The PS3 has been out for more than 18 months, so there's been plenty of time to build up a decent library. The graph is not irrelevant.
And that's really the heart of the matter, isn't it? You go where you have the most fun. There are more games in the 360 catalog and more people playing online, so for some people it is just worth it to be where their friends are.
I think that Microsoft should continue to charge for Gold, just take online play out of the package and offer that for free. I have no problem with them having exclusive perks for people who are willing to pay $50 per year for it, like access do demos and DLC before non-paying members like they have now, or free content that only paying members can get.
So did Sony also screw over 20gb PS3 owners by selling a version of the console that didn't have all of the same hardware as the 60gb? Or are 40gb owners screwed over because they can't play PS2 games? Of course not. If anyone buys a 40gb PS3 with the intention of playing PS2 games they're just poorly informed.
There's not a single person that I've ever heard of being forced to buy or tricked into buying the Arcade version of the 360. If someone gets screwed it's because they scr...
"to those of us who have seen a real pair" - hahaha! That made me laugh so hard!
But when the PS3 is $249 or $199 the Wii will still be $50 to $100 cheaper. Nintendo's been making a profit out of the gate on those things, unlike Sony and Microsoft. The cheaper the Wii gets the more of them they'll sell, because if current demand is any indicator that market has definitely not reached saturation.
Sony has traditionally had great exclusives. But they're losing some big ones, too.
I don't see history repeating itself. Everything about this generation is different so far. Within 18 months Nintendo has regained the top spot and the PS3 is still trailing in last place. I paid $500 for my PS3 a year ago, so it pains me to say that. But it's the truth.
This guy lost all credibility to me due to the poor grammar. "Whether your a fan of Microsoft, Nintendo, or Sony, they are by and large all doing very well." My eyes are bleeding.
Things are different now than they were back then, really. The only real shovelware is on the Wii due to the lower cost of development, and I can't see how the Wii alone can tank the whole market. I remember 1983 very well, and what we have today is nothing like that. Electronic entertainment ...
Yep. I wish they would finish this up.
Lan Di.
Some cuties.
I'm not sure I'd go as far as to call it a mess, but it doesn't have the detail and number of zombies onscreen. I'll rent it just to see how it stacks up.
Yeah, I don't see how people without an HDTV were able to play the 360 version.
Instead of 5 years of Live @ $50 per year why didn't you just go ahead and make it 10 or 15? Or why not take it from the monthly option and say it's $96 per year for 5 years? I mean, since you're including something that isn't really a part of the cost of the system you might as well exaggerate it as much as you can.
Believe it or not, there are people who do not play online multiplayer games. Those things are not necessary for playing games, they are optional. I've yet to play a...
I think that companies have a right to protect their intellectual property, so copy protection is something that they should have the right to do. They just need to find a way to do it that isn't disruptive or potentially damaging.
Without the hope of copy protection PC gaming would completely dry up. No company as millions to invest in a game if they know that everyone could take it for free.
It will only be a Sony if they drop the price of the 60GB model to $299 after the 20GB is gone. That's what Sony did with the 80GB PS3.
If Microsoft leaves the 60GB at $349 then the whole thing is just lame.
Unless you have an HDMI cable the 360 is only going to output DVD content at 480p.
Microsoft needs to drop this one to $299 once stocks of the 20GB are gone. I wouldn't buy one knowing that this is just a clearance sale. I'd rather have the 60GB.
When did FF7 become the Holy Grail of gaming? It was a great game, but was it the best game ever made?
The 360 is selling well enough on its own that it doesn't need to resort to "Hey, at least we're not the PS3" tactics, which is exactly what this article is about. What Microsoft needs to do to capitalize on a price cut is show some really awesome software to entice people to buy it.
I still don't see how people are screwed. How many games are currently available for the 360 that require a hard drive install? How many upcoming games are confirmed to require one? There is no confirmation that there will be games that require them. And if there are games released that require them then people still have a choice. They can choose to buy a hard drive or they can choose a different game.
Think about it. There are several games that require HDD installs on the PS3 ...