jezz, for every little positive feedback sony gets, you always find ways to spin it into something of a negative with a wall of text. Don't you get tired of doing it. This generation is far from over and this is a marathon and from what we see right now Sony is gaining ground everytwhere. Like the ole'saying goes "slowly but surely"

edit @ alpha below
Like in the article says, if you're talking about a short sprint yes Big N has won the race. but Sony, they consider it a marathon( 10 year plan)and from what I'm reading on the web Sony is in the right track. Like I said this gen is far from over and the one jumping into the shark is you for saying Big N has won already.

Amen, spoken unbiased words once again.

People who rate Negative on him please leave N4G and go suk a fat slim covered Kotick dik!

Winning would just be the most successful (profits). Meaning sony most likely in third, they lose so much money on the PS3, M$ is turning good profits, Nintendo has always been.

N - 1
MS - 2
S - 3

When it comes to profits from the systems/games. And it comes down to one thing; the cost of the system. Xbox lost because of price and a year late. Sony is in MS shoes from last gen roughly speaking.

Don't be so sure of that. Just like with the PS1 and PS2, Sony has a 10 year life span for the PS3 with at least 10 million consoles sold a year so at ten years that will put the PS3 over 100 million just like the PS1 and PS2. The guy above you was right when he said who ever stops production first will finish in last place. This gen isn't over so Nintendo didn't win yet. They are destroying the competition now but it's not over yet. I'm sure Microsoft will cut out early and drop support for the 360 to get a jump on the next gen again so they will not win the war.

Microsoft will have to be content with the silver medal. They started out sprinting but now they are exhausted and are crawling while sony is starting to pick up speed.

I have no problem with positive news, but when if I find that it says something incorrect I will point it out. Just because Sony is gaining ground doesn't mean they will instantly win. They have to make up for the years that they lost, and in that time Wii has dominated. Slowly but surely? Did that work last gen when PS2 dominated? Yes, the PS3 is doing great but don't jump the shark and assume it will overtake Nintendo within four years.

And Hank, if the Wii were to back out now how do you know that Sony PS3 will surpass or come close to them?

The PS3 is not the PS2 or PSOne. Sony didn't start off with that same level of success. They were kicked off and had to climb back up to the top, and that's what they are doing now. Wii started off strongest and is still going strong. If you read the article the author tries to justify Sony's reign with Move and 3D.

Move is optional. Natal on the other hand is being pushed more mainstream. If the article is trying to say Sony will win then they appeal to Sony's perception of winning: sales, profits, etc.

And in none of that has Sony yet, or is likely, to beat the highest standard of this generation: the one Wii has set.

If the winner is whoever sells most then Nintendo has won and it's really ignorant to think Sony will beat them. PS3 released 2006. It's 2010 now. In 6 years do you sincerely believe that Sony will miraculously increase sales so much so that they will beat Wii when a) Nintendo is still selling Wii well
b) Sony still hasn't beat Microsoft

@Godmars

You have demonstrated my point on how "winning" has many interpretations. By your argument GAMERS are the one who are winning. If SONY will win the marathon then they have to do the BEST in sales and profits. Gamers are the real winners, but this article tries to favor Sony as the corporation to win as a company. So which is it people? What does winning mean? Because Hank says its about whoever sells the most, and Godmars is arguing games.

They wont be pulling profits off their systems for a while. Cost of blu-ray is stil high, the cell isnt highly produced and isnt cheap.

You people say its so high tech this and that, it all comes at a high cost, that will less than likely be much further reduced from the slim pricing in the coming years.

You have Nintendo who can make a dollar off a penny, MS who is coming out with the slim to drastically reduce manufacturing costs.
Sony already did their bit with the slim @ 299.

Xbox slim could be <150 if the screen shot I saw was real (the cost to actually make it) they really streamlined the xbox to save money.
You need to think without the fanboy backing it.

Logically, in todays economy where alot of people are broke would be the cheapest option for the kids, gifts or even themselves. The cheaper unit will win; this isnt anything new though.
Watch how it unfolds, follow me or add me so when Next gen comes out you can tell me differently from what i've been saying.

How has Nintendo won anything when not only their own games but 3rd party publishers have failed to capitalize on the Wii's now faltering momentum? The Wiimote hasn't opened new gaming generas and customers, its just hooked soccer moms who are still going to be fiddling with balance boards after the Wii2 been announced.

Edit:
Sony hasn't caught up to MS. More to the point consumers in general haven't realized how bad an overall deal the 360 represents. Sony, or rather "Not so Crazy Ken Kutaragi," wanted to deliver an all around media hub. MS copied that poorly while Nintendo have been focused as they've always been, on making a game system. The Wii wont win this console gen because its not a movie or music player, which is why the PS2 was and remains the most notable console.

Aside from the Dreamcast, but only because it was beaten that badly.

It wasn't the game that brought the Wii to public attention, it was waggle. It wasn't Modern Warfare 2 that put the 360 in the spotlight, it was Netflix. The PS2 kicked general @$$ because it was the cheapest DVD player of its time just as VHS needed to be replaced, something which was far from the case with the PS3 and BR. That's why it fell on its face, but also why its coming back now.

Its not going to be game or games that win this generation, the iPhone says that much, its going to be media.

I don't care if Sony is in 1 billionth place for all I care. As long as they are supporting their console with kick@ss games and other services, then I'm good.

Sony has proven every time to produce 10 year life span consoles. If Nintendo bows out early then Sony will pass them. The PS3 is at about 35 million in 3 1/2 years and that's on pace to hit over 100 million in 10 years like the PS1 and PS2. We also know that Sony don't drop support for their current console when they release they new one unlike Nintendo and Microsoft. Just look at how the PS2 is STILL selling.

lol, more wall of text no one will read or care about
the winner has always been who sells the most consoles stop trying to spin it

Edit:
"We have even yet to see a PRICE drop for the Wii, and when that happens the Wii will sell even more."

Ok now I know that you have no idea what you are talking about

I'm sorry that you can't bother to have a proper conversation Marius. You've never bothered to have a discussion anyway. Is a wall of text too hard for you to read? I'm not spinning anything: I'm asking for a proper definition of what it means to win. Godsmars attacked the lack of games on Wii. If winner is most consoles sold, then

a) don't say sales matter
b) make sure that your statement is realistic
c) Sales really DONT matter, because since sales is what the company cares about then they really care about profits. Sales =/= profits. MS and Sony have lost a lot in repairs and failing to reach break-even points. Nintendo hasn't had that problem

It's a very unrealistic assumption that PS3 will outsell Wii. In order to believe that numerous factors have to just right: Microsoft has to lose out, and the Wii has to stop selling, even though Nintendo is still selling it well.

We have even yet to see a PRICE drop for the Wii, and when that happens the Wii will sell even more. It's very unrealistic to think that, based on this article, Sony will win just because it has Move and 3D. Natal is by far a more marketable product that will receive much more media attention. Move is aimed at the hardcore gamer, yet this article expects it to be something that makes Sony win the generation.

Edit: Hill, another price drop will happen if Nintendo feels threatened. The fact is that the Wii continues to push ahead and they have a better position to keep that lead.

@mike, nobody is talking about Microsoft: yeah, MS is just as in a poor position in terms of profit as Sony in comparison to Nintendo. They will never pass Nintendo either. Yet this article makes the claim that Sony is going to win.

Sales actually don't matter like Marius believes. Sales only matter because they make profits, but profits have been lost on selling PS3s and fixing 360 hardware. Nintendo has never had that problem this generation.

@ mittwaffen - You can't really compare last gen to the current one, not even "roughly speaking". Or rather you can, but you'd have to neglect the fact that the PS3 sold more than the original Xbox in half the time, and the gap between 360/PS3 sits at 5-6 million versus 110-115 million for the Xbox/PS2.

So no, Sony is not "in MS shoes from last gen". Can you even provide us with a link to back up your claims about production costs and profitability, or are you just pulling numbers out of thin air?

"We have even yet to see a PRICE drop for the Wii"

Uh, the Wii dropped from $249 to $199 when the PS3 Slim came out and the Xbox Elite dropped to $399. Where have you been?

If you go by success in terms of profit Microsoft still loses. Here are 4 reasons why:
1. They buy out for exclusives
2. They advertise the most in commercials and also in public
3. The RRoD cost money
4. They don't make much money from 3rd party games since most of the profit earned is first party. One Madden 10 copy sold on 360 is $1 for Microsoft where as Halo 3 is like $15-$20 for Microsoft. It's a rough estimate but essentially you make your money from 1st party and Microsoft only has 2 or 3 real 1st party studios.

Microsoft has spent more money this generation. GTA4, Japanese exclusive RPGs, RRoD, every other game they made multiplatform has more than offset what Sony has spent. And also when you talk about Sony you must include PSP and PS2. With the success of PS2 they're still making money from that.

The Wii may be more successful this generation but next generation many pissed off hardcore gamers will not buy it. Also what does Nintendo do next generation because Sony and Microsoft has motion controller to? Nintendo can't compete they aren't a big enough company to make billion dollar investments. Nintendo likes to turn profit on a system at launch which is not possible next generation.

Despite a lot of third party games selling poorly on the wii (they don't as long as you release games that favor the wii audience. The wii had 5 games in teh top 20 and DS 4 last npd), Nintendo is still making the most money off games this generation by a long shot. The PS3 would have to double it's lifetime sales and then some to catch the wii. The fact that microsoft and PS3 are both trying to break into nintendo's market is a testament to how successful nintendo was this generation.

And I wouldn't call continuing to run past the finish line of the marathon when everybody else starts running a different race winning the marathon.

The obvious winner is the company that can keep the share holders happy.

Judging by that i would place Nintendo in top position.

Microsoft and Sony both seem to be doing bad. Last i read Microsoft was 3 billion in losses, Sony was at 6 billion.

Judging by their current profits it doesnt seem like this money will be recovered by the end of this gen (which might be 3-4years more)

Even if they do recover they will need to get set to make more losses for next gen consoles.

Overall it doesnt look pretty for Microsoft or Sony.

No counting the PS2 you mean :p

Actually, since we are talking about a marathon not a race, then what's the point arguing about a conclusion when we're still in the middle of it?

Though I would like to know, while the PS3 and 360 are showing 2nd winds, what does the Wii have left. Does it have the momentum to reach 100+ million sales, or will the PS3 copy the PS1 and PS2? I think that's where the author got the notion of it winning: by prior example.

I'm sure someone from Sony already mentioned that they were running a marathon not a sprint race.

@PS3FTW

Agreed.

Though i do feel Microsoft doesnt really care about the console war. Its more like they are in it to hurt Sony.

Microsofts golden goose is Windows. Imagine what would have happened had Microsoft not entered the console war.

Sony would have conquered the Living room by now, they probably would have been a good position by now to have more people shift to linux as a platform instead of Windows(that would have been a low blow to Microsoft).

If Microsofts objective was to hurt Sony then i would say they have accomplished this to a good extent:

They probably have taken a good share of gamers from Sony,
They have caused Sony to take tremendous losses this gen,
Set them back from taking the living room,
Foiled their plans of making linux a windows replacement.

Sony probably wont make the money back in time for the next console 6Billion in the red is a huge figure, even if they recover part of it they will make further losses by the time next gen consoles are to be released.

Imo Microsoft is a whale they really dont care if they lost some money on the Xbox as long as they protected windows as being a monopoly.

True, and yet MS went to such effort while reaping no real benefit to themselves much less their costumers.

A long time age when Sony did the same to Nintendo we got the PS1 and former Nintendo franchises as they were never shown before. This time around there's only a question of lesser quality for multiplatform titles.

Sony can hit 100M, but Nintendo can easily hit 130-140M.

And if some can't understand how Nintendo will be near 90M before next spring, take the fanboy goggles off. :)

Nintendo won this gen and Sony will beat Microsoft. End of discussion.

@Godmars

While i agree people who have followed Microsoft have been milked badly. Microsofts done nothing but bad for the gaming industry this gen.

Microsoft as a company had a goal that was to hurt sony, so that they could protect their real cash cow (Windows).

Hence i think they did benefit for themselves, had sony taken over the living room, Sony could have leveraged that to later cause people to shift to Linux via PS3 (which eventually could have hurt Microsoft as that could have led to NON gamers shift from Windows to Linux on the PC).

On Microsofts part this operation is a success, if they can hurt Sony for 1 more generation it will be a bad blow to Sony(who already is in big losses with this gen).

360 peaks at 60 million. They have America, hardly an audience in Europe, and no footprint in Japan. As successful as the PS2 was they sold around 45-50 million in AMerica so the 360 at 60 million worldwide is their peak. PS3 continues to grow in every territory where as 360 has plateaued in Europe and in Japan.

Nintendo is done after this generation. They're going to make a "N64" next generation. SNES was successful but with "N64" they tried to innovate further with that controller but lost.

@mikeslemonade

PS2 sold very well in the sub continent region. That region is packed with people. Over half the worlds popultion lays there (shared between India, Pakistan, China).

PS2 sold so well there due to piracy being rampant in those regions. PS3 doesnt sell so well in those regions due to it being protected from piracy. That should effect sales of the PS3 worldwide.

However Sony is better of without that sale. Since had the PS3 been hacked by now, those people would have pirated games anyways.

Tell me something I don't know! (hehe)

As far as I'm concerned, the race is between the 360 and PS3. The Wii is a totally different product, with a totally different market, with totally different games.

It's like saying, "Which company will sell more bikes, Yamaha, Harley Davidson, or Trek?" Well just because Trek (a mountain bike) has 2 wheels like the others doesn't mean they deserve to be in the same conversation, right?

Time to learn the basics:

The Wii is a.... Console? Right.

And we are in a.... Console war? Correct.

So based on what we learn today the wii is a console we are in a console war which the means the wii.... shouldn't be considered in the 'console' war?!

you are the most disguised troll i've seen in this site, you always try to push down our throats how "unbiased" you think you are with your walls of text but the truth is you are a Sony hater, and as soon as something extremely positive is said about PS3 you jump in with some "rational" explanations to spin whatever positive is being said. Go back to your 360 which you conveniently say you bought just recently and play your "GoTY" games Reach and Alan Wake. The article never said SONY IS WINNING NOW!!!!, it says that on the LONG RUN they will come out on top.

Who wins a CONSOLE WAR you ask???

WHATEVER COMPANY GETS THEIR CONSOLE INTO THE MOST LIVING ROOMS ACROSS THE WORLD. Plain and Simple.

You can't measure which console has the best games, because that's subjective, a good game for me might be a POS to you.

Who makes the most profit?? Who knows only each company accountant knows. manufacture gets cheaper, company makes deals, get bonuses etc etc

Right know Nintendo is #1, Xbox #2, PS3 #3, but if for example Microsoft decides to come with a new console next year and consequently the 360 sales dry up, allowing the PS3 to catch and pass them then the PS3 will take 2nd place in this generation even if the next generation already started.

CAPISH???

And how "smart" of you to say that the generation is over as soon as a new console comes out. Not even the 25% of all gaming market share will buy a new console within the first few years of being released.

A GENERATION IS OVER WHEN ALL THE RESPECTIVE SYSTEMS FROM THAT GENERATION GET CANNED AND ALL THE NUMBERS ARE TALLIED.

The Playstation division has been in the black (meaning "profitable", kids) for quite some time now.
Come meet us in the present. It's 2010 now.

How many times we've have been through this?
Stop compare Kia to BMW. Damn lastgen kids.

Yes sony is in MS shoes, they released their console a year late, they have better tech to compensate.

Fanboys need to think more like AlphaMale, hes realistic with his thinking; stupid fanboys.

If you ask me Alpha Male is actually really childish. All he talks about is fairness. Life isn't fair. He always types walls of text to exercise his freedom of speech. He's too childish to realize most people aren't going to read that and most people don't care enough. He comes on N4G trying to make it more "gamer friendly" instead of being fanboy infested, and that is childish because he isn't going to change anything when no one is listening.

He isn't Rosa Parks sitting down in a bus making a stance. He comes in here trying to scientifically define everything. There's a difference in being smart and sounding smart. He is being the latter.

When choosing who wins the console war you treat it like reviewing a game you don't just look at one thing, for example sales. The Wii is obviously leading in sales and the PS3 is leading in games and features, and if you ask me it is actually kind of close between Sony and Nintendo, but I also agree with whoever caves first and makes a new console looses but i'm pretty sure that will be Microsoft.... again. Also I don't consider the 360 even in the console war because of RROD, I don't think a system with such a big flaw should even be considered anymore, Even though the 360 beats the Wii in more features and games I still think the Wii beats it because it is more reliable and has more sales, and lets not forget that the Wii also has good games. I also don't consider the 360 because the PS3 beats it in best value for your money, more features and more games. So here are the 2 outcomes.
1.Sony
2.Nintendo
3.Microsoft

1. Nintendo
2. Sony
3. Microsoft

and yes I also realize that this war is quite a ways from over but I dont see Microsoft fixing the 360's flaws or the 360 passing the PS3 in exclusives because Microsoft has very few first party studios and Sony has alot of them, and the PS3's growing install base is too big for third party devs to ignore anymore. Also I'm betting on the first outcome I posted because I'm noticing Wii sales are slowing as PS3 sales are growing.

MS sells
1 console
+ n games
+ 1 hdd
+ n years Live subscription
------
= total gain MS

Sony sells
1 console
+ 1 hdtv (ok ok, maybe not from Sony)
+ n games
+ n blu ray movies (for many many years to come)
------
= total gain Sony

>Sony thrown into a leading market position
>3rd place out of 3 major competitors
>they were first before this gen (if going on sales alone)
>lolwut

Pull up your pants, article, as well as 98% of the users of N4G. Your fanboy is showing.

A lot of people on here accusing Alpha-male of being anti-sony or biased,I don't think thats the case at all.

I just think he is a patronising little arse who loves the sound (in his head) of his ridiculously long wall of text comments.

Alpha - your attenpts at making yourself sound intelligent dont work, condense the points that you want to make into decent bitesized chunks. If you want to have massive 15 minute to and fro arguments then go join the college debating society because im pretty sure everyone here is sick of your BS - I certainly am.

Just look at the prices of these consoles.

Wii Sports pack. Price 197,9€.

Xbox 360 Elite + 4 games (ODST, Forza 3, Lego Batban and Pure). Price 244,9€.

PS3 Slim 120 GB. Price 299,9€.

Don't you people have any sense? Come back to this topic after 5-7 years after seeing what happened when the PS3 was available with a 120€-200€ pricetag for a couple of years. They are almost giving the x360 away here and the Wii is at half the price of a PS3.

Everyone wants a PS3. This is the truth right? If the price was 50€ what do you people think would happen saleswise? The price isn't 50€ now and probably will never be but once it hits the sweet price of 200€ or below there will be a landslide of new customers lining up to get one. EVERYONE wants a PS3. There is no way to say differently. It has the games and BD. The PS3 still costs almost as much the PS1 and PS2 did when they LAUNCHED.

Wow this is fun. Ok Sony is running a race, yet they are about to be lapped. The wii is at 70 million now. PC graphics are going to keep getting better. I mean seriously you all got a PS3 after 5 years of PS2 because you wanted better graphics. Basically your whole fanbase will upgrade with in a year or two or when sony stops making sequels.

t850 is right... MS got serious when SONY claimed they where going to make a better OS than MS LOL. I remember that day and I saw like hellz to the yeah! Then we got the PS3 and I was like WTF!? is this....
Anyway MS is not done with SONY. I wouldn't be surprise if MS is behind all the other OS hacking LOL Man don't you just love a good conspiracy.

Well any way Why don't you guys buy some damn games already PS3 fans? I mean when the PS3 sits at 100 million and uncharted 2 is still at it's current numbers the industry will have a nice chuckle.

I mean the neo geo "won" tthe same way basically...lol

The whole console war thing is getting boring... bring on next gen!

Also you do realize that the ps2 has been out for 10 years are you really looking forward to that hell most of you can not even stand wii games. When the new systems hit you will see differences in polygon counts controls, etc... So even with the PS2 being out 10 years most of it's top games can not even out sell the wii right now. What is funny also is the wii is a GC also, in fact most early engine wii games where GC games... so in an essence the GC will win last gen also. Hell since you all say it's two GC duck taped together then it has already won 70 million*2+GC 21million = 160 LOL Now isn't this fun?
I think nintendo target last gen was 50 million GC also, man did they f that up, sorta like how sony is doing.
What is eerier is you all say your old N64 fans right will here is what that system sold...
Nintendo 64 – 32.93 million (Japan: 5.54 million, the Americas: 20.63 million, other: 6.75 million as of 31 March 2005)
Wouldn't be crazy if the PS3 sales go cold in the mid 40s.... I know if another HD format comes out some thing tells me it official over for the ps3, hey but it beat blu ray right! Well it beat net flix though?

Well that was fun... got any more bizarro articles?

"Sony has not made the most profit, and they wont."

You're asserting they won't, as if you know the future. And since you know the future, can you tell me who's going to win the world cup in advance? Blu-ray was victorious thanks to PS3, so you have to factor all of Blu-ray's profits in the future, and that includes sales of HDTV thanks to Blu-ray. So, if you at least want to prove that Sony WON'T make as much money as Nintendo, then please make a reasonable model of all the implications of Blu-ray winning and PS3's install base in comparison to Nintendo's, otherwise your argument is invalid.

Even if "best games" is a subjective label, it is a fact that PS3 has almost everything the 360 and PC have to offer, and yet has the most exclusive content as far as full-fledged games go in the timeframe of this generation; it also costs nothing to play online. It's also true that Wii has garnered the worst reviewed for everything it gets except first party games, i.e. there's no quality control so a serious gamer would only get value from first party exclusives and very few third party exclusives, unlike next-gen consoles and PC which have tons of good games not available on Wii. If anyone was a serious gamer and not a fanboy and wanted to experience as much quality content as possible, then the PS3 is the best choice in case you have to buy a single console. 360 and PC wouldn't be bad second choices for a single platform to own, but 360 has too high of a failure rate, costs to play online, and doesn't have as many exclusives, let alone as many good ones; most of its games are guaranteed to be available on PC and/or PS3; and as for PC, while its games are (or were) cheaper, and it's also free to play online, it's a hassle to have a fully compatible rig, to get your pc connected to your TV, etcetera, i.e. a PC is more expensive and not as easy to use as a console. "Casuals" may opt for a Wii given its social appeal, but serious gamers are better off with just a PS3, unless they want a second console for Wii's few good exclusives.

I think Sony has made quite a bit of money off the PS3 indirectly, they ended the format war, started HD, and soon 3D all thanks to the PS3. Imagine if Sony made the PS3 more like the 360, they wouldn't have sold the most blu-rays, HD wouldn't be as popular so less TV sales for them.

"I am getting tired of this where Sony is constantly getting praised as the Future King of Win. Nobody knows what will happen,"

But yet you say this:

"Sony has not sold the most, and they will never catch up to Nintendo."
"Sony has not made the most profit, and they won't"

So in other words your saying "Nobody knows what will happen," except you.

Hill, I am saying from what we ALREADY Know we cannot jump to a hasty conclusion. We know that Nintendo is leading by a ridiculous amount right now and to say that Sony will outsell them is based on no solid evidence other then that they are doing well.

Don't shift burden of proof on me, I am not making the claim that Sony will outsell Nintendo. You guys are. So it's up to you to have some proof that isn't based on a vague future.

Your reasoning is that Sony has always sold the most. Yet you fail to realize the PS3 didn't get off like the PS2 or PSOne did. It suffered a lot from a high price, and a lack of good games at launch. The gap is much wider, there is more competition from Microsoft. It's completely foolish to equate the PS3 to the PS2 or PSOne when neither PS2 or PSOne was in the situation PS3 is in today.

The Wii has catered to a much wider audience that Sony is only now trying to gain with Move, something that is aimed at the hardcore.

So Sony fanboys are trying to have it both ways. Either Sony will win (as defined by Marius as whoever sells the most), but that means that they have to dominate the casual market. What's their casual hook? Move, which is aimed at who? The hardcore gamer. Which is optional. Which is in direct competition to Natal, a product that MS is fully aiming at casuals. And of course, the Wii, which has already secured the casual audience by a large gap. Yet, somehow within four years, Sony is supposed to have Move and 3D not only run past the 360, but the Wii. It's a huge assumption.

"Don't shift burden of proof on me, I am not making the claim that Sony will outsell Nintendo. You guys are. So it's up to you to have some proof that isn't based on a vague future. "

But you did claim that Sony WON'T make as much profit, which is also based on a vague future. In math, if you deny something, you have to prove it too. Just like a proposition isn't true when there's no proof about its state of truth, a proposition isn't necessarily false when there isn't proof; it's only uncertain, that's pretty basic when dealing with plausible reasoning.

Funny, this is the same failure argument you used last time we argued and the conveniently proceeded to ignore me because your lack of knowledge regarding rhetoric and reasoning was put in evidence, so you had to PM me with idiocy and grammar errors. Stay in college, kid. Oh, and change the "Alpha" to "Omega" too.

Anyway, nothing to see here. As usual, Omega-Male fails.

I heard there is a petition to have ALpha change his screen name to something more relevant and NATIVE to this nature.

LovestoReadHisOwnPosts sounds like a good injun name for ya.

Don't try to make sense with Alpha-Male22.I already knew that he's an Xbox troll in disguise,a long time ago.

That's why I put him in Ignore list.

On topic,everything is looking good for gamers,expect for those who feel insecure by Sony's continuous success.