I'm not a big motion control fan, but if someone is going to succeed with it, i would rather it be Sony than Microsoft, because i just think Natal does a great job of making people look stupid standing there waving there hands and feet in the air without holding a tangible controller.

Who wants to stand around and kick or swing at the air, or turn there fingers into a gun, to me that looks and sounds ridiculous, at least Wii and Move controls have the actual controllers that can give the illusion of a baseball bat, golf club, gun or sword. People will walk into your living and see you shaking your body in front of Natal and they'll call the men in white suits to lock you up.

The super nintendo and, the ps2, and ps3 are all the consoles I fell in love withRTUUMM

Why RDR is winning:

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/life-in-red-dead/63316

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/gameplay-series-red-dead/64784

mD-

would it have been more widely accepted by hardcore gamers. Because as of right not it has the games, so why do the majority of hardcore gamers still think its a joke.

i5750at4Ghz

[QUOTE="RPG-explorer"]

I believe mine was back in 1978 when i went across the street to a friends house on Dec 26th and they had just gotten the Atari 2600 for christmas, and when i walked into there living room and saw them playing Pac ManPandaBear86

racing1750:wrote

It's very honest of you to admit that, most gamers will just say they hate games like Oblivion and Fallout 3 without admitting the real reasons why.

However if you think about those people like myself who do get obsessed with these games, you can literally give each of these games, especially Oblivion months of your life and never do the same thing twice.

So to me thats the real value of a game, i think open world games should be the future of most games, it's the only way you get the absolute most for your money as opposed to a game where the single player is over in a mere 12 to 20 hours. Yes a lot of games have an online multiplayer mode that increases the value and replay time you get but it's usually the same thing over and over like online shooters. Where as games like Fallout 3 and Oblivion have no online play and yet you can literally play them for months and do something different every time you turn it on, thats a true $65.00 value.

It's a shame that you consider yourself too lazy to really explore these games, because i believe if you forced yourself to maybe read through some of there strategy guides and just see the infinite possibilities of what you can do in the game it might peak your interest to fight and explore your way through to loving the game.

How many games out there let you be one of 10 different characters or 5 different species and become either a knight, warrior, mage, thief, vampire, or a member of the Dark Brotherhood assassins guild, and all while exploring underwater lairs, caves, forts and ancient ruins, gathering loot, killing dozens of different creatures and amassing a huge fortune that allows you to buy a house or castle in every city and acquire businesses.

While steadily leveling up your character to a near invincible state of being. I don't know about you but that sounds amazing to me... and that and more is possible in Oblivion...and a very similar experience is also possible in Fallout 3. So if there were ever 2 games that were worth practicing your patience on and investigating further it would be these two.

I don't even need RDR to be out to know that I will enjoy it more than I enjoyed Fallout 3(which I couldn't even bring myself to like for more than 5 hours) That game was so lifeless, devoid of a soul or personality.

It's my biggest beef with Bethesda ever since the first elder scrolls games. They know how to make a game world expansive and "deep" blah blah. But it all feels empty and lifeless to me. Bethesda has these games that are well crafted, polished for the most part(hitches here and there), well thought out, progressive in certain ways, but the games feel like it was made by a bunch of lifeless robots instead of people with a personality. That is why their games bore me to death.

Rockstar on the other hand? They make some of the most horrible games from a mechanics standpoint at times, they can royally screw up the polish end of things, and they can go as far as to be pretentious, but they know how to entertain. There games have some personality to them, some life to them. They know how to engage their consumer as much as they can piss you off with bad design choices. So I'll take RDR in this case.

jg4xchamp

Bethesda is actually one of my favorite developers, and i believe there games are the exact opposite of what you think, if you watch the opening cutscene to Oblivion you get a real sense of a living breathing world with near infinite explorations and people to talk with that provide endless quests and multiple characters and guilds to be a part of.

Games like Fallout 3 and the Elder Scrolls series are more involved then most gamers ever discover, because they either don't put in the thought and time necessary to get the most out of them or, there just to complex for the average shooter, sports or platforming game lover to comprehend.

These games require skill, strategy and thought to be able to progress at a steady pace. So that could be the reason a lot of people don't like them, because those who do, absolutely love them.

I believe mine was back in 1978 when i went across the street to a friends house on Dec 26th and they had just gotten the Atari 2600 for christmas, and when i walked into there living room and saw them playing Pac Man, a game that until that day i've only seen in the arcade, now being played in my friends living room, well that was it, i had to have the Atari 2600.

We all know the 2600 version was of a lesser quality but it was something that could finally be enjoyed in the comfort of your own home right on your TV, no more begging your mom to drive you to the arcade and give you $10.00 in quarters, no more waiting in line to play a certain arcade game, only to have to stop playing mid game and rush home because it was time for dinner or because you had to try and get back to school before lunch was over.

Arcade games could finally be enjoyed at home for the first time and with similar looking joystick controllers, all you had to do as a kid back then was ask for the 2600 for christmas and games for your birthday or other occasions your parents deemed necessary and you were golden.

That was the first time i fell in love with a home console, and i've owned every console and portable ever since, and i expect them to pry a controller out of my cold dead hands in another 35 years or more.

[QUOTE="RPG-explorer"][QUOTE="xTpux"]

Mainly so I can play sniper ghost warrior, bully scholarship edition, crash twinsanity, crash nitro kart, gta san andreas...but thats not enough for me to buy a 360. there has to be some good exclusives for the 360 only atleast 4. can anyone supply me with a list of 360 exclusive games? and no, i dont really like the halo series.

xTpux

Then just concentrate on collecting all the PS3 exclusives, i think that alone amounts to like 40 games, it should be more than enough to keep you busy and it's much better than spending that money on a whole new console that you have to start collecting games for all over again.

My brother in law is a perfect example, he got 360 from day one and just kept collecting games for it, today he has like 70 360 games and he really likes a lot of the PS3 exclusives he sees at my house but because he has so much invested in his 360 he won't trade it towards a PS3, nor' will he start all over again collecting games for another console, especially when the 360 and PS3 library is virtually identical with the exception of those few exclusives.

So i say do what he did, but with your PS3 just use the money to expand your exclusive and multiplat game library, and if you still think your really missing something without a 360, then go play a friends or relatives 360 to satisfy your curiosity.