[merylsilverburg]

Originally Posted by jjmoohead

Finally, I am not saying that the PS3 will release and not do the same thing, but only 6 months after realease I can see about 10 quality games I am looking forward to and by next Christmas (baring any delays in 3rd party software) I can easily see myself with a 20 game collection.

Wow, really? You must have varied taste because I'm looking at the game list on Wikipedia (yes, I know it’s probably not comprehensive or accurate) and I hardly see anything that interests me. Most of the titles are all sequels again (not that's it's a bad thing otherwise I would have to start dissing off MGS4) and it seems a lot of the titles are very MMORPG-ish (which is like what the Xbox and 360 have) or very blah action-adventure titles. I was really hoping for some new and refreshing games, being that it's a next-gen console.

Originally Posted by dan da man

I don’t even own any sports title on the 360 yet it still gives me next gen gaming guess I‘ll have to name a few titles worth purchasing the 360 because I’m not a sports game fan. Condemned, Kameo, PGR3, Perfect Dark Zero, Dead Rising, Oblivion, Saints row, Enchanted Arms, just a few games in my collection that blow my mind away

I saw an advertisement/commercial for Saints Row on TV and it looks rather, well, like a GTA-copy. So, how does it exactly entail next-gen gaming? The other titles I don't know much about but a buddy of mine's reviews of some of those games say they're pretty good. However, they still don't really "wow" me even though some of the concepts are interesting.

Originally Posted by dan da man

Being massively overpriced, big and ugly, c’mon we like our £475 gadgets to at least look nice, same ps2 pad which is god awful for FPS, and then fair enough it’s a blue ray player so you get that for your money but nah I’ll stick to HD thanks, I don’t see Blue ray beating HD anyway.

What you said here is really just based on your own preferences though. Personally, I don't think the PS3 is "big and ugly" compared to the 360...sure, the 360 may not be big (anymore) but the design isn't really to my taste. It looks like a slimmer version of that piece of hardware of a home PC (sorry, I don't know the term). As for the controllers, is it really fair to accuse because most of the placements on each console's controllers are similar now...they don't have such massive differences IMO. But if you want to gripe about the PS3's same design which is bad for FPS, then I really think it's all about getting used to it. For example, the 360's placement is similar to the Xbox's. The controllers are only smaller. So would I be able to function better playing FPSs with the 360 controller? I don’t really know, but I had a lot of trouble when I was playing Halo on Xbox for the first time because I couldn't get used to the awkwardness of the settings. Eventually I got used to it, but that's the point I'm making: I think it's really a matter of getting used to, not because a certain placement is worse than the other (except for a few exceptions).

Originally Posted by kupoartist

Not that I can imagine the Wii with any more than a handful of particuarly exciting FPS games

The Wii, or Nintendo in general, never seemed like an FPS-type anyway, at least to me. I think they fit the 3rd-person or party game style better, which is fine. Even though I agree the controller would make good use of FPS games.

Originally Posted by Harry

What I meant when I said "it is good if you like Sports games" is simply that all action/adventure titles available for the system right now are second-rate games, that disappear in comparison with PlayStation 2 games like God Of War, Shadow Of The Colossus, Mark Of Kri, and so on.

Well, I could imagine God of War on the Xbox/360, but that's another story. What you said is a reason why I dislike the 360 because it seems like it's only worth the value if you like sports games, since it seems sports games are the greatest asset to the console (of course, with what jj said, it doesn’t seem like that anymore). Even though certain action/adventure titles, like Condemned or Dead Rising, sound interesting, most of the games are really just "okay" to me. Of course, if Shenmue 3 ever decides to make its appearance, this game might be the only one that I would buy a 360. I know, it's a stupid reason, but I really like this series and I'm hoping they'd complete it.

Originally Posted by Harry

All true, even though I do not agree when you say the difference between the Xbox and PlayStation came just from the smaller user base behind the Xbox. There is much more than that, in my opinion. This is a subject I'd like to talk about in more detail, but in general, what I mean is that while the biggest portion of sotware sales often come from generic titles, there are a few games that really "define" the aura, the "soul" of a game console. The PlayStation 2 and the Xbox had a lot of games in common, but the Xbox could have never had games like ICO, Shadow Of The Colossus, Dark Cloud, Konami's Shadow Of Destiny, and many, many others, simply because Microsoft doesn't have the "sensibility" to develop or promote this kind of titles. Sony has the great strength of being a Japanese-American company, and I am sorry to say that with few glaring exceptions, Japanese do it better. Their creative freedom, the unique way in which they mix elements from different cultures, the extraordinary depth behind a lot of their games... Sony will lose the battle if they start to rely only on the North American market AND culture, because nobody can beat Microsoft at home. And I am not speaking just of sales (which are unimportant to me), but of the quality of the games offered to the players.

This mirrors what I quoted from you above and I completely agree, so there’s no need for me to add on. But, I just want to say that certain US developed games do have a strong point that I think the Japanese wouldn’t be able to come up with or develop. That is, I think the Japanese have sort of a problem when it comes to pure freedom/independence. Like, what many of the RPGs or certain games developed for the Xbox/360 (like Fable or Star Wars: KOTOR) contain is, the freedom to choose your own life or story or path. Also, choosing what you look like, what you want to be, etc. I think this stems from the culture difference (obviously) that most Americans or whatnot are a bit more independent than the Japanese. This ability is a good thing because players can really use their creativity or choose to "be in the game" by living out their fantasy image with all the freedom given from these customizable games. Japan, on the other hand, has a very "group mentality" mindset (like all Asian countries, really), so that’s why most of their games are really tightly wounded. However, I believe it's for this reason why the chemistry between the game characters, as well as the game to the player, is much more realistic or in-depth. These differences are probably what contributes to the lack of "soul" in Xbox's games...because of the inability to portray genuine feeling or the inability to emotionally connect with the player. This is my opinion.

Originally Posted by kupoartist

Sony doesn't have that advantage anymore, and the 360 user-base isn't to be scoffed at. If the PS3 hasn't sold impressive enough numbers this time next year (and lets face it, the 360 is going to be unchallanged for ANOTHER christmas rush in Europe and in shortage everywhere else) developers are going to be putting their resources into Xbox 360 development and not investing in PS3 ports. They need to make money after all.

I agree. There are a lot more fans behind the 360 now which I think partly comes from the advantage of being released first in the "console war." I sometimes wonder though, that if the PS3 were released first, would the 360 have garnered up the adequate fanbase that they have now? Or is it really the games that made people fans of the 360? Or is it just the appeal of owning the first "next gen console" first?