Sony pretty much saved gaming this generation

  • 182 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for mrintro
mrintro

1354

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#1 mrintro
Member since 2004 • 1354 Posts

Xbox did pretty well in the beginning, but soon fizzled out. I would say the Xbox's legacy would be Xbox Live cause that really changed the game (pun intended) and pretty much was the predecessor to PS+. Wii will be remembered for successfully implementing motion controls into gaming. However, Sony has been spanking everybody with their games. I mean, damn, Last of Us, Puppeteer & Beyond Two Souls (all AAAEs) in just a matter of 4 months. There's also Ni No Kuni, another AAAE that came at the beginning of this year. Other 2013 Sony exclusives this year include God of War Ascension, Tales of Xillia, Kingdom Hearts Remix 1.5, Disgaea D2, Gran Turismo 6, Dust 514, and the upcoming Ratchet & Clank. And that's just 2013!! All I gotta say is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyEE0qpfeig

Avatar image for DarkLink77
DarkLink77

32731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#2 DarkLink77
Member since 2004 • 32731 Posts

Sony didn't save shit, because nothing failed. It did, however, take them three years to make their console worth a damn. Thank God that waiting period is over.

Avatar image for lundy86_4
lundy86_4

61427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#3 lundy86_4
Member since 2003 • 61427 Posts

@DarkLink77 said:

Sony didn't save shit, because nothing failed. It did, however, take them three years to make their console worth a damn. Thank God that waiting period is over.

Avatar image for ladyblue
LadyBlue

4943

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5  Edited By LadyBlue
Member since 2012 • 4943 Posts

They all brought something that helped. You'd be a fanatical to say otherwise.

Avatar image for Chutebox
Chutebox

50499

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6  Edited By Chutebox  Online
Member since 2007 • 50499 Posts

@kingoflife9 said:

Sony copied wii u's gamepad screen, (a cheap version with no display) and copied the Kinect with the new eye. All they really did was put a slightly faster chip in their console... big deal, and because they are so cheap to get the big games they are buying up all these shitty indie games. give me a break.

What?

Avatar image for casharmy
casharmy

9388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 casharmy
Member since 2011 • 9388 Posts

@DarkLink77 said:

Sony didn't save shit, because nothing failed. It did, however, take them three years to make their console worth a damn. Thank God that waiting period is over.

The waiting period was over the minute MGS4 was released on PS3 June 2008 (a 10/10 rated title here which no xbox360 title could ever match) and that was only a year and 5 months...

since xbox360 was never able to receive such a highly regarded exclusive title I guess we are still waiting for xbox360 to be worth a damn.

Avatar image for DarkLink77
DarkLink77

32731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#9 DarkLink77
Member since 2004 • 32731 Posts

@casharmy said:

@DarkLink77 said:

Sony didn't save shit, because nothing failed. It did, however, take them three years to make their console worth a damn. Thank God that waiting period is over.

The waiting period was over the minute MGS4 was released on PS3 June 2008 (a 10/10 rated title here which no xbox360 title could ever match) and that was only a year and 5 months...

since xbox360 was never able to receive such a highly regarded exclusive title I guess we are still waiting for xbox360 to be worth a damn.

Are we still using the, "It got a 10 here, better than every other game, I have no mind of my own, blah blah blah" argument on this site? Pathetic.

Metal Gear Solid 4 is a bad joke and an insult to the MGS series, and even if it wasn't, one game, no matter how good it is, doesn't make a $600 system worth owning. The PS3 only became worth the money when Demon's Souls and Uncharted 2 released.

Avatar image for ladyblue
LadyBlue

4943

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By LadyBlue
Member since 2012 • 4943 Posts

@DarkLink77: MGS is an insult to itself. One of the most pretentious series I have ever played. They're lucky the gameplay is good.

Avatar image for Gue1
Gue1

12171

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#11 Gue1
Member since 2004 • 12171 Posts

Avatar image for DarkLink77
DarkLink77

32731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#12 DarkLink77
Member since 2004 • 32731 Posts

@Pete-B said:

@DarkLink77:

MGS is an insult to itself. One of the most pretentious series I have ever played. They're lucky the gameplay is good.

It's got its issues, but MGS3 is a damn good game that actually spins a decent yarn. So is the original, for that matter.

Avatar image for CanYouDiglt
CanYouDiglt

8474

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 CanYouDiglt
Member since 2009 • 8474 Posts

Lol some of the comments on here just blow my mind. The console with the smallest game library and a worse game library according to critic scores saved gaming. This is why this site is so hard to take serious because of threads like this.

Avatar image for deactivated-5d7fb49ded561
deactivated-5d7fb49ded561

4019

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14  Edited By deactivated-5d7fb49ded561
Member since 2010 • 4019 Posts

Sony did save console gaming.

Can you imagine a world where people could only choose between an anti-consumer box or a Wii U?

Sounds like hell to me

Avatar image for helwa1988
helwa1988

2157

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 helwa1988
Member since 2007 • 2157 Posts

I had a good laugh for 5 minutes when i read this thread title. Sony didn't do anything for this generation yet.

Unfortunately there is nothing Sony,Nintendo or Microsoft can do to save the gaming industry. The casuals have taken over and they only care about mobile gaming because it's cheaper than buying $40 games.

Avatar image for remiks00
remiks00

4249

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 37

User Lists: 0

#16 remiks00
Member since 2006 • 4249 Posts

Demon Souls & Uncharted 2 are the reasons I bought a PS3 in 2009. I still hated PSN back then with a passion compared to XBL. But Microsoft lost me around 2010-2011 because of their focus on Kinect, and I got tried of playing Gears & Halo... >_>.

Avatar image for casharmy
casharmy

9388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17  Edited By casharmy
Member since 2011 • 9388 Posts

@DarkLink77 said:

@casharmy said:

@DarkLink77 said:

Sony didn't save shit, because nothing failed. It did, however, take them three years to make their console worth a damn. Thank God that waiting period is over.

The waiting period was over the minute MGS4 was released on PS3 June 2008 (a 10/10 rated title here which no xbox360 title could ever match) and that was only a year and 5 months...

since xbox360 was never able to receive such a highly regarded exclusive title I guess we are still waiting for xbox360 to be worth a damn.

Are we still using the, "It got a 10 here, better than every other game, I have no mind of my own, blah blah blah" argument on this site? Pathetic.

Metal Gear Solid 4 is a bad joke and an insult to the MGS series, and even if it wasn't, one game, no matter how good it is, doesn't make a $600 system worth owning. The PS3 only became worth the money when Demon's Souls and Uncharted 2 released.

Your comment was pretty pathetic. I made my post to point out how pathetic it was. Seems it still didn't do the trick since you still insist on talking non-sense.

You say no game no matter how good doesn't make a $600 system worth owning...(despite the hardwre in PS3 that was worth over $1000 retail at the time) but PS3 has more games than MGS4 before it released. And furthermore let me flip your WHOLE argument now on it's head. You are relying on a fanboy double standard to try to justify your sillly argument saying "I have no mind of my own" when I point out MGS4's perfect score here on GS............................However

you will point to GS scores to justify saying PS3 wasn't worth a damn *cough* like you "have no mind of [your] own". So tell me hypocrite, decide what your argument is now please because your original argument just fell apart if you are insisting that I use my own mind when deciding the quality of games on a platform.

:) Thank you and good bye

Avatar image for DarkLink77
DarkLink77

32731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#19  Edited By DarkLink77
Member since 2004 • 32731 Posts

@casharmy said:

@DarkLink77 said:

@casharmy said:

@DarkLink77 said:

Sony didn't save shit, because nothing failed. It did, however, take them three years to make their console worth a damn. Thank God that waiting period is over.

The waiting period was over the minute MGS4 was released on PS3 June 2008 (a 10/10 rated title here which no xbox360 title could ever match) and that was only a year and 5 months...

since xbox360 was never able to receive such a highly regarded exclusive title I guess we are still waiting for xbox360 to be worth a damn.

Are we still using the, "It got a 10 here, better than every other game, I have no mind of my own, blah blah blah" argument on this site? Pathetic.

Metal Gear Solid 4 is a bad joke and an insult to the MGS series, and even if it wasn't, one game, no matter how good it is, doesn't make a $600 system worth owning. The PS3 only became worth the money when Demon's Souls and Uncharted 2 released.

Your comment was pretty pathetic. I made my post to point out how pathetic it was. Seems it still didn't do the trick since you still insist on talking non-sense.

You say no game no matter how good doesn't make a $600 system worth owning...but PS3 has more games than MGS4 before it released. And furthermore let me flip your WHOLE argument now on it's head. You are relying on a fanboy double standard to try to justify your sillly argument saying "I have no mind of my own" when I point out MGS4's perfect score here on GS............................However

you will point to GS scores to justify saying PS3 wasn't worth a damn *cough* like you "have no mind of [your] own". So tell me hypocrite, decide what your argument is now please because your original argument just fell apart if you are insisting that I use my own mind when deciding the quality of games on a platform.

:) Thank you and good bye

Nah, my comment was spot on. You sound mad because I bashed your system of choice, which was an excellent system once it got going.

As for the games that released before Metal Gear Solid 4, they were pretty forgettable experiences. No one is going to look back at them as a reason to own the platform.

When did I point to GS scores anywhere in my posts other than to mock your argument that scores make the game? I did not use GS scores when I said DS or UC2 were excellent games. I said they were excellent games, which is an argument I can back up with the design of the games themselves, without any use for scores. I can also argue why MGS4 is a poor game without using them. You, however, immediately jumped to MGS4 and used its score, and its score alone, to imply that the game was worth owning, and automatically better than every other game that has not scored a 10 on this site. So no, that's not about you "having a mind of your own." That's about you using a score, and nothing else, to make an argument.

At this point, you're just making shit up and putting words in my mouth as a poor excuse for an argument. C'mon, dude. If you're gonna call me a hypocrite, at least do it for something I said. Jesus.

Avatar image for casharmy
casharmy

9388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20  Edited By casharmy
Member since 2011 • 9388 Posts

@DarkLink77 said:

@casharmy said:

@DarkLink77 said:

@casharmy said:

@DarkLink77 said:

Sony didn't save shit, because nothing failed. It did, however, take them three years to make their console worth a damn. Thank God that waiting period is over.

The waiting period was over the minute MGS4 was released on PS3 June 2008 (a 10/10 rated title here which no xbox360 title could ever match) and that was only a year and 5 months...

since xbox360 was never able to receive such a highly regarded exclusive title I guess we are still waiting for xbox360 to be worth a damn.

Are we still using the, "It got a 10 here, better than every other game, I have no mind of my own, blah blah blah" argument on this site? Pathetic.

Metal Gear Solid 4 is a bad joke and an insult to the MGS series, and even if it wasn't, one game, no matter how good it is, doesn't make a $600 system worth owning. The PS3 only became worth the money when Demon's Souls and Uncharted 2 released.

Your comment was pretty pathetic. I made my post to point out how pathetic it was. Seems it still didn't do the trick since you still insist on talking non-sense.

You say no game no matter how good doesn't make a $600 system worth owning...but PS3 has more games than MGS4 before it released. And furthermore let me flip your WHOLE argument now on it's head. You are relying on a fanboy double standard to try to justify your sillly argument saying "I have no mind of my own" when I point out MGS4's perfect score here on GS............................However

you will point to GS scores to justify saying PS3 wasn't worth a damn *cough* like you "have no mind of [your] own". So tell me hypocrite, decide what your argument is now please because your original argument just fell apart if you are insisting that I use my own mind when deciding the quality of games on a platform.

:) Thank you and good bye

Nah, my comment was spot on. You sound mad because I bashed your system of choice, which was an excellent system once it got going.

As for the games that released before Metal Gear Solid 4, they were pretty forgettable experiences. No one is going to look back at them as a reason to own the platform.

When did I point to GS scores anywhere in my posts other than to mock your argument that scores make the game? I did not use GS scores when I said DS or UC2 were excellent games. I said they were excellent games, which is an argument I can back up with the design of the games themselves, without any use for scores. I can also argue why MGS4 is a poor game without using them.

At this point, you're just making shit up and putting words in my mouth as a poor excuse for an argument. C'mon, dude. If you're gonna call me a hypocrite, at least do it for something I said. Jesus.

lol, wow. Your whole post was filled with nothing but biased opinion.

it is funny you are going to sit here and try to act like you weren't using scores to justify your stupid original rant. You are obviously a huge fanboy. I am not the one who came off and said an entire line up of games was garbage for 3 years ( a comment which I proved wrong both critical praise and fan praise)

Fist of all you can't use ONLY your personal opinion of a game or platform to make such a gross statement as the one you did unless you are just a blind fanboy like what I described. If you had said "imo" or "for me" then I wouldn't have even bothered making a comment but you needed someone to interject some reality into your fantasy land so I did.

1. If you are not using some kind of meter to justify your original comment and only using your opinion then you are full of **** and have 0 credibility in anything you said so what you said is worthless

or

2. You based your original comment off reviews for the critical acclaim of games which got proven wrong by the existence of MGS4 which also makes what you said wrong.

So take your pick? Either way what you said fails. Anyone can say a game sucks and justify it with personal opinion, that doesn't make it credible.

Thank you and have a nice day.

Avatar image for tagyhag
tagyhag

15874

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21  Edited By tagyhag
Member since 2007 • 15874 Posts

Someone please tell me 5 MUST HAVE games for the PS3 before MSG4 was released. Otherwise this argument is stupid.

Avatar image for casharmy
casharmy

9388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22  Edited By casharmy
Member since 2011 • 9388 Posts

@tagyhag said:

Someone please tell me 5 MUST HAVE games for the PS3 before MSG4 was released. Otherwise this argument is stupid.

lol, first, define a "must have game"?

lol, as if that can even be done without using reviews and or personal opinion...which is what is being argued if you aren't really paying attention.

This discussion isn't stupid, but coming into it not understanding what is being discussed and trying to put a stance on it is!

Avatar image for DarkLink77
DarkLink77

32731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#23 DarkLink77
Member since 2004 • 32731 Posts

@casharmy said:

@DarkLink77 said:

@casharmy said:

@DarkLink77 said:

@casharmy said:

@DarkLink77 said:

Sony didn't save shit, because nothing failed. It did, however, take them three years to make their console worth a damn. Thank God that waiting period is over.

The waiting period was over the minute MGS4 was released on PS3 June 2008 (a 10/10 rated title here which no xbox360 title could ever match) and that was only a year and 5 months...

since xbox360 was never able to receive such a highly regarded exclusive title I guess we are still waiting for xbox360 to be worth a damn.

Are we still using the, "It got a 10 here, better than every other game, I have no mind of my own, blah blah blah" argument on this site? Pathetic.

Metal Gear Solid 4 is a bad joke and an insult to the MGS series, and even if it wasn't, one game, no matter how good it is, doesn't make a $600 system worth owning. The PS3 only became worth the money when Demon's Souls and Uncharted 2 released.

Your comment was pretty pathetic. I made my post to point out how pathetic it was. Seems it still didn't do the trick since you still insist on talking non-sense.

You say no game no matter how good doesn't make a $600 system worth owning...but PS3 has more games than MGS4 before it released. And furthermore let me flip your WHOLE argument now on it's head. You are relying on a fanboy double standard to try to justify your sillly argument saying "I have no mind of my own" when I point out MGS4's perfect score here on GS............................However

you will point to GS scores to justify saying PS3 wasn't worth a damn *cough* like you "have no mind of [your] own". So tell me hypocrite, decide what your argument is now please because your original argument just fell apart if you are insisting that I use my own mind when deciding the quality of games on a platform.

:) Thank you and good bye

Nah, my comment was spot on. You sound mad because I bashed your system of choice, which was an excellent system once it got going.

As for the games that released before Metal Gear Solid 4, they were pretty forgettable experiences. No one is going to look back at them as a reason to own the platform.

When did I point to GS scores anywhere in my posts other than to mock your argument that scores make the game? I did not use GS scores when I said DS or UC2 were excellent games. I said they were excellent games, which is an argument I can back up with the design of the games themselves, without any use for scores. I can also argue why MGS4 is a poor game without using them.

At this point, you're just making shit up and putting words in my mouth as a poor excuse for an argument. C'mon, dude. If you're gonna call me a hypocrite, at least do it for something I said. Jesus.

lol, wow. Your whole post was filled with nothing but biased opinion.

it is funny you are going to sit here and try to act like you weren't using scores to justify your stupid original rant. You are obviously a huge fanboy. I am not the one who came off and said an entire line up of games was garbage for 3 years ( a comment which I proved wrong both critical praise and fan praise)

Fist of all you can't use ONLY your personal opinion of a game or platform to make such a gross statement as the one you did unless you are just a blind fanboy like what I described. If you has said "imo" or "for me" then I wouldn't have even bothered making a comment but you needed someone to interject some reality into your fantasy land so I did.

1. If you are not using some kine of meter to justify your original comment then you are full of **** and have 0 credibility in anything you said so what you said is worthless

or

2. You based your original comment of reviews for the critical acclaim of games which got proven wrong by the existence of MGS4 which also makes what you said wrong.

So take your pick? Either way what you said fails. Anyone can say a game sucks and justify it with personal opinion, that doesn't make it credible.

Yep, I was trying to use scores. Which is why I never mentioned them, at all.

Yep, huge fanboy, which is why I said the PS3 is a great system, and just took some time to get going. Makes sense.

I didn't say the entire line up of games was garbage for 3 years. I said they weren't memorable (they aren't, aside from MGS4), and they were not worth purchasing a platform for. You have a real problem with putting words in other people's mouths when it suits your agenda.

I am not using my personal opinion. I am using the games themselves, which is "some kind of meter." In fact, it's the only one that matters. Metal Gear Solid 4 is a prime example of poor writing, retconning up the wazzoo, and bad pacing. You could maybe argue the third point, but the first two are pretty objective. That's not my opinion. That's being able to critique.

Nope, I based my original comment on the quality inherent in those games. Demon's Souls is not a good game because a bunch of reviewers said it was good. It's a good game because of the way it was designed. It's a good game because of how good the environmental storytelling is. It's a good game because of how precise and rewarding the combat is. It's a good game because of the encounter and environment design. It's not a good game because a bunch of people said it was a good game. It's a good game because it's a good game.

The game itself is the only measurement that matters.

So, once again, not wrong.

Avatar image for Midnightshade29
Midnightshade29

6003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 301

User Lists: 0

#24  Edited By Midnightshade29
Member since 2008 • 6003 Posts

@DarkLink77 said:

Sony didn't save shit, because nothing failed. It did, however, take them three years to make their console worth a damn. Thank God that waiting period is over.

Really? could of fooled me. It had uncharted, Heavenly Sword, Resistance fall of man, Ratchet and Clank, Motorstorm, Warhawk, Ninja Gaiiden Sigma and Folk Lore as great exclusives in year 1, plus multiplats like Oblivion Rainbow Six Vegas and Assassins Creed. Year 2 is when I got the console... it had 2 AAAA games back to back.... MGS4 and GTA4.. Picking up the console, for $400 in May 2008 when GTA came out was a pure win in my book. It complemented my then gaming pc and psp. Plus later that year, LBP, Motorostorm Pacific Rift, Disgaea 3, Resistance 2, and Katamari Forever all came out as exclusives that year..

You xbots think a system doesn't have games if it doesnt' have a "halo" seller? Seriousy bs... that meme. as the PS3 had great games in the first 3 years. (I won't even go into year 3 as it would embarrass you too much!)

Avatar image for jsmoke03
jsmoke03

13717

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#25 jsmoke03
Member since 2004 • 13717 Posts

man without the levels, i think 90% of people that post are new to video games lol

anyway, gaming was fine this generation. its the first time i think that no one company stood out. they all had their successes and faults.

ninty won in sales, and had great first party games but i think they damaged their image in the long run (wii u) and they started the stupidity that is motion gaming

sony had some of the biggest blunders. they proved once again that there is a threshold to price with gamers. they lost most of their third party exclusives and had a bad 3 years. they got hacked. the failure of ylod....oh and vita. they also had a big comeback. they built their first party studios and released a bunch of great first party titles. 3 gs goty were sony exclusives. the introduction of psn plus (a discount and instant game collection i think is pretty awesome)

microsoft started awesome. the better multiplatform games. the expansion of xbl. achievements.explosion of indy games through xbla. however they had RROD. how many people bought 360 numerous times and how many had to get theirs replaced by ms with their warranty. they got lazy or something because they stopped halfway in the generation...probably because of the kinect. oh and the kinect.

Avatar image for DarkLink77
DarkLink77

32731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#26 DarkLink77
Member since 2004 • 32731 Posts

@Midnightshade29 said:

@DarkLink77 said:

Sony didn't save shit, because nothing failed. It did, however, take them three years to make their console worth a damn. Thank God that waiting period is over.

Really? could of fooled me. It had uncharted, Heavenly Sword, Resistance fall of man, Ratchet and Clank, Motorstorm, Warhawk, Ninja Gaiiden Sigma and Folk Lore as great exclusives in year 1, plus multiplats like Oblivion Rainbow Six Vegas and Assassins Creed. Year 2 is when I got the console... it had 2 AAAA games back to back.... MGS4 and GTA4.. Picking up the console, for $400 in May 2008 when GTA came out was a pure win in my book. It complemented my then gaming pc and psp. Plus later that year, LBP, Motorostorm Pacific Rift, Disgaea 3, Resistance 2, and Katamari Forever all came out as exclusives that year..

You xbots think a system doesn't have games if it doesnt' have a "halo" seller? Seriousy bs... that meme. as the PS3 had great games in the first 3 years. (I won't even go into year 3 as it would embarrass you too much!)

1. Most of those games are not good enough to justify dropping $600.

2. Ninja Gaiden is not exclusive. Sigma is basically just a toned down version of Black.

3. Multiplats are not a good reason to buy a console.

4. I never said a system isn't worth owning if it doesn't have a "Halo" seller. I'm also not a lemming just because I said something negative about the PS3's launch, which was, let's be fair, not all that great.

5. Year 3 (aka 2009) was the year the system was worth the money. So you're right, there's no reason to go into year three, because I already agreed with you.

Avatar image for casharmy
casharmy

9388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 casharmy
Member since 2011 • 9388 Posts
@Midnightshade29 said:

@DarkLink77 said:

Sony didn't save shit, because nothing failed. It did, however, take them three years to make their console worth a damn. Thank God that waiting period is over.

Really? could of fooled me. It had uncharted, Heavenly Sword, Resistance fall of man, Ratchet and Clank, Motorstorm, Warhawk, Ninja Gaiiden Sigma and Folk Lore as great exclusives in year 1, plus multiplats like Oblivion Rainbow Six Vegas and Assassins Creed. Year 2 is when I got the console... it had 2 AAAA games back to back.... MGS4 and GTA4.. Picking up the console, for $400 in May 2008 when GTA came out was a pure win in my book. It complemented my then gaming pc and psp. Plus later that year, LBP, Motorostorm Pacific Rift, Disgaea 3, Resistance 2, and Katamari Forever all came out as exclusives that year..

You xbots think a system doesn't have games if it doesnt' have a "halo" seller? Seriousy bs... that meme. as the PS3 had great games in the first 3 years. (I won't even go into year 3 as it would embarrass you too much!)

Thank you.

I will save myself the trouble of further argument with this guy. I was going to take the time to slowly break down how stupid and fanboyishly blind his original comment was but he isn't worth it. Your post clearly illustrates how blind he is, no point in saying anything more really.

Avatar image for DarkLink77
DarkLink77

32731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#28  Edited By DarkLink77
Member since 2004 • 32731 Posts

@casharmy said:
@Midnightshade29 said:

@DarkLink77 said:

Sony didn't save shit, because nothing failed. It did, however, take them three years to make their console worth a damn. Thank God that waiting period is over.

Really? could of fooled me. It had uncharted, Heavenly Sword, Resistance fall of man, Ratchet and Clank, Motorstorm, Warhawk, Ninja Gaiiden Sigma and Folk Lore as great exclusives in year 1, plus multiplats like Oblivion Rainbow Six Vegas and Assassins Creed. Year 2 is when I got the console... it had 2 AAAA games back to back.... MGS4 and GTA4.. Picking up the console, for $400 in May 2008 when GTA came out was a pure win in my book. It complemented my then gaming pc and psp. Plus later that year, LBP, Motorostorm Pacific Rift, Disgaea 3, Resistance 2, and Katamari Forever all came out as exclusives that year..

You xbots think a system doesn't have games if it doesnt' have a "halo" seller? Seriousy bs... that meme. as the PS3 had great games in the first 3 years. (I won't even go into year 3 as it would embarrass you too much!)

Thank you.

I will save myself the trouble of further argument with this guy. I was going to take the time to slowly break down how stupid and fanboyishly blind his original comment was but he isn't worth it. Your post clearly illustrates how blind he is, no point in saying anything more really.

Read: I have no further response because I can't make up any more strawmen to argue against.

But at least we can agree that Demon's Souls was pretty ace.

Avatar image for tagyhag
tagyhag

15874

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 tagyhag
Member since 2007 • 15874 Posts

@casharmy said:

@tagyhag said:

Someone please tell me 5 MUST HAVE games for the PS3 before MSG4 was released. Otherwise this argument is stupid.

lol, first, define a "must have game"?

lol, as if that can even be done without using reviews and or personal opinion...which is what is being argued if you aren't really paying attention.

This discussion isn't stupid, but coming into it not understanding what is being discussed and trying to put a stance on it is!

Games that you HAD to play, games that defined the system, games that you couldn't find anywhere else.

So basically, something that's NOT Resistance, because anyone who has played that game knows it wasn't what every Sony fan was expecting out of the PS3.

Of course, I have high standards so for someone with low standards I can see games like that being a must have.

Avatar image for casharmy
casharmy

9388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30 casharmy
Member since 2011 • 9388 Posts

@DarkLink77: lol Bizzoro world? No it's call objective and reality, not the place you seem to fly off into in the depts of your mind.

I'd like to ask you, what game on 360 justified dropping $400 to own the system?

Avatar image for j_assassin
j_assassin

1011

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 j_assassin
Member since 2012 • 1011 Posts

I agree, sony playstation has got different variety of good games like demons souls, valkyria chronicles, little big planet, ni no kuni, mgs 4, etc...

Avatar image for DarkLink77
DarkLink77

32731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#32  Edited By DarkLink77
Member since 2004 • 32731 Posts

@casharmy said:

@DarkLink77: lol Bizzoro world? No it's call objective and reality, not the place you seem to fly off into in the depts of your mind.

I'd like to ask you, what game on 360 justified dropping $400 to own the system?

Oh, I dunno, I thought I was being more than fair.

At launch? None of them. I'd say the 360 really wasn't worth owning until around 2007, to be honest.

Avatar image for p3anut
p3anut

6609

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 p3anut
Member since 2005 • 6609 Posts

The Wii saved gaming. It brought more casuals to the market.

Avatar image for Blabadon
Blabadon

33030

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 1

#34 Blabadon
Member since 2008 • 33030 Posts

As someone who dropped $570 on a PS3 in 2008, it wasn't worth it.

If it wasn't for Uncharted 1, I would have sold it then and there.

Avatar image for Gue1
Gue1

12171

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#35 Gue1
Member since 2004 • 12171 Posts

@tagyhag said:

Someone please tell me 5 MUST HAVE games for the PS3 before MSG4 was released. Otherwise this argument is stupid.

1. Resistance

2. Heavenly Sword

3. Valkyria Chronicles

4. Uncharted

5. MotorStorm

6. Ninja Gaiden Sigma

7. Warhawk

Loading Video...

Avatar image for casharmy
casharmy

9388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#36 casharmy
Member since 2011 • 9388 Posts

@tagyhag:

@tagyhag said:

@casharmy said:

@tagyhag said:

Someone please tell me 5 MUST HAVE games for the PS3 before MSG4 was released. Otherwise this argument is stupid.

lol, first, define a "must have game"?

lol, as if that can even be done without using reviews and or personal opinion...which is what is being argued if you aren't really paying attention.

This discussion isn't stupid, but coming into it not understanding what is being discussed and trying to put a stance on it is!

Games that you HAD to play, games that defined the system, games that you couldn't find anywhere else.

So basically, something that's NOT Resistance, because anyone who has played that game knows it wasn't what every Sony fan was expecting out of the PS3.

Of course, I have high standards so for someone with low standards I can see games like that being a must have.

lol, hold up Mr. Biased personal opinion. Since when could you decided which individual games are must have and not. I simply asked you to define a must have game.

I could have said you were doing ok until then, but you had to mess it up didn't you?

All that personal opinion mess up the credibility of what I was asking you for. Before you even started I put the dissimilar in there about personal opinions. You could have used something like sales, or high critical acclaim, awards with parent company endorsed posters ect.

Going by your post tho, the guy I was debating with IS STILL WRONG...with the example I originally used MSG4. His argument was that PS3 wasn't worth a damn for 3 years. You come in and try to change the argument and make up some arbitrary number of "must have games" BEFORE MGS4 to try to validate the original stupidity of his comment but that is just some weak bait and switch mumbo jumbo.

I could name 5 "must have games" on PS3 before MGS4 starting with Resistance 1 (you tried to eliminate that...fanboy move) because you wanted to perpetuate the original fanboy fallacy isn't that correct? if not then you need to stop with the desperate attempts to make what he said be somehow correct.

BTW:

Resistance Fall of Man, War Hawk, Heavenly Sword, Motorstorm, Uncharted: Drakes Fourtune.

Avatar image for tagyhag
tagyhag

15874

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 tagyhag
Member since 2007 • 15874 Posts
@casharmy said:

lol, hold up Mr. Biased personal opinion. Since when could you decided which individual games are must have and not. I simply asked you to define a must have game.

I could have said you were doing ok until then, but you had to mess it up didn't you?

All that personal opinion mess up the credibility of what I was asking you for. Before you even started I put the dissimilar in there about personal opinions. You could have used something like sales, or high critical acclaim, awards with parent company endorsed posters ect.

Going by your post tho, the guy I was debating with IS STILL WRONG...with the example I originally used MSG4. His argument was that PS3 wasn't worth a damn for 3 years. You come in and try to change the argument and make up some arbitrary number of "must have games" BEFORE MGS4 to try to validate the original stupidity of his comment but that is just some weak bait and switch mumbo jumbo.

I could name 5 "must have games" on PS3 before MGS4 starting with Resistance 1 (you tried to eliminate that...fanboy move) because you wanted to perpetuate the original fanboy fallacy isn't that correct? if not then you need to stop with the desperate attempts to make what he said be somehow correct.

BTW:

Resistance Fall of Man, War Hawk, Heavenly Sword, Motorstorm, Uncharted: Drakes Fourtune.

I just tried to get rid of Resistance early because it honestly wasn't a good game, unless you can give me good reasons other than "One of the best FPS'es ever made!" or "I want Sony's dick in and around my mouth!"

The point that DarkLink was trying to make is that you wouldn't really feel satisfied spending all that money on a PS3 expecting all that Sony told you to expect during the first years, even some diehard fanboys realized that Sony lied to them.

@Gue1 said:

2. Heavenly Sword

3. Valkyria Chronicles

7. Warhawk

I agree with these. There were experiences that you pretty much couldn't get on any other system. I wouldn't shell out $600 + tax just for these games but they're good choices.

Avatar image for Blueresident87
Blueresident87

5903

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 8

#38  Edited By Blueresident87
Member since 2007 • 5903 Posts

Why did the industry need 'saving' in the first place this gen? Exactly when did that happen?

Was it when all 3 console companies were, at one point or another, raking in millions and millions of dollars...? Because in that case all of them did a fantastic job at playing savior the past several years.

Avatar image for DanteSuikoden
DanteSuikoden

3427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#39 DanteSuikoden
Member since 2008 • 3427 Posts

Maybe seeing how Microsoft and Nintendo basically stopped trying after 2009.

Avatar image for DarkLink77
DarkLink77

32731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#40 DarkLink77
Member since 2004 • 32731 Posts

@tagyhag said:
@casharmy said:

lol, hold up Mr. Biased personal opinion. Since when could you decided which individual games are must have and not. I simply asked you to define a must have game.

I could have said you were doing ok until then, but you had to mess it up didn't you?

All that personal opinion mess up the credibility of what I was asking you for. Before you even started I put the dissimilar in there about personal opinions. You could have used something like sales, or high critical acclaim, awards with parent company endorsed posters ect.

Going by your post tho, the guy I was debating with IS STILL WRONG...with the example I originally used MSG4. His argument was that PS3 wasn't worth a damn for 3 years. You come in and try to change the argument and make up some arbitrary number of "must have games" BEFORE MGS4 to try to validate the original stupidity of his comment but that is just some weak bait and switch mumbo jumbo.

I could name 5 "must have games" on PS3 before MGS4 starting with Resistance 1 (you tried to eliminate that...fanboy move) because you wanted to perpetuate the original fanboy fallacy isn't that correct? if not then you need to stop with the desperate attempts to make what he said be somehow correct.

BTW:

Resistance Fall of Man, War Hawk, Heavenly Sword, Motorstorm, Uncharted: Drakes Fourtune.

I just tried to get rid of Resistance early because it honestly wasn't a good game, unless you can give me good reasons other than "One of the best FPS'es ever made!" or "I want Sony's dick in and around my mouth!"

The point that DarkLink was trying to make is that you wouldn't really feel satisfied spending all that money on a PS3 expecting all that Sony told you to expect during the first years, even some diehard fanboys realized that Sony lied to them.

@Gue1 said:

2. Heavenly Sword

3. Valkyria Chronicles

7. Warhawk

I agree with these. There were experiences that you pretty much couldn't get on any other system. I wouldn't shell out $600 + tax just for these games but they're good choices.

Finally, someone who can read.

Avatar image for M8ingSeezun
M8ingSeezun

2313

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#41 M8ingSeezun
Member since 2007 • 2313 Posts

I wouldn't go as far as "saving this generation".

What PS3 did manage successfully was giving gamers a fair well rounded balance of games, from 3rd party multiplats to exclusives. It had variety and still retained that "hardcore" mantra. It NEVER deviated into a casual platform, despite supporting the PS Move. And Sony knew who their demographics were. They've been practically consistent.

For 7 years, the PS3 struggled in an uphill battle, from its horrid launch price, into a well rounded, imo, balance console that provided games that most core gamers can enjoy.

Avatar image for treedoor
treedoor

7648

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 treedoor
Member since 2004 • 7648 Posts

You know cows have bad taste in games when they think Resistance is a reason to own the PS3.

That was 2nd worst FPS released this gen (first being Duke Nukem Forever).

Avatar image for SonofK
SonofK

1088

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 SonofK
Member since 2013 • 1088 Posts

@casharmy said:

@DarkLink77 said:

Sony didn't save shit, because nothing failed. It did, however, take them three years to make their console worth a damn. Thank God that waiting period is over.

The waiting period was over the minute MGS4 was released on PS3 June 2008 (a 10/10 rated title here which no xbox360 title could ever match) and that was only a year and 5 months...

since xbox360 was never able to receive such a highly regarded exclusive title I guess we are still waiting for xbox360 to be worth a damn.

MGS4 is one of the biggest pieces of sh*t I've ever played. If anything that takes away the credibility of Sony and it's fans for praising that garbage, and even if it was a decent game there's a strong chance that the Legacy Collection will be on the Xb1 so it won't be exclusive anymore.

Avatar image for John_Matherson
John_Matherson

2085

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#44 John_Matherson
Member since 2013 • 2085 Posts

@tagyhag: How about you tell me 5 must have games for the 360 AFTER MGS4 was released. Otherwise...well, nevermind lemmings are already...lemmings..

Avatar image for SonofK
SonofK

1088

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45  Edited By SonofK
Member since 2013 • 1088 Posts

@treedoor said:

You know cows have bad taste in games when they think Resistance is a reason to own the PS3.

That was 2nd worst FPS released this gen (first being Duke Nukem Forever).

There was also Haze which was pretty rancid, I remember PS3 fans hyping it to be a Halo killer like Killzone.

Avatar image for treedoor
treedoor

7648

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46 treedoor
Member since 2004 • 7648 Posts

@SonofK said:

@treedoor said:

You know cows have bad taste in games when they think Resistance is a reason to own the PS3.

That was 2nd worst FPS released this gen (first being Duke Nukem Forever).

There was also Haze which was pretty rancid

I've heard bad things, but fortunately I have not experienced that game :P

Avatar image for musicalmac
musicalmac

25098

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 1

#47 musicalmac  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 25098 Posts

Are those without a PS3 still unsaved?

Avatar image for CJ_ofCamelot
CJ_ofCamelot

2072

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#48  Edited By CJ_ofCamelot
Member since 2013 • 2072 Posts

O C'mon, this all couldn't be possible without Microsoft helping!!

Avatar image for tagyhag
tagyhag

15874

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#49 tagyhag
Member since 2007 • 15874 Posts

@John_Matherson said:

@tagyhag: How about you tell me 5 must have games for the 360 AFTER MGS4 was released. Otherwise...well, nevermind lemmings are already...lemmings..

Oh sweet I'm a lemming? I have now officially been called every SW group! :D

I'd say: Mushihime-sama Futari, Gears 3, DoDonPachi Dai Ou Jou Black Label Extra, Deathsmiles II, and Forza 4.

Avatar image for Merex760
Merex760

4381

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#50 Merex760
Member since 2008 • 4381 Posts

You'd have to be a pretty big fanboy to not recognize the impact Sony had on console gaming this generation. Microsoft also had a major impact, but more with services than games. As far as games offered by first party studios, consoles would look pretty bleak if Sony wasn't there.