Sony vs. Sony?

I'm thinking XBox launched with Halo(96%), Dreamcast launched with Soul Calibur(96%), and Gamecube launched with Super Smash Bros Melee(92%).

I take your batch of good games people no longer play except out of nostalgia and raise you three of the best games of all time.
 
The Cube didn't launch with Smash. And even so, if we're going to say that a launch is one single game, then what launch wasn't spectacular?
 
Last edited:
How about we look at it like this: What systems have launched with games that made people clamor for the system?

Halo is a prime example of a system that people bought when the only thing they really knew about it was Halo.
 
spudlyff8fan said:
The Cube didn't launch with Smash. And even so, if we're going to say that a launch is one single game, then what launch wasn't spectacular?
Click to expand...

The PS2's, who's best game was Madden. And we all know how you feel about ports.
 
Actually, Madden 2001 was was entirely different from Madden 2001 on the other consoles, and it was improved in every way over the other ones. It'd be like Madden 2006 on the 360. Entirely different games, but one sucked (except Madden 01 didn't suck when it was next gen because it had more, while Madden 2006 had less than its past gen console versions).
 
So, it's totally unlike Madden 2006 for X360, except that it was the first of a new generation. And it likely borrowed any improvements from NFL2k, except for a soon-to-be-negligible graphical edge.

In all fairness, it was a decent launch that kept people busy just long enough for the next title they were waiting for, whatever that was. And Tekken Tag Tournament was unusually solid when I went back to it. PS3, however, can't quite boast so much.

But I hate saying so, especially so soon after the launch. I'm not even ready to say anything definite about the Wii, or the PS3, until probably next February or March. Nintendo DS launched pretty poorly, but after a wait the titles we should have gotten finally trickled through.

What was this all about, again? PSP and PS2 and PS3 all still running at the same time, right.

It's really a shame that Sony is shooting themselves in the corporate foot like this. But they seem to think the problem was with their foot, and either they were right or they'll bleed almost to death for this.
 
You know, Listereo...you're knitpicking alot. You might wanna work on that. It's a terribly annoying trait.
 
We can say that for the Wii, and Zelda Jonas. 80% of Wii games sold has gone to Zelda. Almost every Wii sold had a Zelda tagged to it.

My point is still this Sony played everyone. And are now looking like fools. And people are now seeing that Sony is not all that great. That does not mean the system wont sell...........I mena even I bought one................But more people just don't care about upgrading when the PS2 still has a ton of games. And yes PS2's are still selling.

Another point I would like to add is that, Sony needs to work on the software. Focus on the third party companies, now that the system is out. NO MORE HARDWARE CRAP, were are the games. MS keeps comoing out of nowhere steeling the exclusives from them. Sony now has a hard battle to fight. This aint Nintendo or Sega were Sony got lucky and to the top spot. MS knows what it is doing and is doing everything they can to cut into Sony's market share. People come into my store an ask me what system should they get, last gen I would say PS2 now it's looking like I'll have to say 360...it's cheaper offers damn near the same things, and Has games.
 
listereo said:
Only to you, since you frame your opinions as markers of others' ignorance.
Click to expand...
Well it's not my fault that everything I say is based on facts which can be backed up with evidence...
 
spudlyff8fan said:
Well it's not my fault that everything I say is based on facts which can be backed up with evidence...
Click to expand...

Which are then interpreted on your own value scale, which slides depending on what suits your argument. Oh, ye opinionated fool. Difference here: I value single titles with lasting impact and enjoyment over a smattering of games that are either forgettable or trumped by their successors. You do not believe so.

And thus, an impasse.
 
listereo said:
Which are then interpreted on your own value scale, which slides depending on what suits your argument. Oh, ye opinionated fool. Difference here: I value single titles with lasting impact and enjoyment over a smattering of games that are either forgettable or trumped by their successors. You do not believe so.

And thus, an impasse.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately (for you) your value scale can't be statistically proven, and therefore incorrect. Mine can, and since it has no statistically proven competition, it is therefore correct by default. Now, if you can find some statistical basis to counter my statistically proven argument, then I won't be right by default.
 
You can't put a value on art, you fool! It can't be proven! Is the Mona Lisa really that important, or just well marketed? Who can say! Paris puts an awful lot of money into convincing the world that it's the best city with the finest art, so you ought to doubt what is said. It's easy to just lean back and point at numbers, but what about Psychonauts? Brilliant! Hilarious! Inventive! Beautiful! Polished! Well reviewed! Massively outsold by 50 Cent: Bulletproof!

Does that make it a bad or meaningless game? Statistically, yes.

You argue like a republican.

What in the Vast Cartoony Tomes of the Necrowombicom are we babbling about, anyway? This has nothing to do with Sony vs. Sony! Curse you, pride!
 
Darth_Jonas said:
Who has the better statistics. Soon it will be who's statistics are longer.
Click to expand...

My statistics aren't the biggest or the longest, but they get the job done! I get no complaints...about my statistics.
 
listereo said:
You can't put a value on art, you fool! It can't be proven! Is the Mona Lisa really that important, or just well marketed? Who can say! Paris puts an awful lot of money into convincing the world that it's the best city with the finest art, so you ought to doubt what is said. It's easy to just lean back and point at numbers, but what about Psychonauts? Brilliant! Hilarious! Inventive! Beautiful! Polished! Well reviewed! Massively outsold by 50 Cent: Bulletproof!

Does that make it a bad or meaningless game? Statistically, yes.

You argue like a republican.

What in the Vast Cartoony Tomes of the Necrowombicom are we babbling about, anyway? This has nothing to do with Sony vs. Sony! Curse you, pride!
Click to expand...
Your argument fails in two ways. 1) We're not discussing an individual game. We're discussing a large group of games. I would make the case that Metal Gear Solid 2 isn't nearly as good as Metal Gear Twin Snakes, but this can't be proven, because it boils down to a personal preference. I can, however, make the case that the PS2 has better RPGs than the Xbox, using the statistical evidence of how the top 10 exclusive RPGs, using the exclusive status as a stipulation to exclude games that appear on multiple consoles, (FFXII, FFX, Suikoden 3, DQ8, DC2, KH2, KH1, SHC, CoN, FFX2 for the PS2 and KOTOR, KOTOR 2, Morrowind/GOTYE, Jade Empire, Fable/LC, Bard Tale, Arx Fatalis, Sudeki, Pirates!, Pirates of the Caribbean) have a radically different media average, as well as how I can make the case that the PS2 launch had one of the best launches in the past two generations.

2) I never made the case that sales dictate the quality of a game, and it's impossible to prove that, especially as there's more statistical proof to the contrary. I also fail to see how you could even twist my words to state that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom