So quality has never been better and prices nothing for the quality you get on a game to game basis...... ballocks.... quality is down,shine and cost is up and the consumer never more woolly.KDR_11k said:That reeks of No True Scotsman.ZippyDSMlee said:If you are casual(either hard or soft) you don;t need more than 1 but as a real gamer there are maybe at best 4 or so games on each system worth owning, thus in order to have all the worth while games you have to buy all the systems.
If you don't care or don't have the money your stuck with marginalized quality. It was not as bad last gen when the industry made games geared to enthusiasts(what was once called the hard core gamer), now adays its all casual focused either to the lite/non gamer of the brain dead hardcore game consumer....
I bought an N64 to play GoldenEye.needausername said:No game justifies buying a console just for it in my opinion...
Hopefully, there'll be price drop before GOWIII comes out.Magugag said:Right now, God of War III is tugging at me, but until I see that price go a little further down I'm not touching that overpriced monster.
That's when SONY will move some units.floppylobster said:Much more likely for a Team Ico game.
If the Core system's cheap enough (prob <£100) when Alan Wake comes out, I'll be the proud owner of both consoles.Corpse XxX said:I am a ps3 owner, and if the same thing happened the other way around with the xbox, i would just buy the game even if i dont own the console to play it, and just go to a friend that has that console, and play it at his house..
I have a PS3 and I know the answer to this question. A lot Xbox owners have been labelling KZ2 as being between average and rubbish. In truth, having played the demo, I think it's average to good shooter which I'm not going to buy (not my kind of shooter). To make an owner of a current system buy another machine it would have to be a great game not an average to good game.Boober the Pig said:This is a question for Xbox 360 owners. Is Killzone 2 enough to get you to buy a PS3?
No no it just means you are a consumer like any other.C Lion said:KDR_11k said:So to be a real gamer, I have to invest like 800 dollars and buy a Wii and PS3? In that case no thanks, I'd rather be a fake, soft-core gamer.ZippyDSMlee said:If you are casual(either hard or soft) you don;t need more than 1 but as a real gamer there are maybe at best 4 or so games on each system worth owning, thus in order to have all the worth while games you have to buy all the systems.
If you don't care or don't have the money your stuck with marginalized quality. It was not as bad last gen when the industry made games geared to enthusiasts(what was once called the hard core gamer), now adays its all casual focused either to the lite/non gamer of the brain dead hardcore game consumer....
That reeks of No True Scotsman.
Non Sequitur. I called your comment about how real gamers must own all systems because they don't find more than 4 games on each a No True Scotsman argument because you define your category by how closely a person obeys your claim. The common definition of a gamer is one who plays games. A real gamer is one who really plays games. You can't tell me everybody who plays games only sees 4 good games on each console, if that were the case we wouldn't see tie-in ratios of 6-8.ZippyDSMlee said:So quality has never been better and prices nothing for the quality you get on a game to game basis...... ballocks.... quality is down,shine and cost is up and the consumer never more woolly.