yeah, we shall see.
everybody already knew that Sony wasn't gonna have a standout presence at the GC; Sony said so themselves. its not that they don't care, its that they have their own way of doing things. they'd confirmed that they would instead focus more on TGS. this is hardly news worth mentioning.
actually, if your observation is keen enough, and you look at the space between the guy's right hip and the back of the 360, you can see that the wires in back of dev-kit are actually leading to the turned-off LCD screen.
actually, the 360 is sitting to the left on the same desk as the turned-off LCD screen. the LCD screen displaying the Assassins Creed image is on its own desk, and you can't see to the left of it. given this, its reasonable to assume that the 360 on the pic is connected to the turned-off LCD screen (since they're sharing the same desk); and that something else is connected to the LCD screen where the AC image is displayed. we have no true way of knowing whats connected to the LCD with the ...
while i can't vouch for the authenticity of the pic, AC may very well be currently in development for the 360. even though Ubisoft has yet to confirm AC for the 360, i'm still not arguing against this sentiment that its 360 bound (that only makes sense, considering Ubisoft is a multi-platform developer). where my argument comes in at is WHEN will the 360 get AC? Microsoft said that Pro Evo was exclusive to the 360 for 12 months, and Konami immediately came forth and said that it wasn't. n...
1up isn't the only site saying that Pro Evo and FIFA aren't 12 month 360 exclusives. ign.com said it:
http://xbox360.ign.com/arti...
and gameinformer recently had an interview where Konami confirmed that Microsoft misled the GC attendees.
http://www.gameinformer.com...
there's a difference between making an observation and bickering. i may have made an observation about the article's lack of credibility, but i wasn't bickering. bickering requires two parties.
no offense, but this is THE most unofficial news i have EVER read...ANYWHERE. i hope this article doesn't get approved. i can just see the amount of fanboy bickering it would cause, and over what, "a few drinking words" between some unnamed folks?
Microsoft is NOT the richest company in the world. it just so happens to employ two of the richest PEOPLE in the world, but it is not the richest company. Walmart, Sony, Dell, Ford Motors, Exxon Mobil, Citigroup, Hewlett-Packard, these are just a few of the company whose over-all revenue exceeds Microsoft's on an annual basis.
you are EXCEPTIONALLY silly. you argue a partial case of advocacy for Microsoft, while at the same time feigning objectivity and nonconcern. your views are disinformation portrayed by nonsensical conjecture, overlaid with the occassional sarcastic quip just to hide your own self-denied ignorance. after this comment you can count me out. i'm done with this debate, even should this article be approved and others add to it. if you would deign to respond to this any further then so be it. y...
.....
i'm sorry. i have a HP Pavilion with a 64 bit Athlon processor. i couldn't even tell you what kinda graphx card it has, only that it's ATI standard issued. even still, i probably don't meet the minimum requirements for a game like WoW (i don't even wanna think about Crysis, since you'll need Vista for it); and i don't game on my computer enough to justify buying a $400+ graphx card and Vista. oh well, i still have my 360 and soon a PS3. maybe WoW will come to one of those systems...here'...
it'd be cool if it did, for both the 360 and the PS3. it'd also be cool if fanboys of both camps could game together...*pauses to consider how fanboys bicker on this site* wait, scratch that last idea. eh, i'd actually thought about getting WoW on my PC, bue concluded that i don't really have the time to invest in a mmorpg of such calibur. i'm still considering it, however.
i talk like Sony is god? yeah, and this coming from "Microsoft Master"
.....
first of all, if you wanna insult someone learn how to coordinate proper english. it's "Hey dumbass" not "A dumbass" you dumb idiot. you bring up sales, i refute your statement, and now you start talking backwards talk. if PS2 sales didn't matter this holiday season neither Konami or EA would've bothered putting their respective soccer games on it...ya know, like how they aren't releasing their games on the Gamecube, because they know they won't make any money on it, be...
try wikipedia.
here's Sony's:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
and here's Microsoft's:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
as you can see, Sony generated more revenue, but didn't earn as much profit, just like i said.
what about this article is based in rumor? and since you seem able to deduce so much from such limited knowledge, what rumor am i believing?
Sony's annual revenue for the year 2006 was in the neighborhood of $64 billion. by comparison Microsoft's revenue for the year of 2005 was around $40 billion--i'm quite sure this year will be less, with Vista, 360 etc. to consider. so Sony does generate more money annually than Microsoft. however, given losses generated by R&E for Cell, Blu-ray and PS3, as well as the fact that Sony employ's over twice as many people as Micrsoft, their actual income was less than Microsoft's. still, n...
didn't the inquirer post an article not too long ago, saying how the PS3 was "broken", and soon after nigh every developer known to man came out and refuted it? oh how i can't wait for Nov. 17th to get here, so all the retarded, backwards attempts-threw-assumptions to degrade the PS3 can stop. this "news" is just proof that the inquirer is ran by some of the biggest fanboys the other side of journalism. and whats worse, they don't even name a source for their allegation...