To everyone who's claiming Heavy Rain would sell double on the Xbox: gimme a break, whatever the hell you're taking must be strong stuff. Alan Wake has a lot more mainstream appeal - it has action and shooting alongside the story after all - and sold 1/3 of what Heavy Rain did. Good joke, guys.

Don't act butthurt, people. I bought the Xbox for Alan Wake and other games, and only got Halo and Gears on bargain bins way later. I'm not offended by the Journey guy comment, it isn't aimed AT ME. It is aimed at the teabagging teenagers on LIVE. AND THEY EXIST. You can complain all you want but YOU KNOW THEY'RE THERE. So what? Let them there and move on.

@nitefox1 Couldn't agree more. I own all three consoles and I am not offended/butthurt by his comment as lots of people seem to be because it doesn't necessarily reflects on me. I got Journey on PS3, I bought Alan Wake on the Xbox, and there's lots of games on Xbox I do consider artistic (though of a different sort), but there's no denying Journey is a more logical fit to the PS3.

Also, these people who are arguing that "just about every multiplatform game sells double on the Xbox" are at least two or three years behind on their info. That used to be true in the US back then and doesn't even come close to remain true anymore *in the country*, much less in the whole world. Nowadays, both consoles are at equal footing in global sales and there are more PSN subscribers for the simple reason that IT'S FREE. And in the last two years the trends have been very clear: FPSs, shooters in general and action RPGs (such as Skyrim) sell a little better on the Xbox 360, while sports games, hack n' slash, adventures and other types of games sell marginally better on the PS3 (save the odd case when the PS3 version has problems, such as Bayonetta).

@ulgk

The Witcher 2 did win some (check Wikipedia) as well as Skyrim, Portal 2 and Uncharted 3, just to mention a few games. Batman: Arkham Asylum probably did win somewhere, but I can remember. Dark Souls did win in a fansite I can't recall right now, but that was it.

Starcraft 2 was released in 2010 and Killzone 4 doesn't even exist - and no, Killzone 3 didn't win anything major, of course. Not even Sony-themed sites would award that on a system that had at least Uncharted 3 and Resistance 3 as insanely better games.

Myself, I think Catherine and Dark Souls are better than all the other games above combined, but that's just me.

@joeyrepro It's funny, isn't it? We "old farts" dreamt of those things happening in the future - which is NOW - while those 20-somethings try so hard to be hipsters by recreating and drooling over the graphics and gameplay we expected so much to be surpassed ASAP.

The game is great, but not really due to its retro feel. Retro is for people who didn't live the thing and need desperately to feel part of an established clique.

This is so outrageous that it's actually convincing me to buy the game. It'll be a pleasure to spend money in something that'll enrage so many nerds at the same time in the whole world.

I understand Tom's sentiment, but I believe the real problem here is beside the points made. Here's the gist: 1. DLC locked from backup - We wouldn't have a problem about The Saboteur content if backing it up was easier and more reliable. I bought it for the PS3 and I can only backup the whole HD content, not the DLC alone. It's also tied to my PSN account. This needs to be changed to a more efficient authentication method that can let me copy it anywhere and restore it quickly on any PS3 once the disc is inserted, no matter the account I'm using. If it makes piracy easier that's too bad. I paid for the content, the seller should support me first and foremost. 2. Dedicated servers/p2p - They need to get rid of the whole platform server thing. I don't blame EA for sidestepping Sony or MS structure altogether. I will blame them and other publishers for not exerting pressure on the platform holders and implementing p2p/dedicated servers options. Then, when it is not profitable for MS, Sony or EA to maintain these services anymore, people can still set up their own servers and keep playing.

@OmegaGear This. In fact the only real difference between EA and other publishers, specially Activision, is that it does a better job of announcing which games are gonna get the online component plug pulled. People won't admit it but EA is by far the most honest and direct about it considering the rest of the bunch. And while I generally agree with Tom, in this case he's jumping the gun about the whole EA paying for its own servers thing being part of the problem. Very recently Activision cut support to Split/Second through PSN, for example. Even if EA handed all online activity to MS, they'd still cut these games as there's still associated costs. I believe people that buy games with an online component and expected it to last are severely deluded. It's like buying an appliance and expecting it to last forever. It's simply unreasonable. That's why I refuse to buy games like MAG for full price, and even when I get them on the bargain bin or used, I play the hell of the online component for some months and sell/trade it back ASAP.

"Imagine Monet repainting Water Lilies in black and white because people objected to color. Imagine Salman Rushdie trashing The Satanic Verses because people objected to its implications." Someone I know came with the best example ever: If Leonardo da Vinci had painted the Mona Lisa now, these people would be petitioning him to take out her smile as they say she's smirking *at them*. There. PS.: Before someone mistakenly assumes me and the person who wrote it are considering Mass Effect 3 the Mona Lisa of gaming... No. Just no. Get back to high school please. It's an analogy. That's all.

@blitztwn36 Seconded in every single word. I came here to say my piece, but there's no need anymore. Incidentally, Kevin mentioned the user score on Metacritic is 5 now. Few hours after its release, it was 2.2. I believe in a month or two it will get to the actual score the game deserves. No matter how vocal they are, I'm pretty certain those that think the game represents 'the abandonment of BioWare's prior creative direction' are a very small contingent.

@Polybren I'll answer with a simple reference: The Great Rock n' Roll Swindle. In 1980 the Sex Pistols were making fun and poking jokes at the whole idea of punk, at the whole absurdity of THEM - out of all crazy chaps in England - becoming rock stars overnight. You want to know what's punk today? It is to manage to bring your Nth bizarre game out, always through a different publisher, and finally manage to carve yourself a nice niche without ever compromising what makes your games unique. You know what's subversive? To win on your own terms. Suda 51 may not fit the classic definition of punk. But he's all that punk can be after punk has become just one more music genre in the shelf.