I challenge you to research MS's game division financials. It's still really early in this generation's life cycle; much too early to start crowning the kings. Oh, well, I should say "the PS3's life cycle." At the rate MS is going, the 360 will be maxed out ina year or so, and it'll be time for XBOX3 right as the PS3 is hitting its prime. Also, I feel 360 sales are a little misleading, considering how many lemmings inexplicably repurchase the dang thing once the ring hits.
I usually don't respond to these types of posts, which are obviously inviting the flames for reasons which make no sense to me, but I must be feeling confrontational today or something.
2headedhawaiian
I dont think many people repurchase 360s seeing as you get them replaced for free. Im not really crowning any definite king, I just feel it will probably not be Sony this gen. Plus I like inviting flames, I like too argue sometimes, its fun.
Oh crap I guess your're kinda right. I kinda just skimmed through the article, and plus the headline is nothing but negative. But still every month there is something about Sony losing an ass load of money over something, and that something usually involves the PS3.
Well this may be the final nail in the coffin for Sony this generation. I mean it happens, what did you sony fanboys think or for that matter anybody actually think that Sony would never lose its first place spot?!!? It happens Sony came along and beat Nintendo, and was first place for 2 generations, but now Nintendo, and Microsoft have struck them down and they no longer reign supreme. Its not a suprise at all, its what happens. Mabye next generation they might get back on top again . Or Nintendo will be winning again, or Microsoft who knows. Bottom Line no company will ever stay on top. Sony is just doing poorly this gen, Sorry.
I knew this game was pretty good, played the demo and liked it a lot. I might pick this up, but might not since I'll be playing COD 4. But this game is a lot better than FEAR, and looks like more fun than Haze.
Just because MGS has a better more involved story comapred to SC's realistc,Tom Clancy espionage, terrorist plots doesnt make it better at all. Ubisoft wanted to make the game realistic, but still with some cool gagetry that doesnt exist yet. So that means they had to leave all the magic ninjas, giant robots, and fire-breathing monkeys out of the plot, which I can understand might upset some MGS fans wanting another MGS but with a different name.
In the OXM reveiw for COD4 they said a little over 10 hours for the campaign, which is decent, but they also said the the campaign was one of the best FPScampaigns they ever played in a game.Plus there is 4-player splitscreen(for 360 at least, dont know about PS3 yet).The game got a 10 outta 10 by the way.
Well most of the things that are truley bad about the game are really just technical issues, not gameplay wise(except the atrociously laughable dialouge, which might hamper the story)But still, the technical issues like the horrible framrate, and online lag are enough to ruin the game sometimes.
What are you guys talking about? Quit bashing Splinter Cell now. How has SC sucked since the second one??!??! The second and third are like the best in the series! Mostly for the multiplayer. IMO SC is better than MGS, especally for multiplayer, hands down. I would go as farand say that I'd might prefer SC:Conviction over MGS4.
Log in to comment