[QUOTE="briand07"]M$ screws the customers again.Always-Honest

how? if true (if true... remeber it's a rumor), it's still optional...

Considering MS didn't force you to buy the HD DVD add on.................. and you knew that there was no winner, you could have opted not to buy the "add on". Its referred to choice. Something MS gives you. I believe the $200 price drop in 1 year for the PS3 has probably ticked off more PS3 owners than the HD DVD add on fiasco.

Changing discs is better than installation based on {the time it takes to install the game + the amount of HDD that is gobbled up during installation}. You loose both time and space. A double whammy if you ask me.

It's being hailed by most game critics as GOTY 07'. What a joke, a lame 7 hour SP campaign, decent but nothing revolutionary MP. It's graphics are a joke, and AI is non existent. What bugs me is how critics attacked Crysis for buggy AI, but don't look at CoD 4's linear gameplay, simpleton AI, muddy graphics, dumb story.Dynafrom

Yeah its so... so... The single player is a step back from COD 2 and the multiplayer needs balancing. Perhaps using the Halo ranking system would've been better.

How about joystiq?

http://www.joystiq.com/2008/01/25/wii-tie-ratio-8-1-in-december-still-trailing-life-to-date/2

i_like_pizza

Your sources go directly back the IGN. Hence, if a blame is made, it will lie with IGN and the other sites are off the hook. Considering most of those sites are blogs, its not surprising.

[QUOTE="RaveRabbid"]

So there is no integrity among gaming devs but there is among gaming journalism?? Who are you trying to convice? Certainly not me.

i_like_pizza

Determing which console has the best graphics between two entirely different machines with similar end-results is subjective. Different devs have different preferences and alliances, and you're always going to get different opinions about something like this.

A number, just a flat out number that can't be faked or debated is nothing similar to "which has the better graphics."

Anyone can look at the specs on paper and claim the PS3 is more powerful. Heck, there have been such claims. These are number too. Again, the source is really Matt because we don't know the other 10 - 20 top selling games for December.

Perhaps I should explain why this matters. If you look at the recent NPD data, there are more Wiis sold in Dec. but less Wii software compared to the X360..... in the top ten. That would lead some people to question why the Wii would have a higher attach ratio for the Month?

Do you get it. Its questionable and thats why we are having this debate. Had it been the other way around, there would be little reason to debate.

[QUOTE="RaveRabbid"]

Where is the link that states they stated THAT RATIO?? There seems to be some serious debate. The thread was started with the premise that the Wii had a higher attach ratio for Dec. but the proof was a statement by a bias fanboy (Matt).

No other data was presented. The TC asked the forum goers to believe this statement at face value but Matt has no credibility hence, more proof (in terms of numbers) is required. No one should ever have to take a statement at face value unless its credible. Again, if you believe that NPD stated this Ratio, please provide the link.

i_like_pizza

Holy rusted metal, Batman! Are you serious, or are you just a fakeboy? Either way, you're hopelessly lost in disillusion. Have a good time not making sense.

Again, many people don't believe the statement made by Lair devs that the PS3 is graphically much better than the X360. Should we simply take that at face value knowing that the devs are specifically making a game for the PS3? If the statement came from a neutral source (other than Matt), it may hold more weight.