Epic Games would "love" to ship Gears of War on PlayStation 3, but it's consistently convinced to partner with Microsoft, it's said.
Speaking at GDC, Epic President Mike Capps said he wants to be on PS3, but "time and time again" Microsoft gives him "really good, compelling reasons to work with them again."
So will Gears of War ever come to PS3? Capps wouldn't say, but he did note that, "We definitely own Gears of War. This is our franchise, our IP." So it's a possibility in the future.
However, Capps added, "Time and time again, when it came down to figure out what we do next with Gears, we sat down with Microsoft and they've given us really good, compelling reasons to work with them again.
"They don't just market it; they do amazing work and they have a user testing team that makes our games better, and so each time we've come to the point of 'what do we do next?' we've been happy to work with them. They help us make a better product and do some really cool marketing on the platform, so we save some money there."
Microsoft execs just did a little shudder.
Read our Gears of War 3 hands-on from last week, if you haven't already.
Comments
93 comments so far...
ragna_bloodedge on 3 Mar '11 said:
In before Xbox 360 fanboy rage.
JaffaKira on 3 Mar '11 said:
Still think we should have seen Gears 2 on the PC by now, what happened Epic?
PSAV2001 on 3 Mar '11 said:
"...we sat down with Microsoft and they've given us really good, compelling reasons to work with them again." Did anyone else automatically think $$$
(Not a criticism, just how business works).
digifreak277 on 3 Mar '11 said:
would definately love to see it happen as gears is the only xbox exclusive that has really wowed me, Epic should live up to their name
Very_Silver_Ownz on 3 Mar '11 said:
first Mass Effect 2 then Gears of War then Halo to PS3
Gears imo is the only worthwhile exclusive on the 360. my opinion so don't get all fanboy on me. MS stop paying them off, I want to play Gears on my PS3
slick loose on 3 Mar '11 said:
Yeah I did too.
StokedUp on 3 Mar '11 said:
would you really want Halo on ps3?? the game is s**t! (oooooo that might spark some fires, but its just my Personal opinion)
martinawatson on 3 Mar '11 said:
Yes , would love to see it on a really powerfull machine ...........................
Actually huge shame, i had a shaky clip from a conference years ago that i studied, of the unreal engine , looked forward to seeing the monsters eventually turn up on Sonys new machine. Never will , and as i wont be buying a microsoft machine now or in the future then the question is , who's missed out me or epic , maybe epic in the future , they should be building there IP, getting loyal fans , oh well who cares really
Very_Silver_Ownz on 3 Mar '11 said:
'' would you really want Halo on ps3?? the game is s**t! (oooooo that might spark some fires, but its just my Personal opinion) ''
lol i wouldn't want to play Halo was never a fan but it would be hilarious the 360 wouldn't have any major exclusive left.
strickers on 3 Mar '11 said:
I love the "we work with MS because they have testers"line.I'm pretty sure Sony have them too ,and do marketing(although not as much).
There's one reason to keep your market half the size.$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
Miss_Wacy on 3 Mar '11 said:
but i thought ps3 fanboys said gears of war was sh!t? lol, if it goes to the ps3 watch em buck dance
MrPirtniw on 3 Mar '11 said:
Exactly what I was thinking, Miss.
Moorpheus on 3 Mar '11 said:
Surely you could say this about most games?
At the end of the day, loyalty (for games like Gears) is determined by money. Take the money away and the game will go multi-format.
I'm pretty sure a few PS3 game development companies would 'love' their games to be shown to as wide an audience as possible as well.
Just my opinion
chamony on 3 Mar '11 said:
defo!! first thing i thought
its not really tho is it?? got worse towards the end but its not is it,
dont see what the problem would be bringing any of the 360 exclusives to our ps3, after all they'd all be sub standard versions of the 360, hahahahaha history tells that story.....
strange that even multiformat games get the same treatment with a bit of MS wonga eh Activision??
gmcb007 on 3 Mar '11 said:
Does anyone remember Bioshock was bashed by ps3 fanboys because it was exclusive but then worshipped it when it was released on PS3? The same story would repeat in this senario.
Also let them have GOW but in return give the xbox gamers Drakes uncharted!
fps_d0minat0r on 3 Mar '11 said:
in other words their just waiting for that briefcase full of cash from sony....until then their satisfied with what microsoft is giving them.
chamony on 3 Mar '11 said:
if thats the case cant sony divert a little cash away from legal sh1te??
El Mag on 3 Mar '11 said:
But 360 only owners say Uncharted is crap so they'd never want it....right?.
Works both ways, envious gamers look to something they can't play on their choice of console. But instead of them saying "that game looks great" it's "DERP it's crap, i played it at my cousin's sister's babysitter's house and it was soooo boringzz". Then if it does ever get to their console it's automatically the best thing since chip cobs.
gmcb007 on 3 Mar '11 said:
Well put Mag.I only have an xbox but I would love to play uncharted but I couldn't justify buying another console just to play it. Exclusive games should be stopped for two reasons: 1)Everybody can experience it 2)A LOT less fanboy muck to deal with!
cian84 on 3 Mar '11 said:
Bulletstorm is GOW on PS3, just in FPS form.
Marlonjb on 3 Mar '11 said:
This is gonna cause some arguments lol.
GlynCR on 3 Mar '11 said:
can't say im surprised to see this, EPIC have said before gears was a franchise and that only this trilogy was 360 exclusive
Gaseous Snake on 3 Mar '11 said:
Anybody played that? Anybody heard of it? No?
Well, this seems like we're taking advantage of you a bit, but sure, we're up for that trade.
Actually, joking aside, the 360 couldn't handle Uncharted 2 (Uncharted 1's questionable too), so we could go ahead with that trade.
I never did like Gears or Halo, but I see how the pointless gore and pretty colours might appeal to the typical 360 gamer. You can keep them, it'd take the crap off the shelves. Also, could you bribe Activision and Disney into making all their games 360 exclusive? Cheers.
Imaduck on 3 Mar '11 said:
I love these articles, the fanboys or the closet fanboys just come out of the woodwork for them
There's so much "I hope x happens just to spite y!111", it's really childish, and it'll all balance out in the end. Can't you just enjoy the games? Ya know, remember when we did that? Also, agreed with the whole : it's crap because you can't have it, then it's the greatest thing since sliced bread because it's coming to that plastic box you own mental shares in, it's hilarious to watch
gobbybobby on 3 Mar '11 said:
Well didn't epic also say this week they enjoyed working with Microsoft on the Gears of war project becuase it was Xbox exclusive!?
Now they are saying, yea we wanna bring it to PS3 now.
Sill developers.
Anyone know how much control MS have over Gears of war?
djreplay on 3 Mar '11 said:
Microsoft are going to be fu*ked next gen, 343 industries, Ruffian, Turn 10 and Lionhead studio's are not going to delivering that much 1st party content come next gen.
Sony at the moment are laying the foundations for next gen by buying 1st party studio's (media Molecule) and unless MS throw some dough at the 3rd party's next gen they will be stuck with a console very similar to Sony's but lacking any 1st party content.
chronicwombat on 3 Mar '11 said:
i get the money argument, as in msoft give loads of it to keep gears exclusive, but i wonder about the figures. if gears hypothetically was on ps3 that opens up loads more potential sales = more money.
SavageEvil on 3 Mar '11 said:
Epic just sees money and the fact that Gears would be something completely different to other PS3 shooters. Money is money people, and being exclusive is pointless unless you can command serious numbers like a Gran Turismo game without fail. Gears on PS3 would be nice I guess, but if you already had it on 360 you wouldn't have any reason to buy it again. PS3 only owner looking for something different might pick it up, but if it's an older game, might as well be part of some Trilogy at a lower price point and that should spur sales as a full priced old game is like a slap in the face. Anyway, MS has no say in what Epic does with Gears at all, they can only toss money and ask for it to remain exclusive, if Epic refuses then they can take it to where ever they feel they can make the same money MS was throwing at them and then some.
craiglackenby on 3 Mar '11 said:
You see, bringing Gears to the PS3 would be like bringing Bulletstorm to the PS3 and there is little to no difference with that, not is resolution anyway, just lighter colour pallet. At the end of the day Gears is not a motherf**kin' powerhouse unlike Killzone or Uncharted, then we would be looking at a resolution drop if they were ported to the 360.
If Gears was made PS3 exclusive it would be in a complete different ball park to Gears 360 exclusive, that I'm pretty sure of. It's good to know that MS don't own it though and there is a possibility, until then I have my Bulletstorm for Gears 3 beta in April to look forward to.
I think the days of s**tty ports are becoming less frequent, many devs are choosing PS3 lead platform like Dead Space 2, Castlevania LOS, Medal of Honor, Vanquish, Batman AA and probably Batman AC.
timewarp1 on 3 Mar '11 said:
Havent played on my 360 since gears 2, and probably wont play it again until 3, if at all. Those avatar things do my head in. The menu system sucks, and no browser is poor - considering Microsoft make browsers.
Sound quality on peoples mikes are alot better than the random ones you get PS3, and more people seem to talk though.
craiglackenby on 3 Mar '11 said:
I agree, Sony are dropping s**tloads of exclusives to like you say lay the foundations nurture these first party devs into the next Naughty Dog or Guerrilla.
lol at the sig
altitude2k on 3 Mar '11 said:
Yep, me too.
Zubee on 3 Mar '11 said:
Dear CVG,
Is this an article or an attempt to start an argument?
Looking forward to your response.
Zubee
LiamOmega on 3 Mar '11 said:
Hell Yes, I don't like Xbox 360's, but I'd love Gears of War on PS3. That would be the best present Ever!
chunkysatsuma on 3 Mar '11 said:
I own both so it wouldnt bother me, would still buy it on 360 as controller is better for shooters.
With companies like Crytek now offering 360 exclusive content the console is safe, plus how would Gears going multiplatform hurt the 360 fanboys? Do they not get to play it as well?
Have to admit I am suprised this thread is just full of ps3 fanboys not doing their cause any justice. Uncharted 2 could play on 360, it would just need to be on two discs.
Also annoyed how immature this gen is, Capps says yeah Gears on ps3 would be good but microsoft give us reasons to stay exclusive. People read what they want to and frankly unless you have shares in Microsoft or Sony you shouldnt give a damn about exclusives just as long as you get to play games you enjoy.
Imaduck on 3 Mar '11 said:
Well said Chunky
h3r3tic666 on 3 Mar '11 said:
Screw PS3 ! Just bring it to the really gaming platform that is the PC ..
altitude2k on 3 Mar '11 said:
That thing I use in my office for Excel and PowerPoint?
chronicwombat on 3 Mar '11 said:
i really dont get people saying that bulletstorm is gears of war but in first person perspective
im guessin they are silly fanboys because if youve played both its pretty obvious that they are very different. obviously u shoot people in both.
sjholland87 on 3 Mar '11 said:
Can we have a mass cull of fanboys? All we then need is Obi-Wan:
"I feel a great disturbance on the CVG forums, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced."
It would be SUCH a great day because all I hear now is the sound of a million fanboys fapping
sjholland87 on 3 Mar '11 said:
Wow! You can see into the future?
YOU HAVE GOT TO SHOW ME HOW!!!
Cadmas88 on 3 Mar '11 said:
I really cant reply to this because i would be here all day. All am gunner say is i am in favour of Epic making Gears multiplat.
And would it be crazy to expect a Gears\PS3 announcment at this years E3. And before all the Xbots say yes its crazy should really think about it because the PS3 people were all saying it was crazy to say Metal Gear and Final Fantasy would end up on 360 and look how that turned out.
El Mag on 3 Mar '11 said:
We live in a world of haves and have nots. If you have you're as happy as a pig in s**t and the world smiles with you. If you have not you hate the world and everything in it. Until you finally get a piece, then you finally see what all the fuss was about, and you'll join that bandwagon and ride it hard.
Real fortune cookie s**t right there.
Imaduck on 3 Mar '11 said:
Just to add something I thought of : Every game developer on the planet would pobably like to make more money, ask them you'll probably get a "ye of course". That doesn't mean they'll make it, it just means - in an ideal world where money, time and porting weren't issues it'd be done already. Ask any of the companies, seriously. "Would you like to go multiplat and make more cash?" how many do you think would say "no, Sony are in my blood I will DIE before signing with those MS landlubbers!". They don't give a f**k, they do buisness, not fanboy warfare.
I don't see this particular case happening. There was nothing in what he said other than admitting, ye it might be nice and that they wouldn't seal any doors just yet, they ALL say that, it's generic buisnessman answer number 42 or something.
But Gears 3 is due in September, there's no time to port it. I don't think Epic would have the time or see any real financial gains in it. They're going multiplat after Gears basically, Bulletstorm has already arrived. Why go BACK spend a ton on porting something which would be awkward, (as regardless of fanboy s**t, Gears 2 is a pretty intensive game, it's 1 of the best looking games out there and is designed to work well with on the Xbox) instead of focusing completely on a new series that was multiplat from the ground up? By the time the Gears port was done, the next gen of consoles would probably be in view. It'd cost more to port and basically rebuild than they'd make.
Anyways, fight on
Ali_ on 3 Mar '11 said:
THe first Gears was wonderful online until they patched it and spoiled the character movement. The second was a bit rubbish IMO. I'll happily have the original on PS3 and ignore the rest.
craiglackenby on 3 Mar '11 said:
Have you played Gears 2 recently? It's far from one of the best looking games out there, there is multi plats that blow it out the water like Castlevania, Dead Space 2 and almost every Sony exclusive says Hi
fps_d0minat0r on 3 Mar '11 said:
1) gears uses unreal engine which is very easy to port.
2) it would not cost more or take longer porting gears than making a new game
3) gears of war on ps3 would make them more money than unreal tournament 3 and bulletstorm combined.
uptil now i thought microsoft owned the gears of war franchise which is why i thought it would never come.
after hearing this i think sony will provide them with an incentive to port the game.
people (including myself) thought valve would never develop for ps3 but sony must have done something to persuade them.....maybe they can do it again for gears. id buy gears over any valve game if it came.
starsail on 3 Mar '11 said:
PS3 doesn't need Gears 3 with Killzone 3, Infamous 3, Resistance 3 etc, I don't have enough money! MS geed to release more exclusives or the Xbox 360 will be a lesser version of PS3 without the exclusive titles, I also forgot the minor Uncharted 3.
Imaduck on 3 Mar '11 said:
BlatantfanboyCraig, I actually finished it again on the hardest difficulty 2 nights ago
It's still a lot better looking than Dead Space 2 ( gorgeous as it is) Castlevania, and the likes of Uncharted (1), last Resistance game and a pile more. It's in the top 10 no problemo. Even compared to the likes of Crysis maxed, it's a nicely designed game and it still looks great. Whether a game looks good or not doesn't depend on the box it runs on.
Moorpheus on 3 Mar '11 said:
Dude I said all this earlier in the thread - it just doesn't get commented on cos it's the 'sensible' answer.
Fanboys hate sensible - they prefer illogical and stupid.
shogunreaper on 3 Mar '11 said:
Only convincing reason they give you is money, and they have plenty of it seeing as gears is one of the few remaining exclusives on the 360.
sweatyBallacks on 3 Mar '11 said:
This is semi-related:
Just checked VGChartz and they list Mass Effect 2 on PS3 as having sold only 230,000 total sales after 5 weeks on sale. That's pretty slow for an AAA game I think.
So PS3 owners need to go out and buy it. Me included, but I never buy full priced games.
BenThomasFoster on 3 Mar '11 said:
dayum shame about M$ publishing it. It may of shut up the fanboy snobber of ps3 lot say xbox have crap exclusives
BenJy on 3 Mar '11 said:
I doubt Sony need the lackluster series known as Gears Of War on there console, then again it's more $$$..
blagger on 3 Mar '11 said:
I think you need to go read the preview on ign of crysis 2 ps3.
It got a really bad write-up on ps3(despite what an official playstation mag says), dragon age origins 2 also has bad framerate drops in game compared to the 360 version as well(according to what i've read).
Nothing much has changed.
As for gears, i never thought mass effect 2 would make it to ps3 so you never know.
I'd be surprised if it did to be honest, but most ps3 fans don't seem to care much anyway.
Multiplayerking on 3 Mar '11 said:
No thanks. Sony, don't bother. Focus on new creative games like Heavy Rain, please.
Imaduck on 3 Mar '11 said:
I don't think the days of s**tty ports are over sadly, I think they're just becoming less common. It's just the way it is, the PS3 hardware isn't sitting well from a multiplat point of view, I don't know the ins and outs. Also .... from memory DS2 looked quite a bit better on the 360 according to Lensoftruth. Crisper.
dangermou5e on 3 Mar '11 said:
Fixed your post for you.
Very_Silver_Ownz on 3 Mar '11 said:
'' This is semi-related:Just checked VGChartz and they list Mass Effect 2 on PS3 as having sold only 230,000total sales after 5 weeks on sale. That's pretty slow for an AAA game I think.So PS3 owners need to go out and buy it. Me included, but I never buy full priced games ''
IS THAT IT ??? You PS3 gamers who haven't brought Mass Effect 2 should be ashamed of yourselves.
Mass Effect 2 is one of if not THE best game this gen now go out and buy it right now. You make me sick to my stomach
damoxuk on 3 Mar '11 said:
He said it himself - Epic actually own the IP to gears themselves (tbh I actually thought Microsoft had the rights until this post) almost all the Sony Exclusives are owned by Sony owned studios. Mostly.
But anyhow can't see Gears coming to PS3 unless Epic announce something at E3 for a Gears 1-2 pack for PS3 with Gears 3 coming to PS3 sep now that would be mental.
Although i've finished the 1st gears and playing gears 2 on 360 so I wouldn;t buy it.
chronicwombat on 3 Mar '11 said:
El Mag (kind of): "We live in a world of haves and have nots. If you have you're as happy as a pig in s**t and the world smiles with you. If you have not you hate the world and everything in it. Until you finally get a piece, then you finally see that you are actually just a pig, in s**t. Then you start wanting something else and before you know it you're a bloody have not again."
We all get suckered in unfortunately
djreplay on 4 Mar '11 said:
I found this crystal ball at a car boot sale and have seen my future but it's not very pretty. My future seemed to be filled with military first person shooters and pubic hair.
kmcroc on 4 Mar '11 said:
This is the one relationship MS can not mess up ever ,if they are to continue in the console market. i know they own Lion head studios & have 343 industry working on their Halo IP,But to lose EPIC like they lost bio-ware would be a devastating blow on they will not recover from unless they go out & buy say Ubisoft,EA,THQ or even R. But i doubt buying anyone of them house would still not lessing the blow.
johnafirth on 4 Mar '11 said:
Saying "in the future" means what though? Waiting until Gears 3 has been out two years and then releasing Gears 1? The PS4'll be out first...
FunSponge on 4 Mar '11 said:
@kmcroc.......
MS don't own Epic in any way, shape or form therefore they cannot 'lose' them. They are an independent studio who have developed for the PS3 in the past and an example, quite recent in fact, is Bulletstorm. Another example is UT3 which ironically enough was released on the PS3 6 or 7 months before it was released on the Xbox360. The same goes for Bioware as they are an EA company.
I currently own just the 360 so in no way am I biased or a PS3 fanboy. In my opinion games going multi-plat is the best thing for it, it would save having to fork out an extra 200-250£ just to play an exclusive. Imagine having one console, PS3 or 360 whichever you prefer, and being able to play the likes of Uncharted, Gears, Halo, Fable, Killzone, LBP, MGS4 and whatever other AAA exclusives you can think of on one box. Multi-plat is the way the future should be.
360_Fan on 4 Mar '11 said:
50+ replies on this thread and not 1 xbot complaining about this news. Several ps3 fans being negative.
Could be that there are a number of xbots who are hanging from the rafters after hearing this, but most likely, we can now see where a bulk of the fanboism comes from this site.
Shame to see that mass effect 2 flopped on the ps3. Maybe developers should look at these figured before making statements like this.
El Mag on 4 Mar '11 said:
Thanks for that unbiased summary *looks at name* 360_Fan....oh, i see.
Not one negative or flame bait remark from a 360 owner though?. Did you miss the "but i thought ps3 fanboys said gears of war was sh!t? lol, if it goes to the ps3 watch em buck dance" up top and the couple that agreed?. All of them missing out 360 fans would do exactly the same with a PS3 exclusive. I think it's fair to say this story didn't cause the arguments many expected. Most were actually discussing decent points. The regular fanboys from both sides didn't show up.
Shame you had to finish your comment with a dig after having a go at others. A year old Mass Effect 2 was never going to sell millions on PS3. Maybe the developers will see that the Mass Effect 2 PS3 sales are extra ones they wouldn't have had otherwise, and now it's helped install a larger fanbase to sell even more of the 3rd game.
kmcroc on 4 Mar '11 said:
@FunSponge never said they were owned by MS & Yes thing can still be lost even if one does not own them , their business relationship can sour.they have had only two games on PS3 UT3 & Bulletstorm,UT3 was only on PS3 for 6 months prior to it's Xbox360 release.yes but prior to EA Paying 860 million for them BIO-WARE had a working relationship like they have w/Epic games.i own both consoles & me personally i like when a company has items to offer me that other companies don't have, i can't see myself living in a world where everything is plain & generic ,cause their no competitive edge.
rbt2 on 4 Mar '11 said:
Why don't the 3 super powers of the console world get together and bring out a one format machine? It'd stop all the fanboy nonsense.
Having said that, if it came in a range of colours, there'd be a 'my colour's nicer than yours' tw@tathon.
On 2nd thoughts, Sony, MS and Nintendo.....don't bother.
El Mag on 4 Mar '11 said:
A red one would obviously be the best though wouldn't it. Actually if it changed colour depending on your mood....
*runs to trademark it before LG sue*
Barca Azul on 4 Mar '11 said:
" Microsoft gives him "really good, compelling reasons to work with them again."
Millions of them I guess!
Im sure MS would though!
kirankara on 4 Mar '11 said:
Ok this is just my opinion folks , so agree or disagree, that's fine, I'm not stating this is law sent down from god on tablets to me on a mountain or anything lol
I liked gears of war 1, and almost played it to end before giving up on it, the co op was infinitely more fun than playing alone though, and the 2nd game was a let down to me. I just got bored about half way through and detested the vehicle sections in it. I wasn't playing co op with my brother , and just didn't find anything in game that made me want to finish it.
If ( big if IMO ) it ever came to ps3 , I'd say , it's a good game, with great controls , but lacks real depth. Its better played in co op where it becomes great fun. Would I say they missing out on it not coming to ps3, yes, but , not as much as some people would like you to believe ( cough cough 360 fanboys) would I pay 40 pounds for each one? Not a bloody chance! I can pick up double pack for ten on my 360, and reckon I'd pay 30 max for both on ps3.
My Other thought on this idea is, that it would still be running on ue3, which isn't really favourable to ps3 architecture, and games never (rarely anyway)look as good on ps3 as 360 when built around ue3. Bulletstorm being latest example, and that was in house development too, so my guess is it would look bit worse for wear anyway in the port.
PS3UberTool on 4 Mar '11 said:
So they got a big cheque... it's not like Sony don't fo the same thing... no big deal.
sith lord69 on 4 Mar '11 said:
can't find anything about this on any other news site,so it's either someone quoting an off the cuff remark or CVG baiting the fanboys again,and if it is true,well that's business,we all know that as far as MS is concerned the only exclusive franchise that they are really bothered about is Halo,hence the reason they took it off Bungie before letting them go.
kirankara on 4 Mar '11 said:
I've seen this comment elsewhere sith, but it should be regarded as nothing more than an off the cuff comment i think. It sounded like someone else said as a remark about how they'd love to bring it to ps3, and make a big pile if cash, but MS gives them big pile of cash not to do so .
Paradaz - UK on 4 Mar '11 said:
We talk the same language rbt you big southern mincer
PS3UberTool on 4 Mar '11 said:
With no competition think how much they'd be able to charge you for games... back to the bad old days of £75 for a cartridge, and if they wanted to sell you dodgy hardware whats to stop them? Or charge a fortune for repairs, or charge £650 for the machine in the first place.
While having different consoles does mean we have to put up with kiddies fighting over which console is best it does at least make the manufacturers and developers competitive, which is better for the consumer.
Paradaz - UK on 4 Mar '11 said:
Read my link.....a universal gaming format is still possible inside different hardware. Are all DVD players the same? Is there no competition between rival electronics companies selling players?........yet they all play DVD movies the same!
rbt2 on 4 Mar '11 said:
I think 3DO tried for a single format first, Daz.
Didn't they try to get as many companies to manufacture their systems in the hope of becoming the sole games format?
I know Goldstar and Panasonic got on board.
Paradaz - UK on 4 Mar '11 said:
Well, we all know a universal format will never happen but on top of that there will always be another company who thinks they can do better....and buck the trend.
It's amusing though, just how many people always talk about exclusives in these forums.....and how many threads turn into list-making championships. Why anyone needs to 'brag' about a game of which they have no affiliation, that appears only on one console....of which they have no affiliation, is beyond me.
Perhaps they have really small tally-whackers
headspin on 5 Mar '11 said:
Why can't people just own both consoles instead of imagining either is like supporting a football club??? Ok if moneys an issue then fair enough, but it's no excuse to spout absolute bile... On the controller issue of that making your decision on multi platforms just buy a 3rd party controller that is a copy of your preferred controller for your said console and then you can make a good educated choice of which platform to get the game of you want instead of just saying you prefer a controller, ive just done that for my ps3 and now fps's on my ps3 are a joy to play on as it's a copy of the 360 controller but you can also swap the front buttons so it's how it should be for fps's (L2 to scope and R2 to fire), and before someone bites my balls saying about the stick layout then why did Sony put the d pad where it is right now from the start before the sticks got bolted on, that's right because it's the natural and most comfy layout for your left thumb, otherwise the d pad would have been where the left stick is wouldn't it from the start, god knows why they haven't redesigned the controller for the sticks so people have a choice of an updated controller or the present classic one.... Please someone add me as well to play kz3 with lol... Tag is on my sig....
headspin on 5 Mar '11 said:
Like, and like...
julioaragon on 6 Mar '11 said:
funny how the exclusives xbox 360 had bioshock and mass effect hasnt even sold half a million copies each on the ps3,they went multiplatnum when everybody had already been worn down by playin it on the xbox...if gears does go multi it will be the same result..ps3 only exclusive gems has been god of war 3 with 4 million copies and uncharted 1 and 2 4 million copies combined.resistance 1,2 ,3 have not even sold no more than one million copies each,killzones busts, microsoft gears 1, 4 million copies,gears 2,8 million copies...halo 3, 10 million copies,halo reach, 6 million,original bioshock 1,6 miilion..ps3 version 1 million,as for who has more better exclusives neither, both consoles have 2 great titles except that microsofts two big games have sold far for than sonys..
slick loose on 6 Mar '11 said:
Obviously what ever has sold more = better? CoD has outsold all the games you have mentioned so it must be the best game ever!
rbt2 on 6 Mar '11 said:
The high prices you quote wouldn't happen today. These are very austere times compared to the late 80's/90's. People just wouldn't pay that sort of money for a game or console anymore. You have to remember that gamers paying 75 sovs for a game back then are far different to the gamers of today on the whole. Back then, gaming was nowhere near as popular with the casuals as it is today. Also, what would be the point of making dodgy hardware?
With regards your point about competition, VHS was the standard in the days of video tape. Blu-Ray is the standard for Hi-Def DVD. There is no logical reason not to have a single format. As I previously stated, 3DO tried it years ago. They failed because they, or more accurately Trip Hawkins didn't understand the market.
Riptorn73 on 7 Mar '11 said:
All you d!ckhead fanboys make me want to vomit....'this console is better than that one'....'that console couldn't run this game'.
Are you lot not tired of going on & on & on & on about what machine is best?? I mean come on!!
Your like a bunch of children who REALLY need to grow up.
I own both consoles & love them both, each one has it's own strengths & weaknesses, WE ALL KNOW THIS!! so stop rising to the bait.
Big f**king deal if EPIC brought Gears to PS3....i hope they do so PS3 players could play it coz it a very good franchise, same can be said about Uncharted (prob my fave game this gen) to XBOX....Halo Reach, God of War etc etc etc.
Kn*bheads the lot of ya.
Flame this post if you want i couldn't care less
i like jam donut on 7 Mar '11 said:
Isn't like this with consoles already? They're similar with specs and play the same games but with slight differences.
slick loose on 8 Mar '11 said:
Why would anyone flame you? You're right, it is pathetic how a lot of us on here bicker about who has the better console. Although I disagree about the exclusives, I think all platforms should have them as that is what defines them. I would hate to think that one day we only pick a console purely on the pad or design of said console.
User75 on 8 Mar '11 said:
ahh. i bought 360 only for gears and halo. now bungie is off halo and epic wanna go to ps3?
what a waste off money
martinawatson on 8 Mar '11 said:
As long as savage moon doesn't come to the 360 who gives a s**t
Paradaz - UK on 8 Mar '11 said:
Are you for real?.....DVD movies are the same format. PS3/360/Wii games obviously aren't.
Shadmeister on 8 Mar '11 said:
I have an XBOX360 so not a flame initiator
Does this mean that the PS3 has better hardware and can perform better ?
The person at Epic seems very enthusiastic for PS3 - so have developers been able to surmount the parallel programming issues that Valve stated they had overcome many months back ?
My point is - although we have kinect - i am not bothered about that - have the game physics and graphics for PC advanced so much that consoles are now providing a limited experience ?
If the PS3 has more headroom - this is the start of the negative trend for XBOX360 - it is placed as hardcore gamers machine - kinect may not change this, so XBOX360 now has a reduced lifespan compared to PS3.
Hence, should Microsoft not delay in the next version of the XBOX to maintain momentum - obviously backwards compatibility is important for its established customer base.
slick loose on 8 Mar '11 said:
Technically, couldn't they fit all 3 Gears of War on one disc for the PS3? I'm not say they would or even should...but it is technically possible.
That would be sweeeeeeeeeeeet!