Again, I’m not a gamer. At all. I play Halo, Star Wars, Batman, and a few other games here and there. It’s just tough for me to get into video games usually, especially the old Nintendo games blah. Boring, yet filled with nostalgia for so many. I’d rather read a book than play most games.

XBOX has been hugely successful because multiplayer games introduce a longevity to games that PS3 apparently doesn’t focus on. Once you beat a single player / story game, how often do you go back and play it again? For most people, I’d say quite rarely.

Also, I don’t even own CoD or Halo, but I have about half of the other games listed by Alex Baldwin.

The main reason I refuse to buy a PS3 is because that branch of Sony is a TERRIBLE company. They make some of the crappiest hardware (worked for a company that took in consoles for repair, and the number of PS2s that were brought in was about 10x more than Xbox / Gamecube combined), and have some of the worst programmers ever (how the hell do you even remotely let storing passwords in plaintext slip through to production?). I remember when the PSP came out they knowingly shipped the system with a defect that would cause one of the buttons to stop working because it was too close to the screen, and they didn’t do anything about it.

I started laughing hysterically when I read that. When was the last time the 360 had an exclusive game that everyone was talking about?

War of flame may it rein for eternity

Bottom
line is, I think the numbers showing the success of the Xbox over the
last 24 months are a bit inflated as it’s being used under the
assumption that the Xbox has somehow gotten more popular, when the
reality is that Microsoft has been using extreme marketing techniques to
get the console into more people’s hands than normal. Had I not been
given one with the purchase of a laptop I was going to buy anyway, then I
wouldn’t be counting toward this “success”.

I will say that, as a gamer, there are not many good RPGs, platformers, or frankly any other genre than FPS on the 360, but in the realm of FPS, Microsoft rules supreme. And America is, guess what, obsessed with FPS, generally speaking. Not necessarily a good or bad thing, but our culture does revolve pretty heavily on guns and shooting, so of course the system with the best guns and shooting is going to do better.

And while the people who may play FPS (and yes Gears is a third-person, but I lump it together with Halo and COD anyway) play longer, they are not what I would consider a hardcore gamer. That’s like saying someone who only watches action films is a movie buff/connoisseur. Sure they may be passionate, and are well versed in what they know, but to me at least, a hardcore gamer plays more titles than Halo, COD, Gears, and maybe Madden. A hardcore gamer plays EVERYTHING, from FPS (Halo, COD) to RPG (Final Fantasy, Legend of Zelda, Dark Souls) and platformer (Mario, Jak and Daxter), and everything else in between. As such, most hardcore gamers, I’ve noticed, are either PC gamers, or own multiple systems/platforms.

Iv’e never understood the allure of separate internet tv sets-they can’t play games like consoles, and the console can’t really do internet well either.

I don’t think people can offer great opinions about games if they don’t play some of the generations best titles, and for a fact, Uncharted, and MGS: 4 are included.

I listed these two as they are exclusives. Others I could add are Dragon Age: Origins, the Mass Effect trilogy, Halo, God of War series, GTA: 4 and of course others.

If you were to work for a place like (lets hypothesize here) gameinformer, and you told them that you hadn’t played any of the games I just mentioned there is no way you would get the job.

I’m just saying that you have to be diversified. Also I was pointing out that a majority of this generations masterpieces released exclusively on the PS3, and shouldn’t be passed up by any gaming enthusiast.

And by the way, neither game is a button masher. If you play the games on the hardest difficulty, I bet money you will be thoroughly challenged. Just because you occasionally press a button for a sequence doesn’t mean the entire game is made up of it.

And they don’t charge PC gamers to play online.

Wake up. MS has you so convinced that you NEED to pay them for a quality online experience, when nothing could be further from the truth. They are extorting money from you. Nothing more.

So if we don’t play games where developers hold our hand and tell us when “press X to win” we are not well educated in gaming?

Try again mate.

I don’t mean to troll you here. But that’s a pretty offensive statement.

How about the Witcher 2? Deus Ex: HR? Minecraft? EVE Online? Some pretty sophisticated games aimed at thinking people there. And very little hand holding among them.

Might want to rethink your stance there.

Marketing.

Both the XBOX and the PC are far and away inferior to the PC as gaming platforms. They lag behind PC not by one, but by many, “generations” in terms of tech. Neither can even come close to graphics, frame rates or processing power.

But Microsoft has everyone believing the XBOX is superior in terms of quality to the PS3 because they market more aggressively. No. Other. Reason exists for this. The PS3 has better graphic fidelity and more processing power than the XBOX. Sony does not extort money from people just to “allow” them to play online. The PS3 is in every way superior to the XBOX – except, it is no longer marketed.

Which would matter. If the PC were not worlds ahead of both platforms. The games are cheaper, with regulars sales throughout the year. The modular nature means we can keep a PC updated and up to date – ourselves – for years. Sure the up front cost is higher – but the benefits pay for themselves over time.

But you would never know that, thanks for the MS marketing machine.