Having AA and AF locked is probably hurting the graphics more than anything.

I would love to play crysis, but my laptop is out of date and I don't have the funds to build a new system just yet. Halo 3 will hopefully keep me occupied until I can build a rig for Hellgate and Crysis.

I love how you ignore all other games besides one series you think you have an advantage on. Not to mention the fact that both KOTOR games were better than FFX.

Heck, FF7 and FF3(6) were both better than X. Why does this thread even exist?

Whenever I see that username, I KNOW it's going to be about FFX.

Baldur's Gate? Fallout? Planescape?

PS2 sales will pay the way forward for the PS3. I don't see finances being a problem. The multiplat thing? Possibly. GTA4 getting pushed back hurts, even as a multiplat, people will buy systems for it. Final Fantasy 13 and GT5 are the only games I can see being real exclusive system sellers. I think FF13 will have more of an effect than Lemmings and Sheep would like to think, and GT sales figures speak for themselves. MGS has never moved systems, I don't see why it'll start now. KZ2 could be a system seller, but it all depends on how it turns out.

Ultimately, if FF13 and GT5 go by and PS3 is still behind in monthly sales figures overall, I'll say PS3 is dead in the water. Until then, it just has to hold on, which it seems to be doing.

Ultimately, the first major blow the PS3 took was the movement of sports gamers to 360. Microsoft has catered to them very well and it's reflected in the sales. Cmon, you think Joe gamer knows about the framerate issues? Sports gaming seems like it's going to be done on 360, for whatever reason, and that will hurt the most in sales.

There's really nothing left to argue, thanks to other poster's good points earlier in the thread. Hopefully the poll tomorrow will get this figured out, but cmon cake, go read pages 44-48 and watch the reaction once option 4 passes the combined options 1-3. It went from "Oh well games are beating no system because of combined totals" to "this poll is flawed" as soon as it got passed. The timing is suspect to a guy who read through it after the fact.

There's really no reason to keep arguing about this because of the poll tomorrow. I guess we'll see what happens tomorrow.

1. The new poll was always going to be made.

2. If you read the original vote thread, you can see I voted against games.

3. The latest poll was closed because obvious faults were pointed out.

cakeorrdeath

1. What? "Always going to be made?" That doesn't really make sense to me, please elaborate. Do you mean that it was always planned for SW to have a definitive judging system?

2. So you voted against games. Okay. It doesn't change the fact that there seems to be a push to make the standard games. The chain of events seems to point that out pretty well. Wether or not you actually personally feel that way, it's getting pushed in that direction, and it doesn't seem right.

3. Plently of faults were pointed out in the original poll and it wasn't closed down immediately, yet this one was? I thought the wording of the 2nd poll was pretty clear, but people decided that disgruntled sales supporters were voting for 4. If anything, the first poll was way more biased because of the lack of the "no system" option, and that one held up for a lot longer than a day.

I would just hate to see discussion get stifled because of a system like this put in place. It seems inevitible, simply because there's nothing left to argue about if you declare a winner based on sales or games. Again: why have the forum if that's the case?