sony do not no what to call it sorry

i have been a big fan of the sony brand from day one and still to this day will come back with a resalable argument when xbox fanpeople go PS3 S**T 360 so much better but reading many articles since the 360 price drop has got me thinking
the ps3 is a good price for what it can do ( can you get a games console plus a blu ray player under £300 NO ) but i am starting to feel like the ps3 is a neo geo and what i mean buy that is the out of the reach of the general customer looking at hardware/software prices i can buy a Xbox 360 60GB Premium Pack with FIFA 09 +Xbox Live 12 Month Gold Membership Card for £219.98 but a PS3 80GB Console with FIFA 09 will cost me £309.99 if you were offered the deals at that price which would you go for and if you are not wanting to go on line the 360 can lose the £39.99 for the live card then you look at the prices of second hand games the ps3 are all ways £5/10 more than the 360 i hope that sony sort out a price that will compete with the 360/wii as it has so much to offer just look at little big planet and you see that it is a fantastic console

god I saw the topic and I just knew it was good 'ol Phil...

Firstly you can get Xbox Live for around £24 check ebay for a 12+1month voucher.

Secondly Xbox 360 has far better games, more exclusives, more rpg's, more online gamers and none of that waiting that you get with many games on the PS3 and poor cross platform games and 1yr delays.

Want a complete gaming system that offers top end visuals, everything in the box, best online network with over 12million Live gamers and all the top releases? Get an Xbox 360 and Jump In!

Apparently it makes ordinary gamers talk like Microsoft marketing people too. That's scary, it all seems a bit cultish to me.

better games? to arbitrary, i would say the DS is kicking ass now, the PC still owns and the Wii actually has more variety (in places we all least suspect).
more exclusives? why do people always forget the DS and PC? the first one even owns about a third of the game-industry so no, it is not insignificant...how do these HD-games get financied you think?
more rpg's? DS again...c'mon...
more online gamers...WoW has more online players then Xbox Live...(kinda...)

Clearly, the DS is (somehow and to the shame of all) the ultimate gaming device of this moment...it has everything!


Will you stop copying the MS press releases pls! it's like you symbolize the lack of creativity in Xbox360 games in general

I am talking about CONSOLE gaming not portable, I have a Wii and it seriously lacks a decent selection of games how many times lately have you seen news about top title Wii games? If you look its all about Xbox 360 and PS3 titles, the Wii is nowhere to be seen!

For console gaming Xbox Live network vs PS3 the 360 has far more online gamers on that service.

My mate has a 360 and PS3 and we have done our own side by side comparisons of cross platform games and the 360 won hands down.

So two consoles who barely represent 20-25% of the ENITRE dustry are somehow the norm how? No really...what rational reason can be given to justify that?
Also, the lack of Wii reporting is actually the fault of the very american-centerd reporting on games in general and the american gamejournalists aren't really the smartest and have proven to be living in self-constructed ivory towers, hell even Spong somehow forgot to mention that Sin of Punishment 2 was revealed! What's up with that Spong?

So your statement is actually based on short-sighted information gathering on short-sighted reporting of short-sighted game-journalists. If you have been following the news a bit...you know that Japan is actually starting to shift entirely on the Wii. S&P2, Monster Hunter 3, NHM2, Demon Blade, the new Tales of , Fragile, Captain Rainbow, hell the Wii is the only console getting proper survival-horror games (like that game with mountain in the title, thank you japan).

And from i have been reading now (i'm doing my history master-thesis on video-game generations) and there is some empirical ground to assume that the japanese game-industry and market is actually a few years ahead of the American and European one. Offcourse no one notices this because of the very american-centerd reporting.

SS4 hit his head on the keyboard and came up with: "Secondly Xbox 360 has far better games, more exclusives, more rpg's, more "

I do not know where people pull this from: more games = better games. WRONG.
The X-box has maybe two good games. Halo and.. Ok, wait. The X-box has one or two ok exclusives (Halo and Gears of War are, above all else, sometimes fun.)
The best game for the x-box (in my opinion) is The Orange Box, and that is as much for Portal as Team Fortress or Half-Life. This box is also out for the PS3, but unfortunately for both is much better on the PC.

I have played a LOT of 360 and PS3 games (as an owner of both consoles. Well, my brother buys them, I play them when I wish) and can safely say that I have no affection for either console. Skate, I dug well enough I suppose... I have if front of me my playstation 2, with Shadow of the Collosus, Okami, Physconauts (?) Resident Evil 4, The Metal Gears, FFVIII (PS1 I know), Dark Chronicle - talk of RPG's?)and a host of others besides, that all play, invoke emotion and release little rockets of admiration in my mind for the game developers behind these gems.

I felt that way completing Portal. I completed MGS 4 and loved it, but I think the way the game was presented made me distrust it a bit (tying everything together relentlessly for example). LBP does look set to change all this, but my point is this: XBOX owners seem to feel they have this trump card of 'better' games. They're 95% s**t. Just like the PS3. They may have 100 more exclusives, a thousand more in-house games (though they don't) and the PS3 may return with ten times as many of everything some day and, in 95% of cases, it will all be s**t. (I am disregarding the Wii, as it rarely seems to enter the argument for one reason or another, and, regarding the handhelds- I do know just how many great games surround the DS.)

In a few years the XBOX and PS3 might astonish me, but for now they both lack any charm, originality or worth. Get over yourselves! you're paying money for shiny dildoes(?): they may be bigger, shinier, have more functions but inevitably they'll still f*ck you in the exact way the old one did; with a hollowness, a lack of caress and nothing to hold you after you've spent yourself (too much?). Substance, that's what you need, a good meaty... thing... that knows how to work you over, leave you breathless and actually (god forbid!) leave you wanting more!. Please, Pleease LBP, be the meaty member I need!

Ok, i've lost it...

Look he's (SS4) an idiot, an emabarassmant to any thinking 360 owner, and appears to be getting worse. But he's not incorrect at the moment as far as 360>PS3 in the games department, if for no other reason than the 360 had a bit of a lead time, its still got more, better games...once again, at the moment...

It depends on what you mean by "better".

According to MetaCritic, the 360 has 494 titles with an average score of 68.29. The PS3 has 231 titles with an average score of 71.35. The general quality of the PS3 library seems higher.

If you just look at titles that one platform has but the other doesn't, we get 339 titles with an average score of 66.38 on 360 and 76 titles with an average score of 71.46 on PS3. The PS3 exclusives seem to be of a higher quality too.

However, if we look at titles on both platforms, of which there are 155, the 360 has an average score of 72.45 and the PS3 has 71.30. So the 360 has a slight lead on multi-platform titles.

Of course, if you mean number of titles at 75% or higher, the 360 has 194 titles and the PS3 only has 108. So the 360 has more good titles to choose from. Of course having a larger library the 360 also has more awful games.

If it's of any use to anybody, I'm still recommending the 360 to friends who ask me for an opinion, but it's getting much closer and I'm spending more time comparing the two consoles for them.

I meant precisely what I said, I didn't allude to or reference crappy games, ratio's of good games to crappy games, nor average MetaCritic scores...but I suppose I could clarify...

360 has more (as in a number greater than) really good (better than crappy or average) games than the PS3.



75% seems low, merely "good", what do the numbers work out to at 80%? I'm gonna guess they actually trend more in the PS3's favor, though I could be wrong... (not that I'm accepting MetaCritic as anything, even if their numbers do appear to support my position.

It's funny isn't it? 70% is a first class honours bachelor's degree or a master's degree with distinction - both the highest classification that can be awarded, but it's just a "good" game. There is something seriously f**ked up with game reviews when that's the case. When Bourne Conspiracy or Timeshift - two of the most average games I've played - get 70% there is a seriously mis-weighted bell curve going on.

I mean; what are the scoring criteria? Is 0-50% based on the number of crashes, with 0% being reserved for games that won't run at all, then 50-100% is for the quality of the game?

It's seriously out of whack. We should be assuming the game will run and will be technically competent at least, then start scoring from 0%. If the game crashes during play, deduct points and give truly s**tty games negative scores.

Sorry Roi, this wasn't an attack on you, it's something that has been bubbling up for a while. You merely gave voice to the straw at a time I was willing to spout. :-)

In answer to your question, 80+% games: 360 has 120 and PS3 has 78.

Gotcha Force should have gotten at least 80% ratings just for the pure awesomeness of being shot at from every angle possible by small mech-like crittins.

Severly underrated game...Capcom, make a sequel!

Heh, well...

Over here 70% is a C- or D+. To your average American secondary school student, 75% is right in the meaty part of the bell curve, and represents pleasant mediocrity or worse, Asian kids have horrible things happen to them when they bring home a 75%. I know I wasn't impressed with myself if I got lower than a 92% (A-). But I think we've had this discussion before now, back when y'all went to percentages...

Please enlighten me as to how the percentage relates to the degree over there...

Christ knows... I missed one exam in my degree due to "food poisoning" and still ended up with a 2:1.

In terms of review scores. I have a theory. My theory is that if you give a game 98% then people who already want the game will love you and say you are Lester Bangs (well, they won't as they won't have heard of Lester Bangs who never gave review scores anyway, Ebert and his Sister did).

If, however, you give a game 50% people who already want the game will hate you and compare you to a lamer n00b and want to burn your family.

I am, in fact, planning to run a review consisting of 3,000 words. 90% of these will say, "This is a review of a video game". The remaining 10% will be the name of the game.

The score will be 92.12129%.

The majority of people will react to the review score.

I am being tired and cynical I know. But the damned review score argument is "Arghghghghghghgh!" at the best of times. Here's my new rating scheme.

0-10% - Shoot the person who gave this to you because you would surely not have bought it yourself.

11-20% - Beat the person who gave this... etc.

21-40% - Never speak to the... etc and so on.

41-50% - You might enjoy this piece of crap if you got it for free as a gift or as part of an incentive.

51-60% - If you love the genre, wait for it to go budget. It is clichéd, gives nothing to the genre; a cynical cash-in but the guy who did the audio/physics/gfx/script has some talent.

61-70% - If you love the genre, wait for it to go budget. It is clichéd but harks back to a more innocent time when games were about a bit'o fun and what is that new thing they've done with online/gfx/character interaction/shading?

71-80% - If you've not tried this sort of thing before, wait for budget release as this has more than shovelware going for it. It doesn't add to video gaming as a medium but it's a laugh. If you like this genre, then this is really worth a look especially with what they've done with... etc etc...

81-90% - This is worth a look if you've not played this kind of game before. If you have, then why don't you own it? Get someone you love to buy it for you or make it your second choice this period.

91-95% - Fun! Enjoyable. It is a video game worth playing. Embrace the person who gave this to you or give a copy to someone you want to have sex with.

96-100% - Cut people's arms off to get this game. It adds to the medium. It adds to your life. It is a must-own.

All that said, I'd vastly prefer people to actually read the bloody review. I'd then prefer a rating based on 1,2 or 3.

1 = Don't buy it or even be gifted it.

2 = Be gifted it and be pleased.

3 = Buy it and cherish it.

But I am in a foul mood.

Tim