How about averaging the scores that are more than 7? I really think AAAE should be no more valuable that AAA. If I have a PS3 and I play oblivion on it I play oblivion on it, what averaging the scores does do is take into account multiplats that may be AAA on 2 consoles but 1 scores 9.0 and the other 9.5.

So 105 games >= 7.0. (Sum(A..Z))/105

Just a thought.

[QUOTE="Majatt"][QUOTE="gingerdivid"]

Say if console X has 2 AAAe's and 8 AAe's and console Z has 1 AAA and 15 AAAe's, which would be regarded as better?

CaseyWegner

You'd need a point system like someone suggested.

that was me. -_-

Oh yeah, I know its one of your options but I meant someone posted the actual points they would award and I liked it so I was just referencing that.

[QUOTE="Majatt"][QUOTE="CaseyWegner"][QUOTE="wooooode"]

Lame. This is dumb the 360 will always have more games because it has a year lead. What about exclusives because if you only use exclusives the Wii wins both.

CaseyWegner

the pc is in first. it has more AAAE/AAE games than the 360.

What about the PS3 and Wii, the PC has so many AAAE/AAE games because it goes back years. Shouldn't the consoles get the same treatment as they have libraries just as vast due to backwards compatibility?

Then for VC games on the Wii what counts, the original score? (just like the PC since they arent re-released and re-rated) or the new score which takes into account the years that have past.

you didn't read the whole firstpost explaining things. :(

Oh my apologies, didn't notice that note down there for some reason.

My question about VC games still stand though, especially since they are re-reviewed. Same applies for live arcade and PSN games but at least with those its either original content or upgraded content.

Say if console X has 2 AAAe's and 8 AAe's and console Z has 1 AAA and 15 AAAe's, which would be regarded as better?

gingerdivid

You'd need a point system like someone suggested.

[QUOTE="Majatt"][QUOTE="CaseyWegner"][QUOTE="wooooode"]

Lame. This is dumb the 360 will always have more games because it has a year lead. What about exclusives because if you only use exclusives the Wii wins both.

ss_49

the pc is in first. it has more AAAE/AAE games than the 360.

What about the PS3 and Wii, the PC has so many AAAE/AAE games because it goes back years. Shouldn't the consoles get the same treatment as they have libraries just as vast due to backwards compatibility?

Then for VC games on the Wii what counts, the original score? (just like the PC since they arent re-released and re-rated) or the new score which takes into account the years that have past.

In this case, the release of the 360.

It's fair.

Ok, yeah PC AAAE 9 since Nov 05, 360 - 7.

Didn't count the AAEs but the PC should be comfortably in front of the 360.

Oh and I only think exclusivity should be used as a tie breaker. Whether or not particular games appear on another platfrom, they are still available on the platform being discussed along with those exclusives.

So in a case where the 360 and PS3 end with 10AAAE and 50 AAE but the 360 had 5 exclusive AAAE and the PS3 only had 4 then it would be a tie breaker. Port or no port, a game is a game.

[QUOTE="wooooode"]

Lame. This is dumb the 360 will always have more games because it has a year lead. What about exclusives because if you only use exclusives the Wii wins both.

CaseyWegner

the pc is in first. it has more AAAE/AAE games than the 360.

What about the PS3 and Wii, the PC has so many AAAE/AAE games because it goes back years. Shouldn't the consoles get the same treatment as they have libraries just as vast due to backwards compatibility?

Then for VC games on the Wii what counts, the original score? (just like the PC since they arent re-released and re-rated) or the new score which takes into account the years that have past.

Sales leave out subjectivity, but I care more about games. Here I woud say sales are the more viable determination of who wins and who does not.

Side note:

Too many stickies. I should not need to scroll down to read what the latest topics are. There is a difference between important information and someone just slapping a sticky on any thread they think may keep the forum clean. There was a time that stickies were trying to be limited, what happened to that concept?

-RPGamer-

Been an advocate of that for a while but its up to the mods, hopefully they will create a sticky to decide about whether or not there are too many stickies. *smirk*

On topic, I will say games but with a reservation. The PS3 can play PS2 and PS1 games, the 360 can play Xbox games, the Wii can play GC games as well as Snes, Nes, Genesis etc. So then the question becomes can you limit it to just current gen games? I can play super metroid on the Wii, I can't do that on any other current gen system (legally) isn't that factor?

In that case the PS3 has and out and out advantage from the get go. I know the amount of people buying consoles for older games is small but then again you aren't arguing sales you are arguing games. Games which have been reviewed (and in some cases) Re-Reviewed so their scores (newer ones where applicable) can be tabulated.

So games, but I wanna ask if games are limited to current gen and if so why?

P.S. If sales leads to games, then games is still the deciding factor... since the point of factoring in sales is the amount of games it will eventually bring.

OMG THE DS DROPPED 50K its DOOMED... it dropped 30% its not going to pick back up!!! supply has overcome demand!!!!

OMG THE WII DROPPED 30%....

I'm sure you all see where I'm going with this...

[QUOTE="Sim_genius"][QUOTE="nintendofreak_2"][QUOTE="manningbowl135"]

Zelda had a 9.4 rating average. I know that doesn't mean anything in system wars, but outside of gamespot, Zelda was not a flop. MP3 won't be either.

jdmpastor

Not true. Most of us HOPED it would be AAA but EXPECTED Gamespot to flop it...which they did.

so true