Why is it that the PS3's only good games are MULTIPLATS???

Hmm... lets see.

1. Oblivion: they got that one a year after the 360.

2. Rockband: also on 360.

3. COD4: also on 360.

4. Assassins Creed: also on 360.

5. Rainbow Six: Vegas: they got that one over 6 months after the 360.

6. Ninja Gaiden: It wasnt on the 360... oh yea, it was on the original xbox, all they did was polish the graphics and add a few new bells and whisles.

When I say good games, I mean 9.0 and up, that is the standard for the thread so DONT post things like: LAST TIME I CHECKED 8.0 WAS GOOD. Thank you.

Last time I checked AA = great.

A game doesnt have to be AAA to be good.

Last time I checked AA = great.

A game doesnt have to be AAA to be good.

asdasd

Well, like I said, 9.0+ is a good game, its just the standard for the thread.

Hmm... lets see.

1. Oblivion: they got that one a year after the 360.

2. Rockband: also on 360.

3. COD4: also on 360.

4. Assassins Creed: also on 360.

5. Rainbow Six: Vegas: they got that one over 6 months after the 360.

6. Ninja Gaiden: It wasnt on the 360... oh yea, it was on the original xbox, all they did was polish the graphics and add a few new bells and whisles.

When I say good games, I mean 9.0 and up.

DlMEBAG

Because Sony screwed up and made the PS3 difficult to program for even the top game developers in the world, all in the hopes of pusing the PS3 as a blu-ray player. Unnecessary complexity, unnecessary expense- no wonder devs are leaving it in droves. Not to mention the fact that the PS3 game attach rate is horrendous, probably the worst of any major console that has ever been released (after 1 year on the market).

Serious question: If you were a dev, would you go through all the time and expense of making a game on the PS3, or go with the more profitable and easy to program 360? Pretty easy answer, IMO.

[QUOTE="asdasd"]

Last time I checked AA = great.

A game doesnt have to be AAA to be good.

DlMEBAG

Well, like I said, 9.0+ is a good game, its just the standard for the thread.

And a 7.0+ is a good game by GS standards. You dont make the rules on gamespot.

A-AA games are great too.

and ninja gaiden added alot more then you think.

[QUOTE="DlMEBAG"]

Hmm... lets see.

1. Oblivion: they got that one a year after the 360.

2. Rockband: also on 360.

3. COD4: also on 360.

4. Assassins Creed: also on 360.

5. Rainbow Six: Vegas: they got that one over 6 months after the 360.

6. Ninja Gaiden: It wasnt on the 360... oh yea, it was on the original xbox, all they did was polish the graphics and add a few new bells and whisles.

When I say good games, I mean 9.0 and up.

accameron

Because Sony screwed up and made the PS3 difficult to program for even the top game developers in the world, all in the hopes of pusing the PS3 as a blu-ray player. Unnecessary complexity, unnecessary expense- no wonder devs are leaving it in droves. Not to mention the fact that the PS3 game attach rate is horrendous, probably the worst of any major console that has ever been released (after 1 year on the market).

Serious question: If you were a dev, would you go through all the time and expense of making a game on the PS3, or go with the more profitable and easy to program 360? Pretty easy answer, IMO.

Well the expenses arent the problem, publishers fund that, but I wouldnt take the ordeal to program on the ps3, and the 360 is a bigger market, so anyone would make it for 360.

good games here at gamespot are 7.0 and up last time I checked. TheOrigin

LAST TIME I CHECKED, the thread says it has to be 9.0 or higher to be good, THAT IS THE STANDARD FOR THE THREAD, READ NEXT TIME.

They aren't.

/thread

[QUOTE="accameron"][QUOTE="DlMEBAG"]

Hmm... lets see.

1. Oblivion: they got that one a year after the 360.

2. Rockband: also on 360.

3. COD4: also on 360.

4. Assassins Creed: also on 360.

5. Rainbow Six: Vegas: they got that one over 6 months after the 360.

6. Ninja Gaiden: It wasnt on the 360... oh yea, it was on the original xbox, all they did was polish the graphics and add a few new bells and whisles.

When I say good games, I mean 9.0 and up.

DlMEBAG

Because Sony screwed up and made the PS3 difficult to program for even the top game developers in the world, all in the hopes of pusing the PS3 as a blu-ray player. Unnecessary complexity, unnecessary expense- no wonder devs are leaving it in droves. Not to mention the fact that the PS3 game attach rate is horrendous, probably the worst of any major console that has ever been released (after 1 year on the market).

Serious question: If you were a dev, would you go through all the time and expense of making a game on the PS3, or go with the more profitable and easy to program 360? Pretty easy answer, IMO.

Well the expenses arent the problem, publishers fund that, but I wouldnt take the ordeal to program on the ps3, and the 360 is a bigger market, so anyone would make it for 360.

And thus the cycle keeps going on, and on, and on. Sony royally screwed up this generation. Let's hope they get it right next time (ps4)

good games here at gamespot are 7.0 and up last time I checked. TheOrigin

LOL at buying a 7.0 game. LOLOLOLOL

Hmm... lets see.

1. Oblivion: they got that one a year after the 360.

2. Rockband: also on 360.

3. COD4: also on 360.

4. Assassins Creed: also on 360.

5. Rainbow Six: Vegas: they got that one over 6 months after the 360.

6. Ninja Gaiden: It wasnt on the 360... oh yea, it was on the original xbox, all they did was polish the graphics and add a few new bells and whisles.

When I say good games, I mean 9.0 and up, that is the standard for the thread so DONT post things like: LAST TIME I CHECKED 8.0 WAS GOOD. Thank you.

Gears Of War-PC

Halo 2-PC

Halo 3- Eventually going to PC

Bioshock-PC

Mass effect-most likely heading to PC also

your point?

DlMEBAG

[QUOTE="TheOrigin"]good games here at gamespot are 7.0 and up last time I checked. DlMEBAG

LAST TIME I CHECKED, the thread says it has to be 9.0 or higher to be good, THAT IS THE STANDARD FOR THE THREAD, READ NEXT TIME.

RANDOMLY CAPITALIZING words is pretty COOL. LAST TIME I CHECKED, this is Gamespot and you DON'T MAKE THE RULES.

7.0 = GOOD and if you truly BELIEVE THAT only 9.0 GAMES ARE worth PLAYING, I almost PITY YOU.

[QUOTE="DlMEBAG"][QUOTE="accameron"][QUOTE="DlMEBAG"]

Hmm... lets see.

1. Oblivion: they got that one a year after the 360.

2. Rockband: also on 360.

3. COD4: also on 360.

4. Assassins Creed: also on 360.

5. Rainbow Six: Vegas: they got that one over 6 months after the 360.

6. Ninja Gaiden: It wasnt on the 360... oh yea, it was on the original xbox, all they did was polish the graphics and add a few new bells and whisles.

When I say good games, I mean 9.0 and up.

accameron

Because Sony screwed up and made the PS3 difficult to program for even the top game developers in the world, all in the hopes of pusing the PS3 as a blu-ray player. Unnecessary complexity, unnecessary expense- no wonder devs are leaving it in droves. Not to mention the fact that the PS3 game attach rate is horrendous, probably the worst of any major console that has ever been released (after 1 year on the market).

Serious question: If you were a dev, would you go through all the time and expense of making a game on the PS3, or go with the more profitable and easy to program 360? Pretty easy answer, IMO.

Well the expenses arent the problem, publishers fund that, but I wouldnt take the ordeal to program on the ps3, and the 360 is a bigger market, so anyone would make it for 360.

And thus the cycle keeps going on, and on, and on. Sony royally screwed up this generation. Let's hope they get it right next time (ps4)

Yeah, 7th gen sucked for PS3. When does the 8th gen start again?

[QUOTE="TheOrigin"]good games here at gamespot are 7.0 and up last time I checked. accameron

LOL at buying a 7.0 game. LOLOLOLOL

LOL at only buying AAAE's. You must buy about 10 games per life cycle. How fun :roll:

[QUOTE="TheOrigin"]good games here at gamespot are 7.0 and up last time I checked. accameron

LOL at buying a 7.0 game. LOLOLOLOL

So you let other people decide what games you want to buy?

I bought Legend of Dragoon back in 2000, and its one of my favorite games.(Still play it from time to time) It got 6.4 on GS.

LOL at you for letting others make your decisions

[QUOTE="accameron"]

[QUOTE="TheOrigin"]good games here at gamespot are 7.0 and up last time I checked. asdasd

LOL at buying a 7.0 game. LOLOLOLOL

So you let other people decide what games you want to buy?

I bought Legend of Dragoon back in 2000, and its one of my favorite games.(Still play it from time to time) It got 6.4 on GS.

LOL at you for letting others make your decisions

Yeah, that game is awesome.

Last i checked Resistance, Warhawk, Uncharted, and Ratchet and Clank were considered great games.

w/e helps you sleep better at night though.

AAA = 9.0 and up = Superb

AA = 8.0 and up = Great

A = 7.0 and up = Good

System Wars go by GS review scores, so your statement is false.

[QUOTE="TheOrigin"]good games here at gamespot are 7.0 and up last time I checked. accameron

LOL at buying a 7.0 game. LOLOLOLOL

I do it all the time,and havent regretted one 7.0 purchase.

most of my 7.0 purchases come from the 360 too.

[QUOTE="TheOrigin"]good games here at gamespot are 7.0 and up last time I checked. accameron

LOL at buying a 7.0 game. LOLOLOLOL

So you only buy AAAE games?

I bought Lair and i like it. And guess what? it got 4.5. It doesn´t need to be AAAA to like it.