I'm going to try to make this as pellucid as I can for you. Developing games for 360 is cheaper for developers, both time and money-wise. Game companies want to spend as little as they can putting out games. Thus it stands to reason that they'd be able to spend more time and money on 360 ports while still being cheaper for the developer than porting to the PS3.
we all know that but you saying why 360 is succesfull and selling well as it just being better for development isn't true
you are not in school that you keep that with this bullshit
You've got to be fucking kidding me. Halo is the reason for the success of the 360, huh? If we're talking 2007, maybe there's some credence to that. But, it's interesting how the franchise has been outsold by the Call of Duty series so far, isn't it? Grand Theft Auto has had a significant amount of sales as well. Funny how those are multi-platform too. SquareTrade has the sales of Halo 3 falling hard since the second half of 2008, while GTA and Call of Duty have grown in that time. Something doesn't add up there.
didn't you read what i said
i said HALO is more responsible for XBL then it being reposnsible for games.i never spoke about halo being the only thing
and HALO is what started it all.again and again you are talking like a newbie
if HALO never brought gamers over to XBOX and 360 then developers never would make games for it as developers only make games when their is a userbase
you are a fool to follow what is that squaretrade........lol
you really are that imature
reporting false info and doing all these strike thing like this is a war or something for you
Well done taking the exception, and trying to extrapolate it into the rule. Funny how 7 of the top 10 selling games for PS3 feature online play, and 9 of the 10 for the 360, huh?
yes they do have online play but what you said was just because it wouldn't have it it is a fail,you are proving your own statement wrong
meh
Do you ever get tired of showing your nescience on here, or shall I keep reality checking you?
WOW you are so living in your own world
again and again repoting false news and just believing what you think is correct and then you naively everytime try to make the other person sound bad
Yes there are still great single player experiences out there but that number is dwindling. The fact of the matter is that more and more players are getting involved in gaming because of the online multiplayer mode.
i know that but my reply was simply based on Shayd saying anything that doesn't have multiplayer is low quality
his post are so false and what he himself believe
Gamers are skipping the single player mode entirely and that's causing developers to make pretty short single player modes so that they can make deep multiplayer modes. There are tons of gamers out there who won't even buy a game if it doesn't have an online multiplayer option, no matter how good the game is.
yes cause the mojority of the gamers are casuals,only a minor part are hardcores
and even in the hardcore part some like to play multiplayers
and the casuals follow the popular thing which is multiplayer right now
The downloadable content that gets released for a lot of games is another indicator. A lot of it is to extend the multiplayer side of the game. Very rarely is it to extend the single player side. Red Dead Redemption is a prime example. Rockstar has released two DLC packs so far and both are for online multiplayer. They'll be releasing two more and both of them add more to the online side with the last one also bringing a new single player adventure.
i just hate those DLC's.devs are so greedy that they leave out things from the game which i don't like
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if more games like Warhawk and MAG get released.
neither will i but it is just a period like all others.
mmo's will be the next thing after the online thing
