[Harry]

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. So for a 2 year advance on a now delayed PS3 release, what has Xbox 360 really given me. Nothing I can't get on a PC and nothing I can't wait a short time for on the PS3. NOTE" Meaning nothing I need to open up my wallet for to get an entire system and that game.

JJ, I think the same. The Xbox 360 introduced nothing new to the industry. It "feels" like an upgraded Xbox because it doesn't offer something really different from its predecessor. About Sports games, I admit I have just watched others playing them, and while some left me unimpressed, others looked sleek. Anyhow, Carlito was complaining a lot about some of the things you mentioned, in particular the awful AI and the awkward controls. 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. But after all, I suppose it is just me not liking Microsoft's way of intending videogames - for example, I have always hated Halo and Halo 2, for many good reasons.

Originally Posted by kupoartist

I think one thing to keep in mind is that what went last generation isn't applicable here though. The X-Box became a machine filled with marginally different PS2 ports not because it was a worse machine than the PS2, but a machine with a smaller user base. 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.

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.

Anyhow, as you said, I should go back to the topic of this thread. In addition to the delay in the launch of the console, which is an insult to European gamers that Sony should have avoided at all costs, European players are also lucky enough to have to pay more, MUCH more for their consoles. The $1 = Euro 1 conversion is an insult, but the price in countries outside the Eurozone is criminal. And if this is (maybe) justified in countries that are much richer than the average in Europe, like Norway or Sweden, there is no reason for a PlayStation 3 to cost something like $810 in UK.