Top
390°

Sony: we can't depend on third party exclusives

Sony Marketing and Public Relations Manager Mark Levitan has commented at length on the PlayStation 3's struggle for exclusives.

Levitan said that the breadth of PS3's software library was integral to its appeal, citing Guitar Hero: World Tour, Grand Theft Auto IV, Singstar, Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots and Buzz! as key titles. "It's important to have a balance and we've always done that very effectively."

He admitted, however, that the manufacturer could no longer rely on third party publishers to make its console offering stand out. "As we've seen in the last couple of years, you can't really depend on third party for exclusives anymore. Fallout 3 is an awesome game and it's going to be awesome on the PS3 but I know it's on the Xbox 360 as well. So is Call of Duty: World at War and other titles."

Read Full Story >>
herenb.canadaeast.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Lord Shuhei Yoshida3621d ago

Damn straight.Only 1st party is the way of the future

Sir_Ken_Kutaragi3621d ago (Edited 3621d ago )

.____....____....____
|.......|...|................ .|
|____|...|____....____|
|...................|........ .|
|............____|...____| IS THE FUTURE!!! ;-P

Pain3621d ago

With M$ buying all the games and support cuz there losers yes they cant depend on the sell-out's....err 3rd partys.

3621d ago
Stubacca3621d ago

You're so clever. You obviously have a worthwhile opinion and have no prior agenda to making any comments. You're clearly not an X-bot.

First-party titles are definately the way to go. I love SOE and the games availbable right now. Team ICO rock!

ravinshield3621d ago

i know, thats what i would say after loosing ace combat, tekken 6, star ocean, final fantasy.too many to name

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3621d ago
Silogon3621d ago

"I certainly think we've come down to a point where, for $399, the PS3 is certainly affordable."

You're out of your damn mind... Sony, fire this guy.

ThatCanadianGuy3621d ago

How is that not affordable?

Most people with High Deff t.v's Can afford a mere 399$ Console

360 is like the average car you see for sale
PS3 is like a Ferrari,more expensive,yet those who can afford it Will enjoy it more then the average car.

marinelife93621d ago

I have to agree with Silogan. $399 is still expensive comparitively speaking.

Sony's price has always been the 800lb gorilla in the room. If they dropped it to match the 360 they would be killing Microsoft. They're banking on the games they release this Holiday putting them over the top before they have to lower the price. We'll see.

ultimolu3621d ago

Lol, you make me laugh sometimes Silogon.

I agree with marine. Sony should still consider lowering the price, even if they take a bit of a hit. $50.00 shouldn't be too bad. But then again, the PS3 is a whole lot cheaper than it was when I bought it last year.

Who wants to pay $599.99 again? o-O;

Scotracer3621d ago

You just contradicted yourself first stating the PS3 is affordable then comparing it to a Ferrari?

The Xbox 360 and PS3 do pretty much exactly the same things overall yet the Xbox 360 is half the price in many areas. Sony HAS to do something about that.

morganfell3621d ago (Edited 3621d ago )

So what you are saying is $299 + 4-5 years of Live is more affordable than $399? I love your math. How many times did you repeat the 3rd grade?

ActionBastard3621d ago

But an Elite IS affordable? I look at it like this, with the release of Fable 2 and Left4Dead coming I was in the market for a 360. A $199 360 with a $20 refurb HDD. After looking at what comes in the $199 360, I saw that I would need: 1) a headset *sold separately 2) component cables *sold separately 3) XBL subscription *sold separately 4) a charge N play so I don't waste money on rechargeable or disposable batteries *sold separately. That $199 360 turned out to be over $330. But that is affordable, right?

Will_Smith3621d ago

so let me get this straight?? by your definition

Xbox - 199
WiFi Adapter - 99
Xbox Live - 50
120 gig HDD - 150

Total - 500 Dollars

Sony gives you that AND more for 399... who doesn't want a Blu-Ray player?? unless you hate Sony that much that you will miss an entire gen of incredible high def movies

ThatCanadianGuy3621d ago (Edited 3621d ago )

I said Most people who have High deff T.v's can afford it.
And also i compared it to a farrari because it's more expensive then the average car (360)

How is 399$ Not affordable? I live with my roomate.Hava a minimum wage job,and a bad Smoking habbit.And i have Two PS3's.I think most people can afford it.

Tho i do agree they should drop the price.By atleast 50$
I have a feeling they will early next year.

Also you say 360 & PS3 are the same..only one is cheaper..

PS3 has a blu-ray player.
PS3 has a web browser
PS3 can do 1080p (Not "upscaled" 720P-1080I like 360)
PS3 can help contribute to science via [email protected]
PS3 comes with an 80GB HDD+Dualshock 3 Sixaxis controller
PS3 can do Dolby 5.1 surround sound
PS3 uses HDMI 1.3 (Not 1.2 like 360)
PS3 has real time weather and news in stunning 3D recreated globe

And most of all,it has reliability

It does alot of things 360 doesn't.And with HOME coming soon It's well worth the price.

Edit:
Im sorry to rain on your parade but 360 cannot do 1080P NATIVE
Please show me one game on 360 that does it.And i'll respectfully apologize

Scotracer3621d ago (Edited 3621d ago )

Xbox 360 Premium (60Gb) - $299
Wifi adapter - $99 (IF you need one)
Live - $50
$448 total if you buy the Wifi adapter otherwise it's $349.

Also not everyone will want Live so they wont buy the adapter leaving you at $299.

People look at the price on the box and if things are optional, they will buy them if they want to or need to.

@CanadianGuy

This shows the level of your knowledge when you are 50% wrong about the Xbox 360

-Xbox 360 does not have web browser correct
-Xbox 360 has no blu-ray correct
-Xbox 360 CAN do 1080p native
-Xbox 360 does not do [email protected]
-Xbox 360 comes with 60Gb HDD and comes with arguably the best controller available
-Xbox 360 CAN do Dolby 5.1 via TOSlink optical (same as PS3)
-HDMI 1.2 is perfectly fine for todays consoles
-The news and weather feature may be nice but it's not exactly deal breaking -- clutching at straws for some more?

Man_of_the_year3621d ago

Can't DEPEND on them or can't AFFORD them????

3rd party exclusive titles are hard to come by these days as Devs want to maximize profits by developing for both systems..PS2 had a huge market share so 3rd party exclusives were easier to come by - nowadays its a different story - Devs need some kind of "insentive" to create exclusive titles or exclusive DLC for just 1 console...and lets face it...MS may not be investing money into their own 1st party devision - but they are spending that money on exclusive DLC, stealing once exclusive titles from Sony AND getting 3rd party support for exclusive games...

I just don't think Sony has the money to secure exclusive rights at the moment of this global economic crisis that going on...they just announced that their gaming devision profit forcast has been cut between 38% - 57%...ouch

sajj3163621d ago

Excellent post CandianGuy420. Like I said below ... conveying the value of a PS3 at a higher price point will be a challenge for Sony. Judging by the NPD numbers and Year-over-Year increases, I think its working.

Lifendz3621d ago (Edited 3621d ago )

but I will say that just the other day I had a conversation with a friend about Tekken 6 going multi-plat. He was trying to rub it in my face (being a 360 owner) and I told him that the day of 3rd party exclusives has gone the way of the dinosaur. There are exceptions here and there (e.g., Metal Gear Solid 4, War Devil) but by and large the only exclusive games will be those made in house or published.
Still, I'd rather have Sony's exclusive in-house studios and exclusively published games any day over the MS exclusives. Sorry if that sounds fan boyish but you give me KillZone 2, Resistance 2, Ratchet, Team Ico, Gran Turismo, LBP, Wipeout, Uncharted, White Knight, God of War 3...well you get the idea...and I'll take those games over any MS exclusive. And yes I love the Halo franchise (despite the fact that they're milking it dry imo) and Gears 2 great.

The first stab of 3rd party exclusives was DMC4 and the final straw was FFXIII. Now, no PS3 owner even cares about this stuff.

thor3621d ago

Lol if it was £200 in the UK that'd be a real bargain - if I count up the amount I'll be spending (or have spent on me) on games in the run-up to christmas it'll exceed £200 easily.

Cenobia3621d ago

I don't think Sony has ever paid for any exclusive. They never had to. THe PS1 had better tech (which led to FF jumping over), and the PS2 sold like hotcakes (making devs develop for it exclusively). I'm sure they may have paid for a couple of games that I'm unaware of, but for the most part buying games, DLC, and paying to make games exclusive is Microsoft's business.

I'm pretty sure Sony could afford to buy games if they wanted to (I think they're actually bigger than MS, although I don't really know). They probably just don't feel they need to with all their first party devs, or the rest of the company is unwilling to move money into the gaming division.

Sez 3621d ago

are you guys serious or are you just pulling sh!t out your @ss. you keep add thing you don't need just to justify the 360 cost more than the ps3.
1) most people don't care for the wifi. so stop adding it. it's a matter of prefrence
2)all you need is a 20gig HDD. i've had the same 20gig HDD without having to delete saves or cut DLC. beeside it's not the ps3 where you have to do mandatory installs. saving more space. idoits
3)also you can still do everything that gold menbers do except play online matches with a silver account. so really as i said before it's a matter of prefrence again.

so if it makes you guys feel better thinking all those thing are needed to play 360 cost you 500-700 dollars. then keep believing that.

3621d ago
SuperM3621d ago

Nomather how you look at it the ps3 has an incredible value. 360 may cost half the price, but then you dont even get a third of the value. Its so retarded how expensive the 360 gets if you want all the content the ps3 has. buy hard drive, wifi adapter, xbox live and you are already at the price of a ps3 or even higher. then buy a blu ray player, and we are talking 700-800$. Then if you add another 4 years of xbox live and you got up to 1000$. Someone is getting ripped off, and its not the guys buying ps3

Man_of_the_year3621d ago

Actually MS is much bigger than Sony. You also basically agreed to what i had stated with Sony being the heavy hitters and having such a huge market share with the PS1 & 2 - they didn't need to pay for 3rd party exclusives.

However a gaming console is worth nothing without games. 3rd party games make up a HUGE % of every consoles library of games. I agree that sony can make some great 1st party games there is no argument about that - however its the 3rd party games that are of the greater % of the library and if customer X sees a game on both consoles - the deciding factor may be the game that either has the extra DLC or is on the cheaper console - assuming they are just looking for a gaming console and not the technical monster the PS3 is.

BrotherNick3621d ago

Yes, but I can get the 200 dollar console immediately, and over time I can pay the online...I think it's an american thing Morganfell for people to not look at the long term cost of things. Maybe that's partly why a lot of americans are in financial ruin.

Homicide3621d ago

Of course they can't. They don't have any.

Thugbot1873621d ago

On Mark’s point about 3rd party exclusives, I believe you it is important to balance between 3rd party and what you have. Where I differ is I think you can rely on 3rd party exclusives if you treat them right. Sony this time around what way too big headed, they figured they would get exclusives just because they were king last time round. They didn’t show the developers love by helping them cut cost by giving them good development tools, devkits where late on the first generation of PS3 games, they refused to pay for exclusive to help make up the cost of development.

Now look at Microsoft they are heavy on the 3rd party side and it is working in their favor because they are showing the development studio’s love, great development tools, unified online architecture that’s mature, willing to pay and give support with development for the console. In return they have a high attach rate because they are giving what many gamers want.

Nintendo Wii on the other hand is more on the 1st party titles and as you can see. The game library isn’t so hot…

The point is you need a balance very true, but 3rd party can work for you if you show love.

IdleLeeSiuLung3621d ago

There are a couple things here that should be pointed out and is intended to respond to a number of posts above:

1. Comparing a PS3 to a Xbox 360 Arcade is futile, since they are different business model. Sony charges you an upfront cost for the whole kitchen sink. MS charges you less upfront, but more in the long run and it is for the most part optional. What is your pick? I venture to say that most consumers are short sighted and will select the 360 with the low upfront cost. This is the same reason people lease cars and finance their TV purchase.
2. With the above said, the Xbox 360 Arcade is not intended to compete with the PS3, but with the Wii and PS2. In that respect it is a great value at the moment and the PS2 is continuing to decline in sales. Sony is likely to feel a pinch here.
3. From a game standpoint, the PS3 and Xbox 360 both has good games coming out. At first glance it seems Sony is bolstering their 1st party studios while MS is shedding weight. Well did anyone consider a different business model where MS just funds new IPs like Gears of War. It might be much more expensive to hold a studio rather than outsource it and hold on to the ip. This is also likely to result independent studios being more competitive, easier to hold talent and resulting in better games. So moving forward I think both consoles will have great games. Sony is guaranteed to have great exclusive due to their long established franchises although MS is a little uncertain in this area.
4. For most consumers, even those that buy a high end TV, a $400 blu-ray player purchase might just be too expensive given the poor economy we are in. For a while we kept hearing how the entertainment industry is recession proof, well who would have thought that Sony would cut forecasted profit while it's PS3 business is growing. I think the $400 might be a tough pill to swallow for some.

factory3621d ago Show
Mike134nl3621d ago Show
SkyGamer3621d ago

The thing is that most people do not have that lump sum right off the get go. So a 200 dollar system now and then eventually adding in extras down the road grants them to play now instead of waiting later. Who needs the 120 gb hdd to play a game? Who needs a wireless adapter when hard-line is much better? Those are luxuries and not necessities.

Bottom line is that with this economy, you can not expect to have a console that sells for double the competition with half the games and expect people to rush and buy it on name alone. The truth is that most people do not even have hdtv's.

You fanboys need to get over the fact that not everyone is living in their mom's basement with no bills but work. Some people have other lives and transportation and living expenses and rent and food. Not everyone can live off Dew and Cheetoes and there are others that have families that they need to take care of.

So great for you that you have noone to look after but yourself and you can buy an hdtv and a ps3. For the rest of us that actually lives in the real world, there are priorities.

Thugbot1873621d ago (Edited 3621d ago )

@Factory @Mike124nl: I normally try to hold back on out right just calling people idiots but you two are up there… First your political comments don’t belong here. Most of us come here for games and news on politics is not one of the reasons for this site. If you want to vote or campaign for a candidate leave our games and systems out of it and do it at another site.

Darkseider3621d ago

Is an affordable pricepoint for a lot of people. A lot of folks argue that people don't want or need Wifi for the XBox 360. Well I tend to disagree. If I had one I would definately want one simply because I don't want cables streaming out of my entertainment center to a switch or router. As a piece of equipment in an entertainment center and those with a HD capable TV the PS3 makes more sense with the Blu-Ray player. The large HD is just icing on the cake.

I have two a 40/60 gig model and neither are strapped for space with the games that I own+DLC+downloadable games. Not to mention that with firmware updates come more features for both the console and its' games as well as the Blu-Ray player which further future proofs the device. All in all a very affordable, reliable and robust package when compared to the competitions offerings.

DARKKNIGHT3621d ago

whoever says 400 dollars is too much for next gen technology is unemployed.

in retrospect....sh1t phones cost 1-200 dollars. they have basic functionality and cheap screens but they get the job done.

2-300 dollar phones are better, support some applications but still have flaws in craftsmanship

then theres the phones that cost 4-600.. we all know which phones are loaded with functionality and quality.

you guys see where im going here?

JUST BECAUSE YOU CANT AFFORD IT, dont complain about price. buy something you can afford.

Not everyone is driving an aston martin, so does that make the aston martin a expensive, worthless car?

YES, if you cant afford it. those that have an aston would never go back to a civic.

pain777pas3621d ago

I just had to comment on those downplaying wifi. That is a huge feature especially in light of the comparison between the 360 and the PS3. The price of the 360 goes through the roof when you include life and all the peripherals like the wifi adapter, live, batterpacks etc.....

Bubble Buddy3621d ago

What happened to the people saying XBL is cheap cause basically you're paying whatever cents per day blah blah. So if you buy a PS3, you're basically paying a few cents a day too. Plus it is worth it for $400. 360 + WiFi + XBL = $350 + more if you're getting elite and you pay $60/50 a year and it has no blu-ray.

deeznuts3621d ago

Lets see the PS2 was introduced in 1999 at a price of $299, correct? Now, with inflation, in 2008 that would equal the purchasing power of $392.65.

For $8 you get a Blu-ray player. Not bad.

For the PS1, released in 1995 with a price of, $299, you get: $429.24.

http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin...

harrisk9543621d ago (Edited 3621d ago )

No one complained (the media or consumers) when Apple released the iPhone at $399 and $599.00... Then, add the cost of an overpriced data plan from AT&T with a substandard high speed network (even the 3G iPhone)... Even if you look at the new 3G iPhone at $199 and $299, you still have to factor in the overpriced data plan with an additional premium added in for the iPhone plan. Not to mention the fact that Apple was making a profit on day 1 of the iPhone's release, with reports showing that the iPhone only cost $220 per unit for the 80GB and $200 for the 40GB at launch (when they were selling them for $399 and $599 respectively!!), not to mention the HUGE payoff from AT&T that Apple got for that exclusive contract.

By contrast, Sony has been consistently losing millions on the PS3. At launch, the 60GB cost Sony over $800 per unit!!

Why they continue to bash the PS3 for its price point is ludicrous. What you get with the PS3 for $399 makes it an incredible value. I understand that for many, $399 is still a lot of money, especially in this economy. But, there is a MAJOR double standard when the media talks about the cost of a PS3 is too high, while the price of the iPhone and the crap AT&T plan is rarely discussed.

OK... my rant is over...

Tarasque3621d ago (Edited 3621d ago )

And too the guy that keeps running his mouth about most people that own a HDTV can afford a PS3. Are you out of your mind you think cause people have a HDTV they have money to blow for a 400 dollar console. Well over half the people i know that i have HDTV's is from the fact it was a gift from their parents. And your reference to comparing console's to car's is a lame attempt, due to the fact Ferrari's are overpriced junk. And secondly i can take my 4 banger and run comparable to you for a fraction of the cost. Doesn't matter what you are in when you are racing, just matter's if you are at the finish line first or not.

@Action Bastard
And the same can be said for the PS3 right? No component cables, which for some reason came with my 360 i just bought for 199.99. No headset with PS3 either, which for some reason came with my 360 i just bought for 199.99, Ok you are right about the batteries, but i had to spend 20 bucks to get rechargables for the 360, where i had to spend 40 bucks to get a charger base for the PS3. Yep have to pay 40 bucks a year for live you are right there, But i also had to spend 55 bucks to get a controller for the PS3 that rumbles which came with my 360. So that once 400 dollar PS3 is all of the sudden 570 bucks that's a deal right?

@deeznuts
No i can buy a PS2 right now in 2008 for 129.00.And plus you didn't factor in PS3 launch price which was 599 and 699. That...well that...Just forget....People amaze me.

ActionBastard3621d ago (Edited 3621d ago )

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/h...

If you got an Arcade for $199 with a headset and component cables, let Microsoft know so they can update their newly updated site. That or stop lying. If memory serves me correctly, the $399 PS3 comes with DualShock3. Ya got me on the cables though. But Walmart has HDMI cables for $13 bucks http://www.walmart.com/cata... Wha? You bought a charger base? Why not tack on the price of extended triggers? Point being: You don't need a charger base to enjoy gaming on the PS3. Out of the box, all you need are HD cables. With the Arcade, you need quite a bit more. I had a BT headset for my phone when I got a PS3, so alas, I didn't need to buy one.

agmsd3621d ago

I'm a PS3 loyal fan. but I think he's right if what he's trying to say is that the PS3 will lose as a gaming console to a cheaper console if it stayed at 399, because most gamers only buy consoles to play games and they don't care about anything else. also most of the gamers are kids and there dads try to make them happy with the cheapest thing available.

GameDev3621d ago (Edited 3621d ago )

I have

1 PS3 60gb launch model: $750 after all was said and done and two games to play at launch( I've since slapped a 250GB HDD so I lol at fanboys who cry about PS3 installs)

1 PS3 80gb that I bought for my son two months ago when my 360 RROD.

1 60gb 360 that I got as a replacement for (see above) with Best Buys two year replacement plan (btw they REALLY insist that you buy their instore warranty, I wonder why...lol)

1 Wii (not much to say here)

and a CRAPLOAD of games

silly wabbit gaming is no longer for kids.

oh and I forgot my MONSTER gaming PC and my PSP.

BWS19823621d ago (Edited 3621d ago )

I think you mixed up "component" and "composite", Microsoft's own site says it has standard AV cables with an Arcade (and Pro), which is what I thought too. That's what the PS3 comes with as well, it's not extra. HDMI comes in the Elite. I've never seen a system with "component cables", not nearly enough tv's have them.

One reason I choose PS3... because for many people (some above seem to forget this), the placement or location of your PS3/TV is NOT an option, so WiFi, is a must. How are you to assume a hard line is more of an option? WiFi is a must for me, it was built in. I want a next gen disc player, I got BluRay with it. I wanted free online, I got it. I wanted BC with many games I've never played (don't have a PS2), I got that (already have an Xbox 1)....You guys also forget that XBox Live Gold isn't necessary, but if not, then why is a big bragging point for 360 always "better online this, PSN sucks, more stuff on Live etc..." you don't HAVE to play online, no, but then you can't use Live as a selling point, because you can only browse things etc.. on silver, and not play people. I would also like to state I have many more media options on PS3, I can upload many formats a 360 wouldn't read, and install a massive HD for a fraction of the cost, and have so much more space. The bluetooth will be handy, and I love the browsing abilities. I know it's been beaten to death, but the RROD scared me, I shouldn't have to worry about that, as well as disc scratching (which is NOT covered by MS with the 3 year warranty and happens at times). In the end, I added up WHAT I WANTED, and 360 was about $600 for me (wifi adaptor, Live Gold), because I wanted an Elite (only one with my options) and my PS3 was a MGS4 bundle, for $530 (with the HDMI I bought, Elite has one, PS3 doesn't) and that came with a sweet game at that...but you'll note other points above were non-monetary as well...

I also like the game lineup on both consoles, but the selling points (there's others but I don't want to make this too long) above had me make my choice. I still want a 360, a good few games I can't play still....but I don't regret my choice.

DaTruth3621d ago

Dads that buy a system for their kids buy the one with bluray and get a bonus gift for themselves. Most wives probably won't let them have a bluray player any other way.

calis3621d ago

GameDev - All your bragging just proved you have no life.

ruibing3621d ago

I paid $499 for mine and I'm a grad student (we are in debt). You just need to realize the difference between a one-time cost and recurring transactions.

I could have either have purchased a PS3 then or bought a 360 Pro (with 20GB HDD at that time), bought wireless adapter, a HD-DVD add-on (I'm not even going to comment on this), and annual subscriptions. I'm glad I went with the smarter choice, Sony just needs to teach the under educated public and shift the perceived value (to reflect reality) in their favor.

AAACE53620d ago

It's interesting how you said that, considering the average car will take you anywhere you want to go, and you rarely see people driving their ferrari's, and spend most of their time just talking about it...

Strange indeed...

+ Show (38) more repliesLast reply 3620d ago
Why o why3621d ago (Edited 3621d ago )

Thats why you put MORE resources into 1st and 2nd party devs. Thats why you have more exclusives this year and why relative failures like HAZE can be cushioned by other exclusives.

Silogon

i hear ya but how can you explain the fact despite the higher price of the ps3 last year it still outsold the cheaper machine. Yes it is still high for many but its not extremely high given the tech.

PimpHandStrong3621d ago

ppl spend that much taking a couple family members to a NFL game!
EASY

400 bucks is afordable if you have a job

ceedubya93621d ago

Lots of people have good jobs (and some not so good), but that doesn't mean they have 460+ bucks to spend on a console and a game. People do have other expenses that have to be accounted for. Utilities, car payments, rent/house payments, gas to drive back and forth to work, and other possible factors that may arrive. You just never know.

Of course, over time, the money can be saved up if you really want one. Just depends on how much a person can afford to set aside, and where money priorities really lie at the time.

GameDev3621d ago

that saw the way gas prices rose over the last few years and didn't make arrangement to take mass transit to work or get a job that they dont need to drive to is FVCKING MORON.

calis3621d ago

GameDev - You are quickly becoming the biggest tool on this site.

ToastyMcNibbles3621d ago (Edited 3621d ago )

although i do agree with sony's methods of investing more on internal development at the same time i hope they do realize the importance of some 3rd party exclusives and what they can do for a console...metal gear solid 4 is a perfect of example of a 3rd party exclusive that pushed tons of consoles for them but again the best thing about sony and the ps3 is that they are always pumping out their own games and the best part is that the majority are damn good and some of the most recognizable franchises in the industry...god of war, gran turismo, ratchet and clank

ultimolu3621d ago

I think they do realize this but they also realize that they can't stop 3rd party games from going multiplatform. That's why I'm glad to see them putting their time and energy into first party games and I would HATE to see them go down under.

I will never forget the big smile on my face when I bought Uncharted. xD

That game is so awesome...whew.

ToastyMcNibbles3621d ago

right you are my friend...its exactly why people should not buy a console just for one game...for example when ff13 went multiplatform it was a huge upset for me because i was looking forward to seeing what they can do with the ps3 but i got over it really quickly because games like god of war 3, littlebigplanet and resistance 2 completely washed away the upset...no matter what the case i will always have games to look forward to on the ps3 and that to me is the best thing about it...there is always something to look forward to on the system

calis3621d ago

Sony isn't going 'down under' (to Australia? I think you meant under).

The gaming division profited last financial year and they do more than just sell Video Game consoles.