[QUOTE="Puckhog04"]

EA =/= Valve. I really wish Valve would've handled the port.

Frostbite24

Dear Lord, when are people going to stop blaming PS3's poor multiplats on the PS3 hardware and not the developers.

well the fact is powerwise the 360 has no advantage over the ps3 most developers have stated many times they are about equal with the ps3 having some advantages in some areas the 360 in others. You may be sick of hearing it but in this case it is definately the devs fault they are using an engine based on tech from 2004 and with recent multiplats like COD4 playing and looking the same on both consoles while looking better than Half life 2 it obviosly comes down to poor developers porting the code to the ps3. The people who ported it were ea london they made the harry potter games and the f1 series of games so I think its quite legitamate to blame them if a game based on 2004 tech can't be run on a system that came out in 2006, I know you are looking for a reason to bash sony supporters but in this case you argument is invalid because its quite obvious thedevelopers were not up to the task of porting a pc game (which they never developed on) to the ps3(which they haven't dveloped anything decent for).

Had this been valve themselves you might have a point but gabe newell is too lazy and set in his ways to learn any new development techniques hence why he refused to develop it for ps3 with his team and was content to let his creation (half life) be ported by the people behind the harry potter games.

I'll even up the ante and say:

Western gaming in general has for some time now exceeded, in totality, the eastern flare which seems to be stuck firmly in the past ! :?

PS: " In totality " is the operative words there as exceptions do exist !

N.A. is the gaming capital of the world these days which makes me :) !

SecretPolice

I couldn't disagree more if anything the western side has only started to catch up over the last couple years. Sure when it comes to FPS the western gaming side will always be ahead but japanese devlopers are still in top form look at some of the japanese games released recently as in the last couple years or to be release soon. RE4 with 5 coming soon, Ninja Gaiden with its sequel coming soon, pretty much any decent fighter release in the last couple years or soon to be release(includers VF, tekken, DOA), Mario galaxy, Zelda TWilight princess, FFXII, MGS4 coming soon, Ace Combat 6, Okami, etc.. Well I think you gotten my point japanese developers haven't fallen off just their counterparts in not only NOrth America but Europe have really stepped up their effort recently I think right now it would be har to put any region over the other in terms of developer talent it seem to be coming from all over.

I'm tired of hearing this people who bash jrpgs do not play them because if they did they would realize that JRPGs have been evolving along with the wrpgs counterparts. People need to understand the fundamental difference between the 2 and that is chracter progression JRPGs have a set path when it comes tro the chracter and story some games do have variations but they havea set pathto enhance the ability to tell the story the way they envision it. WRPGs on the other hand give you alot more freedom when it comes to the charcters path and most often this means the story will lack the focus of a JRPG and will not be as in depth although it does give you more control over how the story plays out but you are still limited to the choices the developers have given you.

With that out of the way I woul like to point out that JRPGs gameplay have alot of variation and if you would play them you would know this compare star ocean 3 to FFXII both radically different battle systems and gameplay features(like star oceans item synthesis system or FFXII skill board) they are unique to each game and add a different dynamic to the game not to mention the action rpg genre with games like kingom hearts and dark cloud both play very differently.

Western RPGs are not that innovative at least in the sense in they haven't evolved any quicker or in any signifigant way that would put them ahead of JRPGS in their growth for instance many WrPG fans still play the old games and consider them just as good as the new games minus the graphics games like balders gate, system shock and fallout are all popular amongstWRPG fans. What I'm saying is whichever one you play JRPG or WRPGs it is a matter of taste and that they both have their pros and cons and both genres offer many different choices and styles within them. Anybody who has extensively played both will see things to like and not like on both sides. They will also know that to compare the 2 is unfair even if they may personally prefer one style over the other.

I only thought of this recently but the 360 is selling worse in its second year out than its first year. I'm pretty sure this shows the brand does not have the support to win this gen granted the Wii and ps3 are on their first year so we haven't seen their second year sales but usually consoles sell better in their second year due to a price drop or a stronger library the 360 has both and is still selling worse also the year isn't over yet so I may be a bit premature in pointing this out.

To get to my point Console sales usually increses year on year till they hit a peak in their 3r or 4th year when they usually hit the $200-250 price point(which may or may not be helping wii sales). If the 360 sales are less thus far than its first year sales with a lower price and their strongest game(halo 3) already out of the way it will finish last in the end especially when you consider its appeal outside North America is limited. Anyway just some system wars fodder for some people to argue about....let the debate begin on whether this means anything or if I am completely wrong on my assesment..

Gs is one of the best game sites around but its reviews are not as good as they used to be, the staff here is not of the calibur it was a few years ago and they seem too over the place on certain issues like when it comes to lack of multiplayer and similar gamerplay seemingly penalizing in some instances too much or too little. Don't get me wrong they are in my top 3 of most trusted reviews with ign and gamespy(much better written reviews than GS but the scores are out of whack sometimes whereas GS is off sometimes but not usuallyby much when it comes to score). The thing is they were my one and only source I used for reviews in the past because while hard you knew when they rated a game 8.0+ it will be a great game and not a waste of money unless you hated the genre(to also make my point the 7.0+ reviews were an indicationof a game you should buy if a fan of that genre). The only reason now why they are not my one and only source is they changed their review system to the .5 incriments really makes it too broad much like gamespy's 5 star system and now that they no longer have categories the basis for the score is no longer there and you are left to read the text which is the point of the review but the staff here have really gotten lazy with the reviews I mean none of their reviews are over 2 pages anymore and seem to have minor inaccuracies here and there nothing big but enough to drop them in my book.

They honestly need greg kasavin back he was the greatest reviewer ever....

I think it will happen eventually just not on the ps3, the psp may get a version and maybe the ps4 but right now DOA has a fairly loyal fanbase on the xbox brand and the ps brand has alot more compettition in the fighting gamer genre at least it has in the past.

As for people calling tekken slow yes it is slower than doa but much more strategic in doa it is all about faster reflexes which is why some people call it a button masher it does have a deeper fightiong system than people give it credit for but the penalty to not button mash and use the system strategically just isn't there as long as you are quick on the buttons whereas someone who plays tekken and knows the in and outs of the system will beat a button masher 9 out of 10 times.

[QUOTE="Citan_Uzuki"]

[QUOTE="SpideR_CentS"]Saying that the PS3 & 360 had similar game line ups before a couple months ago is super false. The PS3 still hasnt caught up to the 360 launch line up. OhSnapitz

I see what your saying about similar game linup no doubt the 360 was still ahead mostly due to an entire year head start but the difference was not that great the releases on both in the smae time frame were pretty equal in term of qulaity and if you compare the first years linup of each system again the number of qulity titles is a very difference obviouly right now the 360 has more games and more higher scoring game but it has had an entire year more.

objectively looking at it the systems are on a very similar path and we really won't know until the end of the gen exactly who ended up the best linup essentially I'm saying the 360 fans gloating is very premasturee. Also if you don't think the ps3 has passed the 360 launch linup you are a fanboy who can't be helped.

For all that is Holy I've never understood that argument by fanboys... "Well it's doing just as good as the 360 did it's first year".. WTF? So the 360's second year, in which it kicking the sht out of the PS3, shouldn't count for some reason? Why are we comparing stats that way? Regardless of what the PS3 is doing compared to the 360's first year, ITS THE 360s SECOND YEAR!!! And it's still outselling the PS3..

The argument is saying that comparing first to second year doesn't make sense yes here and now the 360 is beating the ps3(I wouldn't say by alot like I said both systems had a fairly close in term of number of qulity titles realesed this year with the except of the last 3 months but that has really only been 3 or 4 games realistically looking at it). It doesn't make sense because the winner isn't determined by the end of this year but by the end of a gen and to compare 2 systems linup when one has had a year head start obviously the one with the head start will be ahead its not an accomplishment of any sort. the logic behind comparing first year to first year is to show that if the first year is similar that potentially all it takes is for a couple big games and suddenly at the end of the gen the system behind may end up with more quality titles I know its just guesing but we won't know until the end of the gen what is what. So my guessing is no differenmt than somone else but somehow using a fair and comparable stat of first year is not understandable but declaring a system the loser because it doesn't have that extra year is understandable.

I don't know if you understand what I'm saying but I am trying to explain the logic in said argument and there is some logic to it. Also if the 360 were outselling the ps3 worldwide then why has the 9 million unit lead it had from last nov when the ps3 launched been cut to about 7 million the 360 is outselling the ps3 in the us and has all year pretty much but if you include the whol;e world the ps3 is slowly gaining on it so no the 360 is not outselling the ps3, deny all you want just compare the 360 worldwide install base from nov 2006 and now take the latest worldwide install numbers and subtract the ps3 current install base the ps3 has caught up even if only by a little for it to do that it would have to outsell the 360 worlwide

[QUOTE="Citan_Uzuki"]I see alot of people saying well the ps2 fanboys did it 2 years ago seeing as I have been a member of GS since 2000 and been coming to system wars since the old, old forums I can say the ps2 fans as a whole were not this bad yes there were a few like xenogears(if anybody here even know who this guy is they are a true SW vet). no one group has even been as smug as the 360 fans have become of late. honestly how many of you were actally here to witness these event that the ps2 fans are supposedly responsible for or are you simple going on what others are using as an excuse. All I am saying is that if you take a look at it the 360 fans smugness is unwarrented, if they had a 10 or 20 million console lead or if the ps3 had no AAA or AA games in it first year then it might make sense but agian sw do not equal logic. It was a simple rant I made take it how you want to take it really.SeanBond

A lot of 360 fanboys are only as arrogant as they are because of the Sony fanboys. Ever since the PS3 was announced, cows have been 100% sure that their new console was better in every way than the 360, that it would have better games, and that it would have much better 3rd party support. One of their biggest arguments has always been "well it's Sony, and Sony is God, so no one can beat them". Not only is that annoy to hear when you're trying to have a debate based on merits, but it's also a simple and somewhat blind view of this hobby. There are plenty of 360 fans who will admit that the PS3 is a great piece of hardware (I don't think the PS3 can hold the 360's jock when it comes to games, but I've still got both of them, and I respect the quality Sony put into the PS3...at least the earlier models...), and there are plenty of 360 fans who will admit that some of Sony's upcoming games appeal to them. However, when your console has been in last place the entire generation (granted it's early), and when you don't have particularly impressive games to show for your console's "superiority", it's simply ignorant arrogance to laugh at fanboys of a system which is at the moment beating theirs in every way. Cows are constantly coming up with new "proof teh Cell is needed" threads, so it's only natural that lemmings would laugh at them every time one of their games flops.

All fanboys are annoying, but the reason cows get piled on is because instead of looking at evidence, they simply say "the PS3 is madeby Sony, so it's better, and because it's made by Sony, it'll win this generation". Nintendo dominated back in the 80s and early 90s (SNES, anyone?), and yet Sony took over their lead. Why? Because it's not just the brand that matters, it's the games. You don't win generations just because your name is a four letter word...

I agree but what I was saying was the amount of cockiness displayed by the 360 fans does not make sence when you realistically lok at the systems actual position right now they are on top but a game drought and a couple unexpected "flops" and the ps3 and wii could be caught up not to mention the wii is totally blasting the 360 in console sales. the 360 fans have a right to bash sony and any flaw they see in their system this is system wars but the way they have been talking of late its like they already won when this is the first year for sony and nintendo and both companies has closed the gap sales wise worldwide and the wii did pass the 360 before the halo 3 realease.

I'm stating their attitude of overconfidence could come back to bite them because their poisition at the top is not as strong as they think. I was also stating that because there are a very big population in system wars they get an inflated sense of how well their console is doing when in the real world the gen's outcome is still wide open yet they gloat like its already over.