It would be a huge step backwards for the game market for a NON-HD console to win a HD era console war. Not to mention, Hollywood-like budgets are great for gamers, not good for the crappy quick buck developers, but good for gamers.
Sony will win unless the Wii can carry this momentum forever, which with the coming drought, I just don't see happening. PS3 has no where to go but up, it is still in the fewest territories. It still hasn't had even one of it's biggest games released. (Wii fired off Zelda, so it's unlikely we'll even see another Zelda game on the System, Xbox 360 had Gears of War), PS3 still hasn't had a price drop. March will be much better for Sony, you'll see. And while it may still not outsell the Wii, I have a feeling it will top the 360. But by the time April rolls around no one will be looking back at February NPD numbers anyway.
Nothing is even close to being over yet. We still have what, another 3 or 4 years before we can see a clear winner. I guarantee you Sony will not come in 3rd place. 2nd is a possibility if the Wii can maintain its surprisingly good sales for another 3 or 4 years and well into the HD era then perhaps Nintendo can win it, but thats really a stretch.
PS3 hasn't had time to see the Software really start to roll in. Of course, all this will change with march. March will be very positive for the PS3 and PS3 owners.
Achievements should not be considered in review scores.
killtactics
Why not? They had longevity to a game and make players go that extra step to truly beat a game. What's wrong with that? It's not like they're giving games AAA scores based off achievements points, is it? I dont see the problem with them simply mentioning how fun/varied/challenging a game's achievements are. It only extends the life of the game for people who actually give a damn about playing through a game more than once for more points (minority). If the game is only worth playing through once because it's not really a compelling game, the review should reflect this. Not because well, you can get an extra 500 points added to your gamerscore if you play it twice. if a game is compelling enough that gamers will want to do the achivements then the GS score should reflect this... That is a minority based view that a game you normally wouldn't play through twice due to quality of game, is suddenly worth playing through twice solely because of extra achievement points.
This is a prediction, not an actual NPD report. So, big deal. Lost Planet wasn't released in February for the 360. Only Crackdown. PS3 had VF5 and F1 in Feb.
Achievements are cool, if there done right. I think multiplayer ones are even better, but I wouldnt say achievements are selling points, and since they dont hurt the score, why should they help it? Kind of unfair... Whats next, raising a PS3 game because it has a cool looking trophy? coolguy1111
That could happen, but honestly, I doubt GameSpot will ever view PS3 trophies the same way they do Gamerscores.
Achievements should not be considered in review scores.
Ninja-Vox
Why not? They had longevity to a game and make players go that extra step to truly beat a game. What's wrong with that? It's not like they're giving games AAA scores based off achievements points, is it? I dont see the problem with them simply mentioning how fun/varied/challenging a game's achievements are. It only extends the life of the game for people who actually give a damn about playing through a game more than once for more points (minority). If the game is only worth playing through once because it's not really a compelling game, the review should reflect this. Not because well, you can get an extra 500 points added to your gamerscore if you play it twice.
They are big fanboys of achievements , yet they pretty much scoff at the idea of 3d trophies in a virtual space.I don't think they will knock any lack of achievements in Wii games but they will in ps3 games.
Everything I said is my opinion , which might be true.
Nike_Air
Everything said is your opinion and I agree with it 1000%. GameSpot will never even view PS3 trophies on the same level they do 360's achievements.
Achievements should not be considered in review scores.
Brooklyn2700
Why not? Its part of the game. It extends the life of some games. Gives some people goals beyond beating the game. Everytime I play gears someone is talking about getting an achievement.
It only extends the life of the game for people who actually give a damn about playing through a game more than once for more points (believe me, it's minority). If the game is only worth playing through once because it's not really a compelling game, the review should reflect this. Not because well, you can get an extra 500 points added to your gamerscore if you play it twice.
Log in to comment