So every time I read anything about Microsoft or the new XboX, I always see the same comment. And it's always shoved out there with the confidence that it trumps every other possible argument that might be in favor of XboX.
"Xbox has no games."
Now why has this been the go-to argument against Xbox recently? Does no one realize that there is a difference between games and [i]exclusives[/i]?
Sure, PS has a few good exclusives (I say a few because while there are some fantastic ones, a lot of them are pretty disappointing), but Xbox has all of the same non-exclusives that PS does, and now those games are going to get a nice graphics boost on the new console.
The Xbox library is still huge, and last time I checked, tons of devs were already announcing the updates their games are going to get.
All this is to simply say: Hey, think about what you're saying before you post.
-
When you subtract the games that Xbox and PlayStation have in common, the third party titles, there is a massive disparity between what games are available in each consoles games library. Microsoft only have the staples of Halo/Geara/Forza, and a smattering of other lesser titles, hardly worthy of mentioning. When was the last time that Microsoft developed a recognised 'game of the year'? A cursory glance at various 'game of the year' lists reveals that Halo (2001), Gears (2006) are the only games. I do not have the time or the inclination to post the numerous 'Game of the Year' that Sony have had... The problem is that Microsoft do not have any narrative games. Sony excel in creating groundbreaking games with a very strong narrative, and it is this body of work that garners them award, after award. Microsoft appear to have focused solely on the multiplayer experience, rather than the content in their games. Narrative games existed long before the multiplayer era, and the majority of gamers see these types of games as true games. So, when people say that Xbox has 'no games' this is what they are talking about.