Holy Crap!

[G13]

Yeah, it's pretty much been known the 360 version is going to have issues, and they're more than likely going to hit several bumps along the road, even with the multiplatform-ness of the crystal tools engine.

I'd honestly like them to just record the voices and translate it, so I can have this game before they have to get around porting this to the 360. I think they owe me that much for buying every game they put out over 3 generations of consoles (well, the main ones at least).

I own every single final fantasy as well, but I'm a 360 owner because I don't think there's enough exclusives I would want on the PS3 to warrant spending that much money on the system. Why should I be shafted in comparison? Saying that you've supported them previously is retarded. Many of us have. Just wait it out and be happy that we're getting the game on either system at all.


Assuming the game is 1 blu-ray disc, then I don't imagine the 360 version being more then 3-4 dvds tops. I own a couple multi-disc rpgs for the 360 (Such as Lost Odyssey, it's like what FFXII would have been if sakaguchi was still at squeenix <3) and I'll be glad to add another.

Is disc swapping an issue anyway? In some ways the 360 version will feel more like a Final Fantasy title with multiple discs.

Not at all. I have blue dragon and lost odyssey, both multi-disc games. I have no problem with it and don't see why others do either. Heaven forbid I have to get up off the couch every 20-30 hours of gameplay to switch disks. And I don't have to worry about them scratching because *gasp* I take really good care of my stuff.

Amen big Z!

[Moon Rabbits]

So if we are talking 4 disks (which FF8 was), there is 16x the space that FF12 took up, which is the ballpark, I as an outside observer who doesn't know anything about game encoding, would estimate it to be.

FFVIII was on CDs not DVDs, meaning it took 4 CDs, roughly 700MB each. Meaning that it occupied roughly the same amount of space as FFXII. That being said, I was under the impression that FFXII was more around the 3GB range. *shrugs*

Also, there's been plenty of games that exist for both consoles and there has been no difference in the number of discs, as far as I am aware. The 360 is doubtfully going to be a simple rip of the data of the Blu-ray version onto DVD or HD-DVD. The two machines simply don't function the same way. Plus they will probably trim off some of the fat as it were. :/

Sensible answers win.

[Wolf Kanno]

Heres my prediction. They will get the game on 3 discs max and the 360 version with run just as good as the PS3 version. 360 owners won't get gimped like every PS3 fan says so and both will get the exact same experience.

Is disc swapping an issue anyway? In some ways the 360 version will feel more like a Final Fantasy title with multiple discs.

This is how I feel it will turn out.

[Bolivar]

Yeah, it's pretty much been known the 360 version is going to have issues, and they're more than likely going to hit several bumps along the road, even with the multiplatform-ness of the crystal tools engine.

I'd honestly like them to just record the voices and translate it, so I can have this game before they have to get around porting this to the 360. I think they owe me that much for buying every game they put out over 3 generations of consoles (well, the main ones at least).

I own every single final fantasy as well, but I'm a 360 owner because I don't think there's enough exclusives I would want on the PS3 to warrant spending that much money on the system. Why should I be shafted in comparison? Saying that you've supported them previously is retarded. Many of us have. Just wait it out and be happy that we're getting the game on either system at all.


Assuming the game is 1 blu-ray disc, then I don't imagine the 360 version being more then 3-4 dvds tops. I own a couple multi-disc rpgs for the 360 (Such as Lost Odyssey, it's like what FFXII would have been if sakaguchi was still at squeenix <3) and I'll be glad to add another.

You don't have to pay that much for a PS3 if you buy a used/refurb one. You can find discontinued 40GB models for less than $200 online if you look for them. I bought my 60GB for $299 at the end of 2007 and it works great. You can even have better load times on games like Metal Gear Solid 3 (specifically the disc skipping when you start a CALL).

I don't think XII would have been multiple DVD's. Plus, Sakaguchi hasn't had a hands-on role with... any project at SE since he created and produced Final Fantasy IX.

I think its relatively reasonable to say the game would come out sooner if it weren't for the porting process. I also think its reasonable that Playstation fans who... essentially made Square the empire it is today at least have it coming to them.

Thanks for calling that retarded, though.

[Wolf Kanno]

Yeah, it's pretty much been known the 360 version is going to have issues, and they're more than likely going to hit several bumps along the road, even with the multiplatform-ness of the crystal tools engine.

I'd honestly like them to just record the voices and translate it, so I can have this game before they have to get around porting this to the 360. I think they owe me that much for buying every game they put out over 3 generations of consoles (well, the main ones at least).

I own every single final fantasy as well, but I'm a 360 owner because I don't think there's enough exclusives I would want on the PS3 to warrant spending that much money on the system. Why should I be shafted in comparison? Saying that you've supported them previously is retarded. Many of us have. Just wait it out and be happy that we're getting the game on either system at all.


Assuming the game is 1 blu-ray disc, then I don't imagine the 360 version being more then 3-4 dvds tops. I own a couple multi-disc rpgs for the 360 (Such as Lost Odyssey, it's like what FFXII would have been if sakaguchi was still at squeenix <3) and I'll be glad to add another.

You don't have to pay that much for a PS3 if you buy a used/refurb one. You can find discontinued 40GB models for less than $200 online if you look for them. I bought my 60GB for $299 at the end of 2007 and it works great. You can even have better load times on games like Metal Gear Solid 3 (specifically the disc skipping when you start a CALL).

I don't think XII would have been multiple DVD's. Plus, Sakaguchi hasn't had a hands-on role with... any project at SE since he created and produced Final Fantasy IX.

I think its relatively reasonable to say the game would come out sooner if it weren't for the porting process. I also think its reasonable that Playstation fans who... essentially made Square the empire it is today at least have it coming to them.

Thanks for calling that retarded, though.

Sakaguchi has been shown to have had quite a bit of involvement on FFX actually and Nomura even mentioned he consulted Sakaguchi several times on the direction of Kingdom Hearts. I'd say he's more involved than you give him credit.

On topic... Squenix owes as much to the PlayStation owning fans of FF now, as they did to the Nintendo owning fans back in 97. :rolleyes2

This is a business, and despite recent great strides, Sony is still lagging behind the other two consoles. Its a better deal for Square to make it multi-platform and they have a better chance of higher sales by releasing it on both systems simultaneously and with the same quality. Squenix would be stupid to show favoritism.

[The Summoner of Leviathan]

It seems some are under the impression that the 360 version of FFXIII is going to be released simultaneous as the North American PS3 release. As far as I know, that's not the case. The only thing they said was that it would be released in North American on the 360. I was under the impression they would release it on the PS3, then port it on the 360. That's what would make more sense for Squeenix to do at the moment.

Plus, Final Fantasy carries enough weight that if it were to be released first on the PS3 in North America, any fan with the income to spend would most likely buy a PS3 just for that. Also, the PS3 and the 360 version would never be of the same quality. I mean as far as the average Joe is concern, yes it would be, but from what I have seen games released simultaneously on both consoles, the PS3 invariably is of higher quality, though it only becomes pertinent if you have a HDTV anyways. *shrugs*

[Zerokku]

You don't have to pay that much for a PS3 if you buy a used/refurb one. You can find discontinued 40GB models for less than $200 online if you look for them. I bought my 60GB for $299 at the end of 2007 and it works great. You can even have better load times on games like Metal Gear Solid 3 (specifically the disc skipping when you start a CALL).

And that's fine and dandy. That still doesn't stop the fact that the only exclusives on the system that interest me are Valkyria Chronicles, Disgaea 3, and MGS4. It's simply not worth the money to me, particularly in the current economic downturn. Yet you suggest the PS3 should get XIII first because you've supported square enix in the past and are a sony fanboy, despite the fact I have supported them just as much and don't own the PS3. I should get shafted in comparison...why?

I don't think XII would have been multiple DVD's. Plus, Sakaguchi hasn't had a hands-on role with... any project at SE since he created and produced Final Fantasy IX.

Yay for missing the point! Bravo. Where did I suggest XII would be multiple dvds? What I meant by that, is that in several ways, Lost Odyssey feels more like a final fantasy then XII did. If Sakaguchi had been around, XII could have ended up a lot different. Don't get me wrong, I loved XII and Ivalice is easily my favorite "world" of the series, but XII just wasn't the same.

Secondly, as Wolf Kanno stated, while he didn't direct is as much as he did through the original games, he still had a hand in X's creation, since he was still at square, and well, he's sakaguchi. I think squeenix may regret letting sakaguchi go since a decent number of people followed him, most notably Uematsu, which squeenix still views as a major hit to the company, seeing as how they still try and get him to do work for them despite his loyalties to sakaguchi over square.

I think its relatively reasonable to say the game would come out sooner if it weren't for the porting process. I also think its reasonable that Playstation fans who... essentially made Square the empire it is today at least have it coming to them.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Wow. Thanks for the laugh. Firstly, despite what was previously stated by squeenix, they have already decided to start on the porting and localization process now rather then waiting for the japanese PS3 version to finish. Secondly, heaven forbid it come out a month or two later then it would have if it was PS3 exclusive. Here's some food for thought thought.

PS3 sales in NA - 5.7 million as of November 1, 2008
360 sales in NA - 11.6 million as of November 1, 2008

In order for square to make up for the massive cost of producing XIII, they need to make as much money as possible, and face it. Making the game PS3 exclusive would not sell enough alone to make up for the development costs of the game. Do you want more final fantasies? Yes? Then be happy the game is going multi-platform, it means more money for squeenix to recoup costs.

Thirdly, I have supported and bought many squeenix games throughout the PS1 and PS2 generations. That does not however mean I hold even one iota of "loyalty" to sony as a company. The only reason I owned the systems is because they were the winners of the console wars, and therefore more games would come out on said systems. As a company I actually find them rather terrible. My customer "loyalty" lies with square, not sony.

Fourth. It's during the so-called "Playstation era", that square almost went bankrupt and wouldn't have survived if not for merging with the juggernaut Enix. Sony fanboys really made square an empire eh?

Fifth, as Wolf Kanno stated, Square owes no more to Sony then they did to Nintendo. And don't say that Final Fantasy VII on the playstation brought the series to the mainstream. Final Fantasy VII would have "revolutionized" the series regardless of what system it was on.

Thanks for calling that retarded, though.

It reeked of fanboyism and ignorance. I was more then happy to do so.

It seems some are under the impression that the 360 version of FFXIII is going to be released simultaneous as the North American PS3 release. As far as I know, that's not the case. The only thing they said was that it would be released in North American on the 360. I was under the impression they would release it on the PS3, then port it on the 360. That's what would make more sense for Squeenix to do at the moment.

This was originally the Idea, but has since been changed. There will be a simultaneous release of the game in NA.

Plus, Final Fantasy carries enough weight that if it were to be released first on the PS3 in North America, any fan with the income to spend would most likely buy a PS3 just for that. Also, the PS3 and the 360 version would never be of the same quality. I mean as far as the average Joe is concern, yes it would be, but from what I have seen games released simultaneously on both consoles, the PS3 invariably is of higher quality, though it only becomes pertinent if you have a HDTV anyways. *shrugs*

While I partially agree with your first statement (In fact, I'm one of those who would have bought a PS3 solely for XIII if it hadn't gone multi-platform), that is largely dependent on the state of our lovely economy at the time of the release, which currently is rather terrible. Of course nobody knew it at that time, but you get the idea. As for your second point, it's generally dependent on the game and the tools used to program. Fallout 3 and Bioshock are both high budget multiplatform games that look a lot better on the 360. Most lower budget multiplatform games also look better on the 360 because the 360 is less intensive to code for and makes an easier baseline. Games like Killzone 2 prove that the PS3 can pull off considerably more impressive graphics, however that usually doesn't come into play for multiplatform games for the main reason of coding, and the 360 being an easier baseline to code from.

Merged. -Rantzien

[The Summoner of Leviathan]

You forget the fact that the 360 was released almost whole year before the PS3. So you have to keep that in mind comparing the sales. Then again, the PS3 is still lagging behind the 360. But most of that is dude to the price tag attached to it, or at least that's what I think.

[Bolivar]

@ zerokku

First of all, thanks for calling me a fanboy, accusing me of missing the point and saying how my post reeked of ignorance when all I've tried to do is present and defend an argument to you.[/sarcasm]

You and Kanno are wrong - Square owed nothing to Nintendo fans in 1997 because Sony created a system that could facilitate them to make the kind of games they wanted to create. Just like Sony did again with Blu-Ray capacity and other technical innovations making it more feasible for larger games like the FF series has always been. But the main reason why is the disparate extent to which Sony owning fans contributed to Square's success, especially when compared to Nintendo (-only) owning fans.

It's during the so-called "Playstation era", that square almost went bankrupt and wouldn't have survived if not for merging with the juggernaut Enix. Sony fanboys really made square an empire eh?

You obviously need a history lesson. Even Wolf Kanno would agree with me that the PSOne FF's made Square a household name, and led to an era on that console where they put out a whole host of masterpieces, many of which are qualified candidates for best game ever made in the various sub-genres of RPG's (Final Fantasy Tactics, Xenogears, Vagrant Story, etc). This allowed them to go on to make movies (which bankrupted them) and even come into partnerships with groups like Disney. Their status today would not have been possible without the work that came about from their partnership with Sony.

Lastly, I find it very sad that

The only reason I owned the systems is because they were the winners of the console wars, and therefore more games would come out on said systems.

The Dreamcast had phenomenal games that innovated the medium, yet you would have precluded yourself from owning one for the sole reason they didn't win "the console wars". To me, the winner of a console war is the company that can use its technology the best to produce the best games, not sales, and I find it depressing that so many gamers today allow business statistics to drive their experiences in gaming.

Actually your logic is flawed because Nintendo is already clearly the winner, and they may very well end up with the most games, yet it would be hard to argue that their library is, or will be better than, either the 360 or PS3's.

This is a business, and despite recent great strides, Sony is still lagging behind the other two consoles. Its a better deal for Square to make it multi-platform and they have a better chance of higher sales by releasing it on both systems simultaneously and with the same quality. Squenix would be stupid to show favoritism.

Both you and zerokku are diluting and generalizing a plethora of economic concepts into "bigger install base = more potential sales". One such concept your mitigating is brand name building. More PS3 owners bought MGS4 than the total PC, 360, and PS3 users who bought Far Cry 2, despite both being extraordinary games in their respective genres (if you could even say MGS has a genre). That's accountable to a number of reasons - it shows off what the PS3 is capable of, its a continuing partnership, etc.

It's not unreasonable to believe that many PS3 users who are new to Final Fantasy will opt to buy another game like God of War III (probably going to release around the same time) because they'd rather see what their purchase can do.

The question is, can the 360 base offset those lost sales? Considering the Halo/Madden frat boy crowd that makes up most of its user base, it's hard to say.

[Zerokku]

@ zerokku

First of all, thanks for calling me a fanboy, accusing me of missing the point and saying how my post reeked of ignorance when all I've tried to do is present and defend an argument to you.[/sarcasm]

Please show me how you have not been a fanboy, making outright fallacious claims about sony. And saying that sony fans should get the game first, when this is a multiplatform release and you should never show favoritism in quite that matter. Not to mention that timed exclusives almost never sell as well on the other console (With the exception of GTA4 it seems) and so to make the most money, it would likely be best to release both at once. And you did miss the point. You went on an outright tangent that had nothing to do with what I was trying to say. How is that not missing the point?

You and Kanno are wrong - Square owed nothing to Nintendo fans in 1997 because Sony created a system that could facilitate them to make the kind of games they wanted to create.

And nintendo offered them a system to even release their first 6 games on. What's your point? Yes sony had a superior system and square took advantage of that fact. That still doesn't mean they owe anything to sony, any more then they would to nintendo if the roles were reveresed.

Just like Sony did again with Blu-Ray capacity and other technical innovations making it more feasible for larger games like the FF series has always been. But the main reason why is the disparate extent to which Sony owning fans contributed to Square's success, especially when compared to Nintendo (-only) owning fans.

Except that blu-ray is largely pointless in a game, and was mostly used by the main corporate sony to help push the format into the mainstream so they didn't fail hard like betamax or umd did. When it comes down to it, most games don't take much advantage out of it. MGS4 used uncompressed audio solely as justification for the blu-ray disc. The game could have fit on a standard DVD with compressed audio just as easily.

And of course sony owning fans contributed to the success and growth of the franchise, in large part to VII. That doesn't stop the fact that if it wasn't sony, it would just have easily been someone else. How does square owe sony anything?

You obviously need a history lesson. Even Wolf Kanno would agree with me that the PSOne FF's made Square a household name, and led to an era on that console where they put out a whole host of masterpieces, many of which are qualified candidates for best game ever made in the various sub-genres of RPG's (Final Fantasy Tactics, Xenogears, Vagrant Story, etc). This allowed them to go on to make movies (which bankrupted them) and even come into partnerships with groups like Disney. Their status today would not have been possible without the work that came about from their partnership with Sony.

I'll grant you most of that. But the problem is, Pretty much none of that was sony's doing. It was square. Do I need to repeat myself? If it wasn't sony, it would just have likely been someone else. Final Fantasy VII could have released on the N64 and been a huge hit, and probably propelled nintendo into a larger success that console generation. Sony didn't exactly do amazingly at first during that gen if you remember.

The Dreamcast had phenomenal games that innovated the medium, yet you would have precluded yourself from owning one for the sole reason they didn't win "the console wars". To me, the winner of a console war is the company that can use its technology the best to produce the best games, not sales, and I find it depressing that so many gamers today allow business statistics to drive their experiences in gaming.

You misunderstood me, I owned them despite my dislike of sony, because the amount of good games for the system. I didn't say I didn't own other systems. I loved the n64 and dreamcast. Sonic Adventure and Jet grind radio were smex.

And sales drive game development. If there's more people owning a system, then there are more people to buy a game on said system, and it's therefore more profitable to release a game on said system. Aka = Higher sales usually means more games, and with more games comes quality games as well. SNES, PSX, and PS2 are proof of this concept.

Well until this console generation at least, but this console gen is a whole different beast.

Actually your logic is flawed because Nintendo is already clearly the winner, and they may very well end up with the most games, yet it would be hard to argue that their library is, or will be better than, either the 360 or PS3's.

But gaming is far more mainstream then it was back then, and the audience for those kinds of games simply aren't wii owners. Like I stated, this console gen has been unlike any other, so it's a bit hard to compare it.

Both you and zerokku are diluting and generalizing a plethora of economic concepts into "bigger install base = more potential sales". One such concept your mitigating is brand name building. More PS3 owners bought MGS4 than the total PC, 360, and PS3 users who bought Far Cry 2, despite both being extraordinary games in their respective genres (if you could even say MGS has a genre). That's accountable to a number of reasons - it shows off what the PS3 is capable of, its a continuing partnership, etc.

MGS is also one of the more popular franchises around. Farcry? Not so much. Your arguement is a bit fallacious there. And once again, MGS4 does not show off what the ps3 is capable of. If they used compressed audio, the game could have easily been on a standard DVD.

It's not unreasonable to believe that many PS3 users who are new to Final Fantasy will opt to buy another game like God of War III (probably going to release around the same time) because they'd rather see what their purchase can do.

The question is, can the 360 base offset those lost sales? Considering the Halo/Madden frat boy crowd that makes up most of its user base, it's hard to say.

I'd say yes. Lost Odyssey sold over 700,000 copies, a larger number then any other console JRPG so far this generation if I'm not mistaken. And that was an original IP from at the time, a somewhat unknown developer. This is Final Fantasy, a huge franchise with a huge fanbase and a long pedigree of good games.

[VeloZer0]

I have trouble fathoming how two businesses that entered into a deal in which they both profited could owe each other anything after the deal has run its course.

Using your logic the 360 should now 'owe' S-E for releasing a title on the 360, when it is in fact a deal that is mutually beneficial to both parties.

I also can't stand fans who think a game developer/movie studio/sports team owe them something. Bottom line is you bought those games because you wanted to play them, not because you thought it was an investment in the companies future.

[Jessweeee♪]

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO FFXIII YEAH

[Wolf Kanno]

This is a business, and despite recent great strides, Sony is still lagging behind the other two consoles. Its a better deal for Square to make it multi-platform and they have a better chance of higher sales by releasing it on both systems simultaneously and with the same quality. Squenix would be stupid to show favoritism.

Both you and zerokku are diluting and generalizing a plethora of economic concepts into "bigger install base = more potential sales". One such concept your mitigating is brand name building. More PS3 owners bought MGS4 than the total PC, 360, and PS3 users who bought Far Cry 2, despite both being extraordinary games in their respective genres (if you could even say MGS has a genre). That's accountable to a number of reasons - it shows off what the PS3 is capable of, its a continuing partnership, etc.

It's not unreasonable to believe that many PS3 users who are new to Final Fantasy will opt to buy another game like God of War III (probably going to release around the same time) because they'd rather see what their purchase can do.

The question is, can the 360 base offset those lost sales? Considering the Halo/Madden frat boy crowd that makes up most of its user base, it's hard to say.

Far Cry is a bad choice... Its a game with a strong history in PC circles rather than consoles and if history has shown us anything, its that PC and console ports never really do exceptionally well on the other platform; well except for Morrowind and Oblivion.

To be honest GTA IV would be a better comparison, seeing as it has two best selling records. GTA IV has sold over twice as many units as MGS4 (MGS has sold close to 5 million units while GTAIV has sold 13 million) GTA IV is a sequel in a series that owes its success to Sony, was an exclusive til this console generation. Thus it should have had a massive fanbase on the PS3 cause its always been on Sony systems. Yet the 360 version outsold the PS3 version, 2 to 1 according to GameStop...MGS4 might be able to double its numbers if it ported the game to the 360.

There are two major flaws with your overall argument. First, you assume FF fans = Sony fans and that is really not the case here. SE is still being loyal to its fans and that's what they should be doing right now. The fact is, its bad business to play favorites, and releasing it on either platform first may affect sales on the other platform. Its more fair to play it safe and do simultaneous release.

The other problem is that you ignore the fact that Sony is not doing well on the market. Its more sound to go multi-platform than risking your best franchise on a struggling platform in the middle of a global depression. In this case, I feel SE is doing the right thing by keeping themselves afloat rather than sticking to a corporate friends who have been kinda unreliable to them in the last few years. We really don't know how much SE lost when Sony chose to not support online for the PS2; especially when it was SE and FFXI that was at the forefront of promoting that feature.

There were also several grumblings from EA, SE, and Konami about the PS3 and its prices. Hell, Konami is announcing MGS: Rising (the supposed MGS5) as being for the 360 as well. Continued partnership is not looking good...

Besides, SE has been courting Microsoft for a few years now. I mean in all of the PS3's life span its gotten four titles from SE and two of them are exclusives for now (Versus and XIV). SE has been more buddy buddy with Microsoft every year, I wouldn't be surprised if SE gave Microsoft another Sony exclusive.

Now where I do agree with you is that I don't necessarily feel XIII will do well on the 360. I don't think it will do well on the PS3 either due to the PS3's standing on the market and I don't think the 360 has a core market place for the title as it seems RPGs do very modestly at best on the 360. Together, I feel SE has a chance to make the same numbers they had in the past with the franchise but neither market is strong enough for the series to do well on its own. Besides, the 360 has a large install base in the U.S. and PAL regions which is where the FF series has always thrived. Why should a business throw away money for the sake of only some of the fans?

Now where I do give Microsoft credit is this. Be getting the right to have XIII, they have effectively harmed Sony's chance to make a comeback with the series. Even if XIII did have major console selling power, gamers on the fence of the console race may opt for the cheaper 360 to play the game. Even if XIII isn't a success on the 360, it will still hurt Sony to some degree by taking away part of the sales XIII from them and allow Microsoft to maintain their sales superiority. We'll have to wait and see if Sony has learned their lesson and does everything in their power to keep Versus and FFXIV exclusive. Of anything, Sony needs to get their act together.

[sir helix]

id buy that and play it infront of my friend just to feel like im accomplishing something

[Bolivar]

Kanno - you're largely out of touch on a number of issues here.

Before I get in to it - I have to say your argument about Far Cry, GTA, and FF shows that you totally agree with what I was saying - there are a host of factors that play into how well a game will sell, and much of it is completely unrelated to install bases and platform choice. Thank you very much for proving my point.

1. My entire point is that FFXIII would obviously come out at least marginally sooner if the localization process weren't dependent on the porting process. I think it's arbitrary to delay one for the other. It is almost a red herring for you to focus on the "loyalty" aspect which was more of an addendum to what I was saying. The only real objection you have is fairness, which:

2. Plenty of games play favorites, Modern Warfare 2, Assassin's Creed II, and Batman: Arkham Asylum are a just a few big titles that will do that this year to some degree, albeit small (much like having a XIII out slightly earlier on PS3).

3. Where are you getting this that Sony is not doing well on the market? If you compare month-after-month sales since launch for the PS3 and the 360, the PS3 has outperformed the 360 in a similar time series. Not to mention the PS3 has done much better in Japan, and has been said to have eclipsed the 360 in Europe.

4. You're largely exaggerating "grumblings" about the PS3 and its price - EA, Ubisoft, Namco Bandai, and Konami have all reported the PS3 as bringing in more revenue than the 360. In EA's case, it was even more than the Wii. Those are 4 of the biggest third party publishers in the industry. Also, you could say that's because Konami released MGS4 that year, but it just goes to show that they could have record revenue (which they did) by releasing a PS3 exclusive.

PS3 Selling More Games than XBox 360 with Smaller Install Base