And yet the PS3 is still ahead on YTD sales (don't believe me, I'm sure you can find the numbers on the internet). That's including the "woeful" ONE MONTH of November. Cause you see, there is a WHOLE WORLD out there where the PS3 is doing just fine and consistently outselling the 360, even with it's higher price point.
And yet the PS3 is doomed?
While I will be importing this game as soon as it's released and will pick up a copy for my wife when it comes to the US (she doesn't know Japanese but really wants to play the game), I have a feeling this game will be torn apart if it doesn't sell 1 million copies on day one. It could outsell every SquareEnix release so far and there will be a billion articles calling it a flop.
I hope I'm wrong though.
Wow. It's amazing to see logic on this board. Bubbles.
------
You know, when Sony was outselling MS every month but three in the US and every month everywhere else in the world from December 2007 to the latest US price cut (because we all know the PS3 outsold the 360 in Europe and Japan even when it got a price cut), where were the "OMG the 360 is doooomed!" articles?
Sure, there were the "2008 is the year of the PS3" articles..but th...
I don't necessarily agree with all of these examples. Dead Space, while sharing thematic elements with Bioshock (which itself was nothing but a re-skinned System Shock) they played differently and had their own unique feel to them.
Now, I can totally get behind Call of Duty 5 < COD 4. I mean, the only reason it sold well was because COD 4 was a massive hit.
Listing "failed to meet hype" as a criteria is a double-edged sword for claiming something to be disappointing. I mean what is "good" hype and what is "bad." Every one of those games received ridiculous hype from the same places that, upon their release, claim they didn't live up to the hype.
Here's the thing these "journalists" don't understand, sure the PS3 got pounded FOR NOVEMBER, but what about from January 2008-January 2009? How will the YEARLY AND WORLDWIDE numbers turn out. In this business, like any other multinational arena its THE WORLDWIDE NUMBERS THAT MATTER.
Also, what matters in the real world, not within the constant pissing match of the internet fanboys, is if the final yearly numbers match what SONY projected.
I was having some connection issues in the afternoon. But I tried again around 10pm and it connected really quickly and everything ran surprisingly smooth for the amount of things going on. I was surprised.
Multiplayer screen shots. Not single player
It's mulitplayer screen shots
Not as DLC. That is exclusive to the 360. Much like some of the quests in "Oblivion" that the system got the PS3 version didn't--Wizard's Tower, Orrery, Thieves Den.
But it is entirely possible that full-on expansion packs (that add 20-30 hours), like Shivering Isles, could hit both systems in the future. Or even be included in a GOTY edition of Fallout 3.
I've found and fought three--one is a part of the main quest, and the other two are found: inside the Capital Building and at the Raider compound at Evergreen Mills.
I think there are five total. Go to gamefaqs or something similar to find them.
Both EA and Ubisoft (You know, number 1 and 3 in terms of worldwide game publishers) recently released numbers showing they made more money on the PS3 than other platforms.
If you do a little search of this website you'd find it.
No, if it weren't for the blu-ray player, the PS3 would have entered the market priced $300 cheaper than it did and made a quicker grab at overall market share.
Man, they are really keeping a lid on the single player. Outside of cutscenes, there have been very few single player screen shots. But it looks like the multiplayer could be fun.
RFOM sold "because of the public outrage concerning Manchester Cathedral?"
Funny, the game was released in Nov 2006 and the first public outrage came in June 2007. Soo...according to this person the game didn't sell well until then. The fact it was an above average and fun launch title (something that rarely happens when a console is released) obviously had nothing to do with the game selling well BEFORE that.
Also, "linearity and annoying jumping sect...
Is this the awards show that is voted on by X-Play viewers or the employees?
I would assume it's the employee ones because the choices make sense. Even Fable II makes sense. I mean, it wouldn't have been my GOTY given the choices, but in terms of what it accomplishes in terms of scope, content, and enjoyability, I can understand WHY it beat out these other titles. But like I said, I personally wouldn't have picked it for GOTY.
They could use the exact same engine and do nothing to the game other than rework some levels (I mean, so far the Gears universe as been contained to a few key locations so it's not like they would have to create all new environments). All they would really need to do is make new cut scenes and maybe add some new weapons and it's definitely possible for a year turnaround.
However, even if they don't add anything new other than the 5 player co-op, and it is literally "Gears 2.5...
good for it.
I can hear the similarities, but the original Russian song actually sounds like a riff from one of the Castlevania games to me.