Was last gen this slow early on?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Posted by CrashNBurn281 (436 posts) -

The only thing that I see that is a disappointment, is multiplats already becoming the main bulk of the games.

I was really hoping for new ips to push the next gen.

As far as the games are going from the get go, I think Sony stepped up their game, and Microsoft pretty much kept the standard.

What would you really expect from a consoles launch? It is only going to get better. If you tossed your last gen console for this gen so early, you really only have yourself to blame.

#52 Posted by HalcyonScarlet (5136 posts) -
@silversix_ said:

on 360 it was amazing. on ps3 i imagine it was equally shitty to current ps4/xbone

Yeah, there should have been more PC ports to consoles this gen for the launch year. It's a great filler and worked out well for the 360 even though it already had some decent games of its own.

#53 Posted by RimacBugatti (1632 posts) -

@Celtic_34:

This gen seems extremely slow because 4 months in and PS4 has no fighting or driving games. Very unusual for a gaming console launch.

#54 Posted by spaceninja818 (425 posts) -

Last gen was a bunch of overhyped games. Most multiplatform games looked and played worse on PS3 than 360 in the beginning, until PS3's exclusives started coming out. Although to be honest, the best way to enjoy games is to watch/read as little previews as possible before you get to play them. You won't be as disappointed when you play the final release.

#55 Posted by Suppaman100 (4331 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@locopatho said:

@evildead6789 said:

@locopatho said:

@evildead6789 said:

@DarthBilf said:

@evildead6789 said:

@DarthBilf said:

Eh, last gen was slow as well. It took the 360 a year to get its first definitive next gen exclusive, Gears of War, and it took the PS3 a year and a half with MGS4.

BS, mass effect was released as an exclusive in 2005... king kong was released when the x360 got released , the graphical difference was phenomenal. Of course, then a next gen console was really a next gen console, not this weak sauce xboxone & ps4

What? Mass Effect was 2007. King Kong was neither an exclusive nor a good game.

Whatever , oblivion was released in march 2006, we're march now too, this gen sucks balls

And Titanfall is releasing this March, with Elder Scrolls Online, Witcher 3, Dragon Age 3, Destiny, Metal Gear Solid V,the GODDAM BATMAN and many more incoming. Stop complaining, that's an amazing first year.

I'm not complaining, I don't mind this one bit, I'm all excited about VR , which is the next big thing, of course you need a pc for it.

I just answered the tc's question and I'm being realistic,

- titanfall, is just a generic fps shooter with titans and no actual innovation, it's the same as perfect dark zero that got a 9 when the x360 got released , six months later , the game looked as ugly as an 85 year old alcoholic.

- The elders scrolls online matches the graphics of 2006 on higher resolution, and with that price tag, i don't think so. It's just one of those other run of the mill mmo's with a big name, no one cares, only the biggest fans will play it, because they're die hard fans, as a game it sucks.

- dragon age 3 and the witcher: these are titles from previous gen they just want to milk out some more, that's not innovation, that grabbing for your wallet, have fun with these next-gen games

- more batman? dear lord

oh year and metal gear solid V: I'm so excited, more of the same rehashed bs

This gen brings nothing new to the table, you're buying it? good for you , i hope you have fun

Wow you're some miserable bastard. It always saddens me that some people convince themselves that EVERYTHING IS SHIT. Quit gaming if you are just gonna dismiss everything. "More Batman?" Yes more Batman, it was one of the best series last gen and it's gonna be cool to see what Rocksteady do on next gen. But I'm wasting my time typing this, you don't care.

Batman sucks, always sucks. Why you think i'm miserable, i'm hyped about dark souls II and the oculus rift, the virtuix omni.

But on the consoles, they're failing, and i pity people who play on consoles only because they're getting bs (in case you didn't notice not EVERYTHING is shit, only what's coming on the CONSOLES IS SHIT)

Nice for you batman, that you're having fun on your next gen console with 5 year old hardware.

Lol you're bashing on great franchises but are hyping gimmicks like oculus rift and virtuix omni? LMFAO!

Truth is that PC gaming has been dead for a long time, PC has become nothing more than an indie station these last years.

But hey if you have fun with gimmicks and marginally better graphics then LOL.

#56 Edited by LJS9502_basic (152313 posts) -

@OhSnapitz said:

..this gen is starting pretty slow... for the PS4. Ports and indie titles seem to be 90% of the overall library. However this is "par for the course" for a Sony console. They've never really had Great lineups at launch.

The XBO on the other hand seems to be firing on all cylinders. We'll just see how long it lasts.

Hahaha...the bias is strong. Both consoles are on the slow side.....though to be technical Sony has more games. Launches are never that exciting really.

#57 Edited by Gue1 (11257 posts) -

@SolidGame_basic said:

the ps3 launch was dreadfully slow.. I think it took like a good 2 years before getting a solid AAA game

that's only what the lems wanted to believe because the PS3 actually had a better launch than the X360 where all it had was DoA4 and COD2.

Resistance, Folklore, Heavenly Sword, Warhawk, Ratchet & Clank, Uncharted, MotorStorm, Tekken 5, MLB The Show, Ninja Gaiden Sigma, Time Crisis 4 all only on the first year. But the butthurt fanboys chose to ignore it to keep telling to themselves that the PS3 had no games.

#58 Posted by betamaxx83 (360 posts) -

Last generation was MUCH slower. You didn't have huge multiplatform titles like AC, BF, COD, they've made the transition a bit easier.

The 360 got it's AAA game during March with GRAW. If you think this was bad or slow, you should jump back a few generations to see how good you have it now.

#59 Posted by sukraj (23884 posts) -

baba de dare

#60 Posted by DarthBilf (1356 posts) -

@Gue1 said:

@SolidGame_basic said:

the ps3 launch was dreadfully slow.. I think it took like a good 2 years before getting a solid AAA game

that's only what the lems wanted to believe because the PS3 actually had a better launch than the X360 where all it had was DoA4 and COD2.

Resistance, Folklore, Heavenly Sword, Warhawk, Ratchet & Clank, Uncharted, MotorStorm, Tekken 5, MLB The Show, Ninja Gaiden Sigma, Time Crisis 4 all only on the first year. But the butthurt fanboys chose to ignore it to keep telling to themselves that the PS3 had no games.

The PS3 had no games. Many of the games you mention for the PS3 either suck or were ports, and you don't mention many 360 games which were at least as good.

#61 Edited by jsmoke03 (13136 posts) -

@ghostwarrior786 said:

i dont understand why early adopters are bit%hing so much, u all seen the game schedule m$/sony had for the next year or so before the launch so why are u complaining about the lack of games? u knew what u were buying into which is why i decided to wait until ps4 has a few games (uncharted/destiny/the order) which i am interested in before buying it. maybe some of those complaining should have made a more informed decision before purchase so they wouldnt have to complain

the biggest games usually release 1 year after console launches, just like last gen and the gen before that.

this. lol i think a lot of people expected cod and battlefield to tide them over for months.

its why you never trade in your consoles. i have fun with my ps4 and i dont regret it, but my ps3 and even my 360 gets more playtime right now.

im just waiting for infamous ss, watchdogs in may, mlb is going to be my game that gets me through the summer until dragon age comes out. then theres holiday games and 2015 games to look forward to

#62 Edited by commander (8624 posts) -

@locopatho said:

And wait, Titanfall and all the other next gen games are shitty and generic but you were praising fucking King Kong, a shoddy PS2 port, as proof of how awesome last gen was? WTF?

King kong was build for the x360, then ported to the pc and downgraded for the rest of the platforms. It only got such a bad score on gamespot because there was probably one of their less reliable reviewers at work.

It got 77 from metacritic and 7.8 average for user reviews. If it didn't had such steep hardware requirements for the pc it would have gotten a better score but the x360 was so strong when it was released that pc's at that time simply couldn't keep up, well some could but you needed top of the line hardware. Hardware that costed around 1000-1500$, the pc base was much bigger then too. The reason so many gamers jumped on the console wagon is because the consoles were so strong and if you wanted the same hardware in the pc, you needed to pay 3 times the price or more, which was for the most us, too expensive.

You're talking about titanfall, but the x360 got f.e.a.r which was way more revolutionary than titanfall will ever be. It used real-time physics, was a huge bump in graphical quality, had a splended single player campaign and excellent multiplayer. Titanfally may be a good game and be innovative on gameplay as a multiplayer shooter, but f.e.a.r was innovative on everything, graphics, physics, gameplay, story. Not to mention it came out when the console was released.

And around the 4-5 months after release of the new console (which is like the same time now) oblivion came out. Which was one of the biggest releases in the history of the x360.

So yes in comparison this gen is weak, and it's the weakest in console history, just like the hardware.

#63 Posted by AzatiS (8015 posts) -

@OhSnapitz said:

..this gen is starting pretty slow... for the PS4. Ports and indie titles seem to be 90% of the overall library. However this is "par for the course" for a Sony console. They've never really had Great lineups at launch.

The XBO on the other hand seems to be firing on all cylinders. We'll just see how long it lasts.

What the heck are you talking about ...

How Xbone firing on all cylinders compared to PS4 ? Because of Titanfall or what the heck you talking about ?!! .... Both having subpar titles as of now with very very few exceptions.

#64 Edited by speedfog (3341 posts) -

@mems_1224 said:

This gen is just like last gen. xbone already has some great games to play and the ps4 has nothing this year. time is a flat circle.

This, it will be last gen all over again.

#65 Posted by I_can_haz (6511 posts) -

@speedfog said:

@mems_1224 said:

This gen is just like last gen. xbone already has some great games to play and the ps4 has nothing this year. time is a flat circle.

This, it will be last gen all over again.

With Xbone blowing its load early and PS4 games winning all the critical acclaim and GOTY awards? This is very good then.

#66 Posted by Pikminmaniac (9370 posts) -

It's a slow start for the PS4 especially, but the games will come eventually.

Meanwhile the Wii U has been releasing very strong software over the past year (some that even contend with the very best of last gen already) and it looks to continue this year. For now it's the best option. That's until 3rd party starts exclusively working on Xbox One and PS4.

#67 Edited by UnbiasedPoster (1132 posts) -

I love how everyone is implying the One is swimming in games.

Only thing worth noting is a F2P racer and a last gen multiplat. I know its an upswing compared to what MS usually offers, but let's get real guys.

#68 Posted by highking_kallor (594 posts) -

@OhSnapitz said:

The XBO on the other hand seems to be firing on all cylinders. We'll just see how long it lasts.

Good one.

#69 Edited by Ballroompirate (23697 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

Slower. 2007 is when things really picked up. The Xbox 360 had Gears of War to start off but then entered a pretty nasty drought until 2007. Sony fumbled the launch of the PS3 pretty badly and it took them until 2008 to ramp up the exclusives. 2007 was the year where multiplats basically assumed dominance on gaming.

Spot on, the first two years last gen were horrible and boring. I don't think I can even name 5 games worth getting between the 360 and PS3 the first two years of gen 7.

#70 Posted by mariokart64fan (19667 posts) -

the wii had some good games at launch but ya the 360 did start slow saints row test drive unlimited condemned and burnout revenge were its best games around the launch window

#71 Edited by Ribstaylor1 (1441 posts) -

To the guy who made this thread. This launch of consoles is actually a major step up from what was released the first two years of both the 360 and ps3.

#72 Posted by Mozelleple112 (6701 posts) -

@SolidGame_basic said:

the ps3 launch was dreadfully slow.. I think it took like a good 2 years before getting a solid AAA game

What? That's just stupidity. Metal Gear Solid 4 game out summer of 2008. It took the PS3 just over a year to get an outstanding AAAA game (something the 360, PC, Xbox, XO, GC, Wii-U, and many more consoles have yet to do)

#73 Edited by ButDuuude (566 posts) -

Last gen was slower. The Xbox 360 had nothing interesting until Gears of War was launched.

#74 Posted by tonitorsi (8613 posts) -

@SolidTy said:

I think every system at launch blows, and I'm there every gen. People just don't notice as they were too young and create the same threads every new generation.

Dat memory.

#75 Posted by Minishdriveby (10383 posts) -

It was slow enough to not pay attention to the new generation for the first couple of years, just like this generation. What's coming after Titanfall and inFamous? Anything for the rest of the year that we know about?

#76 Edited by SolidTy (45771 posts) -

@tonitorsi said:

@SolidTy said:

I think every system at launch blows, and I'm there every gen. People just don't notice as they were too young and create the same threads every new generation.

Dat memory.

Memory in SW?

*glances around*

#77 Edited by Minishdriveby (10383 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@treedoor said:

I'd be really sad if I were a cow right now. PS4 is a desolate wasteland when it comes to interesting exclusives out now, or on the horizon.

If you want to do some next-gen gaming your best bet right now would be a PC, 3DS, Wii U, or Xbox One.

I wouldn't say a wii u though, that's even worse

I would disagree with this statement at the moment.

#78 Edited by tonitorsi (8613 posts) -

@SolidTy said:

@tonitorsi said:

@SolidTy said:

I think every system at launch blows, and I'm there every gen. People just don't notice as they were too young and create the same threads every new generation.

Dat memory.

Memory in SW?

*glances around*

Its all gone...all gone with the wind, my King.

#79 Posted by _Matt_ (9360 posts) -

7th gen started equally slow, cross gen ports and all.

#80 Posted by locopatho (20798 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@locopatho said:

And wait, Titanfall and all the other next gen games are shitty and generic but you were praising fucking King Kong, a shoddy PS2 port, as proof of how awesome last gen was? WTF?

King kong was build for the x360, then ported to the pc and downgraded for the rest of the platforms. It only got such a bad score on gamespot because there was probably one of their less reliable reviewers at work.

It got 77 from metacritic and 7.8 average for user reviews. If it didn't had such steep hardware requirements for the pc it would have gotten a better score but the x360 was so strong when it was released that pc's at that time simply couldn't keep up, well some could but you needed top of the line hardware. Hardware that costed around 1000-1500$, the pc base was much bigger then too. The reason so many gamers jumped on the console wagon is because the consoles were so strong and if you wanted the same hardware in the pc, you needed to pay 3 times the price or more, which was for the most us, too expensive.

You're talking about titanfall, but the x360 got f.e.a.r which was way more revolutionary than titanfall will ever be. It used real-time physics, was a huge bump in graphical quality, had a splended single player campaign and excellent multiplayer. Titanfally may be a good game and be innovative on gameplay as a multiplayer shooter, but f.e.a.r was innovative on everything, graphics, physics, gameplay, story. Not to mention it came out when the console was released.

And around the 4-5 months after release of the new console (which is like the same time now) oblivion came out. Which was one of the biggest releases in the history of the x360.

So yes in comparison this gen is weak, and it's the weakest in console history, just like the hardware.

You're just stuck in the past. King Kong was a decent movie tie in game. FEAR was good for gunplay but horribly boring and repetitive in levels and enemies. There's far better games incoming this gen.

How is it that every sequel I named you dismissed but an Elder Scrolls sequel was the best thing ever last gen?

#81 Posted by Minishdriveby (10383 posts) -

@ButDuuude: Not exactly true.

Kameo Nov.2005
Elder Scrolls IV March 2006
Dead Rising Aug.2006
and then Gears in Nov.2006
It's not much to buy a console for, but there were a couple worthwhile games before gears during it during the first year.

XboxOne:
Dead Rising 3
Forza (I guess the giant bomb guys hated it)
TitanFall
Killer instinct (is that supposedly good?)

PS4:
Killzone
Infamous
(Although it has a lot more tentative titles announced that I'm excited for in the coming years)


Not sure if anything else is coming out that is exclusively next generation this year besides Batman; I'm trying to avoid cross-generational releases on this list.

#82 Posted by SolidTy (45771 posts) -

@tonitorsi said:

@SolidTy said:

@tonitorsi said:

@SolidTy said:

I think every system at launch blows, and I'm there every gen. People just don't notice as they were too young and create the same threads every new generation.

Dat memory.

Memory in SW?

*glances around*

Its all gone...all gone with the wind, my King.

Gone with the wind...like a puff of air.

#83 Edited by tonitorsi (8613 posts) -

@SolidTy said:

@tonitorsi said:

@SolidTy said:

Memory in SW?

*glances around*

Its all gone...all gone with the wind, my King.

Gone with the wind...like a puff of air.

Truer words were never written, my liege.

Puff of air, and everything.

#84 Edited by SolidTy (45771 posts) -

@Minishdriveby said:

@ButDuuude: Not exactly true.

Kameo Nov.2005

Elder Scrolls IV March 2006


XboxOne:


Killer instinct(is that supposedly good?)

PS4:

Killzone

Infamous

(Although it has a lot more tentative titles announced that I'm excited for in the coming years)

Not sure if anything else is coming out that is exclusively next generation this year besides Batman; I'm trying to avoid cross-generational releases on this list.

If you put in Killer Instinct (7/10), which was a DD title, that should open the floodgates for PS4 exclusive DD game Resogun (8/10) and various other DD games on the PS4/Xbone side.

#85 Edited by Minishdriveby (10383 posts) -

That's true I forgot to add resogun. Most of the PS4 stuff are ports from PC indie games which I bought a year or two ago which is why I wasn't including many of the digital download offerings from the PS4. I should have added Resogun though which is an exclusive. If you can think of anymore that would be great.

I heard good things about Killer Instinct which can't be said for Crimson Dragon (another DD Xbox One game which was excluded from the list).

#86 Edited by clr84651 (5545 posts) -

Last gen was slow too. Resistance Fall of Man was the only good game for many months.

#87 Posted by clr84651 (5545 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

Slower. 2007 is when things really picked up. The Xbox 360 had Gears of War to start off but then entered a pretty nasty drought until 2007. Sony fumbled the launch of the PS3 pretty badly and it took them until 2008 to ramp up the exclusives. 2007 was the year where multiplats basically assumed dominance on gaming.

It happens with every release of new consoles & we still get people that buy them at launch & act all disappointed that there's not many new games for months. I'll never understand the behavior.

#88 Edited by sandbox3d (5136 posts) -
@SolidTy said:

I think every system at launch blows, and I'm there every gen. People just don't notice as they were too young and create the same threads every new generation.

Overall, sure. A system with a small library does blow.

However, last gens launch window was easily the worst to date and this gen is looking to be similar thus far.

Consoles used to launch with a killer app either day 1 or within the launch window. Then about 3 to 6 months in, other quality exclusive titles start popping up. It's really not the same these days. I could list examples from previous generations, but if you've been gaming as long as you say then you should already know.

It's understandable of course. Game development these days is a much more involving process. A studio can spend just as much time getting their engine up and running as it used to take for them to develop an entire game. You just don't see major hit titles within a year of release like we used to back in the day with series like FF, MGS, Zelda, etc..

These days it takes a console a year or more to look even remotely worth while. Back then a console would be firing on all cylinders 1 year in.

#89 Posted by widdowson91 (1238 posts) -

Gen 7 was really slow off the mark. It always felt to me like Microsoft launched the Xbox 360 too early, and nothing for it at launch was compelling enough to make me want one straight away. But because my Dad loved the first Xbox he got a 360 as soon as he could. Even my fanaticism for Rare at the time (something which has since disappeared thanks to their recent games) wasn't enough for me personally, despite Kameo and Perfect Dark Zero.

#90 Posted by locopatho (20798 posts) -

@sandbox3d said:
@SolidTy said:

I think every system at launch blows, and I'm there every gen. People just don't notice as they were too young and create the same threads every new generation.

Overall, sure. A system with a small library does blow.

However, last gens launch window was easily the worst to date and this gen is looking to be similar thus far.

Consoles used to launch with a killer app either day 1 or within the launch window. Then about 3 to 6 months in, other quality exclusive titles start popping up. It's really not the same these days. I could list examples from previous generations, but if you've been gaming as long as you say then you should already know.

It's understandable of course. Game development these days is a much more involving process. A studio can spend just as much time getting their engine up and running as it used to take for them to develop an entire game. You just don't see major hit titles within a year of release like we used to back in the day with series like FF, MGS, Zelda, etc..

These days it takes a console a year or more to look even remotely worth while. Back then a console would be firing on all cylinders 1 year in.

How is Wii launching with Wii Sports and Zelda, and 360 with Kameo, Perfect Dark, COD2, Project Gotham 3, Condemned, and Oblivion a few months later "the worst" launch window? I just don't understand what you guys standards are. If a bunch of AA and AAA games aren't good enough, what are you exp[ecting?

#91 Edited by commander (8624 posts) -

@locopatho said:

@evildead6789 said:

@locopatho said:

And wait, Titanfall and all the other next gen games are shitty and generic but you were praising fucking King Kong, a shoddy PS2 port, as proof of how awesome last gen was? WTF?

King kong was build for the x360, then ported to the pc and downgraded for the rest of the platforms. It only got such a bad score on gamespot because there was probably one of their less reliable reviewers at work.

It got 77 from metacritic and 7.8 average for user reviews. If it didn't had such steep hardware requirements for the pc it would have gotten a better score but the x360 was so strong when it was released that pc's at that time simply couldn't keep up, well some could but you needed top of the line hardware. Hardware that costed around 1000-1500$, the pc base was much bigger then too. The reason so many gamers jumped on the console wagon is because the consoles were so strong and if you wanted the same hardware in the pc, you needed to pay 3 times the price or more, which was for the most us, too expensive.

You're talking about titanfall, but the x360 got f.e.a.r which was way more revolutionary than titanfall will ever be. It used real-time physics, was a huge bump in graphical quality, had a splended single player campaign and excellent multiplayer. Titanfally may be a good game and be innovative on gameplay as a multiplayer shooter, but f.e.a.r was innovative on everything, graphics, physics, gameplay, story. Not to mention it came out when the console was released.

And around the 4-5 months after release of the new console (which is like the same time now) oblivion came out. Which was one of the biggest releases in the history of the x360.

So yes in comparison this gen is weak, and it's the weakest in console history, just like the hardware.

You're just stuck in the past. King Kong was a decent movie tie in game. FEAR was good for gunplay but horribly boring and repetitive in levels and enemies. There's far better games incoming this gen.

How is it that every sequel I named you dismissed but an Elder Scrolls sequel was the best thing ever last gen?

I'm stuck in the past? what kind of answer is that, we're comparing gens here. Generations do happen in different timeframes, or are you talking about generations in a parrallel universe...

Of course if you put the two gens next to each other , this gen will be better just like cars get better over time. It's called progress.

And in terms of progress, there's hardly any innovation this gen, they just want to milk out (the very successfull) last gen a bit more. The next gen consoles have 5 year old hardware in them and previous gen started 8 years ago. New things we got last gen was a big jump in graphics overall, much better 3d models, hd, real world psychics, new gameplay mechanics and much bigger games with much bigger storylines and more attention to detail. This time we got nothing and I doubt there will be coming something , maybe for VR but as it seems now , the pc is the only system that will run that decently.

King kong may not have been the best example but it was way more spectacular (for that time) than everything released this gen. It set new standards just like F.e.a.r set new standards and oblivion set new standards. Of course, you compare them with todays games you can say those games aren't good, they're old games. But at the time of release games like Fear and oblivion were revolutionary. King kong may not have been so revolutionary but it did show a big jump in graphics over games released in the previous gen.

The sequels you're talking about don't bring anything new to the table, that's not such a bad thing when it happens in the same generation but last gen was already way overdue and when finally the next gen consoles get released they use 5 year old hardware and only games that are rehashes of an old formula with slightly better graphics.

#92 Posted by sandbox3d (5136 posts) -

@locopatho said:

@sandbox3d said:
@SolidTy said:

I think every system at launch blows, and I'm there every gen. People just don't notice as they were too young and create the same threads every new generation.

Overall, sure. A system with a small library does blow.

However, last gens launch window was easily the worst to date and this gen is looking to be similar thus far.

Consoles used to launch with a killer app either day 1 or within the launch window. Then about 3 to 6 months in, other quality exclusive titles start popping up. It's really not the same these days. I could list examples from previous generations, but if you've been gaming as long as you say then you should already know.

It's understandable of course. Game development these days is a much more involving process. A studio can spend just as much time getting their engine up and running as it used to take for them to develop an entire game. You just don't see major hit titles within a year of release like we used to back in the day with series like FF, MGS, Zelda, etc..

These days it takes a console a year or more to look even remotely worth while. Back then a console would be firing on all cylinders 1 year in.

How is Wii launching with Wii Sports and Zelda, and 360 with Kameo, Perfect Dark, COD2, Project Gotham 3, Condemned, and Oblivion a few months later "the worst" launch window? I just don't understand what you guys standards are. If a bunch of AA and AAA games aren't good enough, what are you exp[ecting?

I'm using the word 'worst' comparatively. And I'm not expecting anything.

My post is fairly straight forward so I'd rather not repeat myself just to answer your questions.

#93 Posted by foxhound_fox (90618 posts) -

The PS3 was slower than this gen, but the 360 and Wii were getting some good quality stuff early on. The former from both first and third parties, the latter mostly from first party.

The PS4 is turning into another delaystation, with the only good thing coming out from now till September (Destiny) being inFAMOUS. Almost all the stuff cows were yelling about before launch has either come out and been yawn-worthy, or is being delayed (for no real apparent reason given the much more simplified architecture and cross-platform compatibility, making the developer's jobs way easier).

At this point, if the Bone were the same price as the PS4, I'd get a Bone. It has more things on it I'd be interested in playing (Forza 5 and Titanfall).

#94 Posted by legendofsense (114 posts) -

With Dark Souls 2, ill gladly let my PS4 collect dust.

#95 Posted by Midnightshade29 (5537 posts) -

@Gue1 said:

@SolidGame_basic said:

the ps3 launch was dreadfully slow.. I think it took like a good 2 years before getting a solid AAA game

that's only what the lems wanted to believe because the PS3 actually had a better launch than the X360 where all it had was DoA4 and COD2.

Resistance, Folklore, Heavenly Sword, Warhawk, Ratchet & Clank, Uncharted, MotorStorm, Tekken 5, MLB The Show, Ninja Gaiden Sigma, Time Crisis 4 all only on the first year. But the butthurt fanboys chose to ignore it to keep telling to themselves that the PS3 had no games.

Pretty much this. I know i had a blast on PS3 early on, and the lems on this site were railing in droves about "no games" it was pure BS, but they had the stupid biased media on their side. Thank god M$ goofed last e3, as that shut up a bit of the bias that was happening in American based games media. Now things are in a much better state.

It's funny how lems always forget that Infamous is releasing NEXT WEEK!!!

Also not every game needs to be exclusive, i play multiplats all the time nad last gen the lems favored them.. Just because a game is on last gen console and or pc doesn't mean it's not playable, or better on next gen. I am playing thief (which got underatted imo), AC4, Bf4, Strider, Zen pinball 2, Dead Nation, Killzone, warframe, war thunder, and dcuo all on ps4.. I still play my other systems too, vita, Ps3, PC, 3ds...

#96 Edited by stuff238 (936 posts) -

PS3 had an awesome first year. Anyone who says other wise never owned the console. I bought it at launch and we had Resistance, Eye of Judgement, Ninja Gaiden, Folklore, Motorstorm, Heavenly Sword, MLB the show, Lair(gets too much hate), Oblivion and Uncharted in the first year. We also of course had other 3rd party games like Ass creed, guitar hero, CoD and a million sports games.

2008 continued with more great Sony exclusives like MGS4, Hot Shots Golf 5, LittleBigPlanet etc.

I hate xbox fanboys. You never owned a PS3 the first year so you don't understand that we had a ton of exclusive games and you constantly ignore them. You like to pretend the PS3 didn't have a game until MGS4 landed. Your ignorance infuriates me.

#97 Posted by delta3074 (18819 posts) -

@Celtic_34 said:

Seemed like there was a lot more hype and new ips but maybe I'm wrong. What games are you anticipating for the ps4 and xbone? It seems like just more of the same with better graphics and just a nicer console. Almost like upgrading your pc. Reminds me of the ps2 at first after the ps1 although the ps2 went on to be the best console ever probably. Been reading up on upcoming games in 2015 and beyond and there really is nothing announced.

At least I really like my ps4 and it does everything I want it to. Just waiting for the games. I kind of like the lack of hype though. Last gen was a bunch of nonsense.

yep.

#98 Posted by RimacBugatti (1632 posts) -

I think the companies wait to see how the consoles move at launch before they decide on new titles except for the launch titles ofcourse. Not to mention some of these companies are making games with money they don't have. We should be very grateful that these companies are still trying. There really isn't a lot of companies making a lot of money right now. The cost involved in making these games is ridiculous. And speaking of PC gaming. There isn't a lot of games that warrant spending $4000 on a rig. Yeah it's fun to build but all that power and nothing to do with it. Build servers I guess.

#99 Edited by Farsendor1 (431 posts) -

@Minishdriveby said:

That's true I forgot to add resogun. Most of the PS4 stuff are ports from PC indie games which I bought a year or two ago which is why I wasn't including many of the digital download offerings from the PS4. I should have added Resogun though which is an exclusive. If you can think of anymore that would be great.

I heard good things about Killer Instinct which can't be said for Crimson Dragon (another DD Xbox One game which was excluded from the list).

DC universe is a great game.

#100 Posted by KillzoneSnake (1863 posts) -

This gen is going faster. When i bought PS3 it was a paper weight, and 2 years later wow! PS4 is already getting Ground Zeroes and soon The Evil Within :)