 more year

360 will just get another 4 100% AAA games in the form of Halo 3, Bioshock, Mass Effect, Lost Odyssey, and Etarnal Sonata, Blue Dragon are definatly AAA titles for my tastes, though those could receive lower scores from hater reviews

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

Quoted for Truth. 

No one complained when things were the other way around last time. Why all the hypocrisy?

[QUOTE="ApocalypseXIVV"][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.

88Ghost89

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?

well unless after running a race you DIE, no thats not what that would mean... 

[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.

That's one thing for certain - Ms didn't "work out  the kinks" before they released the 360 at all. And all games out at any certain point should be counted. It's just that this point in time is really not very important. The numbers of good popular games out around the holiday season is what makes a difference. By then PS3 and Wii will have many more games and any lead 360 had won't really be visible at all.

It a lot easier to build a library when the 360 is just an xbox 1.5.  Developers had almost nothing new to deal with.

Besides, I think you'll find quite a few people that disagree that 360 has that many AA and AAA.  There's only a handful that are actually good games.  There's Gears of Way, Oblivion (which PS3 has), and Guitar Hero II.  After that, a cliff.

[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.

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.

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.

To be honest, you DID spin the numbers.

Using your logic, you would have to say "PS3 and Wii have been out for almost a year"

In anycase, the 360 had a year head start. 

[QUOTE="88Ghost89"][QUOTE="ApocalypseXIVV"][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?

well unless after running a race you DIE, no thats not what that would mean... 

Well I mean, the next Xbox would come out and then the 360 would fade away. But the PS3 and Wii would still continue no? Because they were a year later.

Maybe it's the confusing race analogy...but the point is...you can't expect 5 month old consoles to have more quality games than a year and a half old console. Even if it means they wont catch up, it's topics like the TC created. They may end up with more games, but that's because they had more time. Who knows maybe the PS3 and Wii will catch up in titles.

 the ps3's been out 5 months but dev's have been developing for it for ages, it was delayed over 200 times. cows seem to forget this.

 the ps3's been out 5 months but dev's have been developing for it for ages, it was delayed over 200 times. cows seem to forget this.

apolloluke

How could have devs developed games for a console that hadn't landed on final hardware.  They had to wait until the final decisions were made.  Weak point.

[QUOTE="ApocalypseXIVV"][QUOTE="88Ghost89"][QUOTE="ApocalypseXIVV"][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.

88Ghost89

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?

well unless after running a race you DIE, no thats not what that would mean...

Well I mean, the next Xbox would come out and then the 360 would fade away. But the PS3 and Wii would still continue no? Because they were a year later.

Maybe it's the confusing race analogy...but the point is...you can't expect 5 month old consoles to have more quality games than a year and a half old console. Even if it means they wont catch up, it's topics like the TC created. They may end up with more games, but that's because they had more time. Who knows maybe the PS3 and Wii will catch up in titles.

i understand what you mean, and im not a person to say, "WE GOT MORE AAAAAA GAMES THAN YOU ROLF!!!!" but to people buying systems, 360 has more good games out now, and that year ahead will never go away, so unless xbox goes on a hiatus for a year i dont know how sony is supposed to catch up, and if the xbox fades out a year earlier, the last year of a consoles life means nothing for console sales, the year earlier is far more benificial

[QUOTE="apolloluke"]

the ps3's been out 5 months but dev's have been developing for it for ages, it was delayed over 200 times. cows seem to forget this.

dubvisions

How could have devs developed games for a console that hadn't landed on final hardware. They had to wait until the final decisions were made. Weak point.

Problem was the PS3 was downgraded in the last minute (its GPU), so thats why the current crop of multi-plats look like POS...give the PS3 more time, and it will be on par with the 360's multi-plats.

Oblivion only looks slightly better than the 360 version, anybody who says "OMGZ teh ownage!!!!1!" is quite clearly insane. I have seen both side by side, the PS3 beats is SLIGHTLY, but the colors are all washed out on the PS3...I guess thats the tradeoff though (brightness and contrast defaults).  

It a lot easier to build a library when the 360 is just an xbox 1.5.  Developers had almost nothing new to deal with.

Besides, I think you'll find quite a few people that disagree that 360 has that many AA and AAA.  There's only a handful that are actually good games.  There's Gears of Way, Oblivion (which PS3 has), and Guitar Hero II.  After that, a cliff.

dubvisions

Is that so ?? Seems i must forget all the fun i had with Kameo, Viva Pinata, Splinter Cell 4, Condemned, Enchanted Arms, GRAW 1-2, LOTR:BFME2, Lost Planet, Dead Rising, COD3, PGR3 etc

Not only colors in PS3 Oblivion are terrible, but the worst part is the downgaded low res textures in rocks and many other things, and no AA

the ps3's been out 5 months but dev's have been developing for it for ages, it was delayed over 200 times. cows seem to forget this.

apolloluke

They are supervised by Sony until the console is out by the way, in case those developers leak info about the console to the press and other corporations. 

I offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has 45 AA-AAA titles

The PS3 has 14

The Wii has 7

Discuss.

(More here.)

CubeJL

remember this in 12 months time and we compare!

A good time to be a 360 owner for sure!!!Mkavanaugh77

Dam straight 

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

Xbox 360 has been out for almost a year and a half. That's not "almost two years". Nice bias. And really, who cares? The only reason it would matter is if they offered something *for gaming* that the 360 doesn't. It's not as though the PS3 came out and suddenly offers better graphics than the 360 for less money.

I don't get the time debate. If I released an SNES-powered console for $10 today, could I really say in a month "oh it's going to win the war - it's selling great because it's so cheap"

"But it has no good games"

Yeah well - uh - it's only been a month.

So? How does that change that it doesn't have good games? The Xbox 360 has great games with HD graphics and sound, plus amazing online - and it has it *now*.

Jump In...or y'know, hurry up and wait. Your choice.

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 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 offer you a simple fact:

The 360 has 45 AA-AAA titles

The PS3 has 14

The Wii has 7

Discuss.

(More here.)

CubeJL

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