Objective take on PS3 vs Xbox 360

F

Furystrike

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 6, 2004
Messages
1,535
There are so many subjective views about the next gen consoles, so here's an objective take on the debate. I tried a similar list a few months back but it had several flaws both in presentation and explanation that made it less useful than was intended. All numbers are taken from metacritic for both the PS3 and 360 with downloadable/arcade games deleted.

Lets start with multiplatform titles:

Grand Theft Auto IV 98
Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare 94
Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, The 93.5
Orange Box, The 92.5
Rock Band 92
Burnout Paradise 87.5
Soulcalibur IV 87.5
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Vegas 87.5
GRID 87
Virtua Fighter 5 87
NHL 08 85.5
skate 85.5
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 85
Fight Night Round 3 84.5
Unreal Tournament 3 84.5
Civilization Revolution 84
Devil May Cry 4 84
Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock 84
Battlefield: Bad Company 83.5
DiRT: Colin McRae Off-Road 83
Madden NFL 08 83
NBA 2K7 82
NCAA Football 09 82
College Hoops 2K7 81.5
College Hoops 2K8 81.5
Condemned 2: Bloodshot 81.5
FIFA Soccer 08 81.5
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Vegas 2 81.5
Call of Duty 3 81
Darkness, The 81
NBA 2K8 81
Assassin's Creed 80.5
NBA Street Homecourt 80.5
Tiger Woods PGA Tour 07 80.5
LEGO Star Wars: The Complete Saga 80
Virtua Tennis 3 80


Above 80: 70
Above 85: 13
Above 90: 5
Above 95: 1

Now for the PS3 Exclusives:

Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots 94
Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction 89
Uncharted: Drake's Fortune 88
Ninja Gaiden Sigma 88
Resistance: Fall of Man 86
MLB 08: The Show 85
Warhawk 84
SingStar 82
MotorStorm 82
Hot Shots Golf: Out of Bounds 82
Tekken 5: Dark Resurrection 82
Gran Turismo 5 Prologue 80

Above 80: 12
Above 85: 6
Above 90: 1
Above 95: 0

On to Xbox 360 Exclusives (360/PC titles are denoted by *, PS2 titles are denoted by ^):

BioShock* 96
Gears of War* 94
Halo 3 94
Guitar Hero II*^ 92
Mass Effect* 91
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter*^ 90
Forza Motorsport 2 90
Call of Duty 2*^ 89
Burnout Revenge^ 89
Project Gotham Racing 3 88
Project Gotham Racing 4 85
Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell Double Agent*^ 85
Dead or Alive 4 85
Dead Rising 85
F.E.A.R.* 85
Viva Pinata 84
Need for Speed Most Wanted*^ 83
Crackdown 83
Test Drive Unlimited*^ 82
Marvel: Ultimate Alliance* 82
Hitman: Blood Money*^ 82
Football Manager 2007* 82
Command & Conquer 3 Tiberium Wars* 82
Condemned: Criminal Origins* 81
Tony Hawk's Project 8^ 81
Football Manager 2006* 81
Saints Row 81
LEGO Star Wars II: The Original Trilogy*^ 81
NCAA Football 08 81
Rockstar Games presents Table Tennis 81
Ninja Gaiden II 81
NBA 2K6^ 81
Perfect Dark Zero 81
WWE SmackDown! vs. RAW 2007^ 81
Ace Combat 6: Fires of Liberation 80
Bully: Scholarship Edition^ 80
Madden NFL 07* 80
Tomb Raider: Legend*^ 80
Peter Jackson's King Kong*^ 80
Moto GP 06* 80
Tiger Woods PGA Tour 08 80
UEFA Euro 2008* 80
Winning Eleven: Pro Evolution Soccer 2007*^ 80
FlatOut: Ultimate Carnage* 80

Titles available on 360 and not PS3:

Above 80: 45
Above 85: 15
Above 90: 6
Above 95: 1

Titles that are only on the 360 and not the PS3 or PC or PS2:

Above 80: 14
Above 85: 6
Above 90: 2
Above 95: 0

How to interpret these results:

Its up to the reader to decide where they draw the line for quality games. Of course, there are bound to be several games that you would buy despite being lower than this standard. Likewise, there are several games you would NOT buy despite being above. I'm making the assumption that these fringe games more or less cancel out for the majority of folks (note- not all).

IMHO, any game scoring above 90 is a good candidate for my time and money and I'd feel comfortable buying them without much thought. That said, some of the games that I enjoy the most fall short of this number. Viva Pinata, for example, has occupied me for many hours despite scoring 84. Nonetheless, I wouldn't lower my standard to an 84; I would NOT feel comfortable buying any game between 84 and 89 without serious thought. This feeling is mainly due to the number of games that score an 84-89 relative to the games that score above 90 - I simply cannot afford all the games above 84, while I can afford the ones above 90.

While I understand that reviewer scores are just numbers, I want to point out that the way I view the scores are in relative terms. In general, I believe that a game that scores an average of 90 on metacritic is going to be relatively better than a game that scores 80. Of course there are exceptions, but I believe that this trend is generally true. If you disagree with me here, you won't get much out of this comparison.

One other factor that is hard to correct for in such an analysis is the factor of time: If Gears of War was to be released this coming quarter instead of last, would it have scored as highly? The same goes for PS3 games - would Resistance have scored as well as it did if it was not the only decent game on the system at the time of its release? This kind of goes along with the whole 'relative ratings' philosophy - its hard to give a relative score to a game when it has no peers. For the sake of retaining objectivity, I'm not going to bother with this - adjusting for release time is way beyond the scope of this analysis.

Comparisons:

Good news for both sides: multiplatform games come out on top in all score blocks. From this, its fairly safe to say that you're going to be a fairly happy gamer no matter which console you end up going with. Exclusives show themselves to be a bit more complicated. While the 360 trounces the PS3 in every block, many of those 360 titles are also available on other platforms such as the PC. Once you adjust for this, the number of exclusives in each block are more or less equal to one another.

Some general conclusions can be made:

If you must have the 360 exclusives, then get a 360.
If you must have the PS3 exclusives, then get a PS3.
If you must have access to every game and have the $$$, get both!

If you don't have a decent PC, like to get your shared 360/PC games months ahead of time, or simply prefer to play your games on consoles, you're going to tend to be in better shape with a 360 given that you have no preference for the exclusives over one another.

If you have a decent PC, don't mind getting the 360/PC games a few months late, and don't mind or prefer to play your games on your PC, then get whichever console has more appealing exclusives. If the blu-ray player is important to you and you don't already have one in your PC/elsewhere, put some extra weight on the PS3.



As a side note, I'd like to add that these lists inevitably have a few mistakes in them. I ask that you point these out in a civil manner and I'll correct them ASAP. I just want to make it clear that I'm not trying to cherrypick. For example, I'm not really sure whether or not Ninja Gaiden Sigma belongs as a PS3 exclusives considering that its just a remake. Also, I don't know whether GH2 should be considered not playable on the PS3 - I know it is backward compatible, but don't know if you can use the PS2 guitars on the PS3. Your help with issues like these is appreciated.
 
Pretty good, though i think you can ditch the "Titles that are only on the 360 and not the PC" unless you want to add a "vs PC" into the title of the thread.
 
thats an objective take on current and past games. no one plays COD2 anymore on the xbox360, how about a current objective take, like games that have come out in the last 3 months and onward. That's what matters to people now.

The xbox360 had a head start on the ps3, which is why past numbers are going to convolute any type of conclusion you make based off numbers.
 
damonposey said:
thats an objective take on current and past games. no one plays COD2 anymore on the xbox360, how about a current objective take, like games that have come out in the last 3 months and onward. That's what matters to people now.

The xbox360 had a head start on the ps3, which is why past numbers are going to convolute any type of conclusion you make based off numbers.
Click to expand...

I see your point, but i think you would lose objectivity by factoring time in. I mean, someone who never has played a COD game just might want to play the entire series, not just 4. At the same time, no one is going to buy COD2 for the multiplayer when they could play the 4th.

Its tough to say when you discount a game as being 'old news' because its going to be different for everyone. For ex.), if I were to buy a PS3, Uncharted would play a big role in that decision despite being half a year old. Another person might say, "uncharted? why play that when I could buy MGS4 instead".
 
damonposey said:
like games that have come out in the last 3 months and onward. That's what matters to people now.
Click to expand...
Yeah, people buying consoles never play the games in the back catalogue. It's a damn shame that you're only allowed to buy the stuff that has come out in the last few months.

What?

Anyway... interesting thread OP.
 
When this list was made it takes into account all the games for both systems up to this date right? ( I understand that games scoring lower will not rate so there are many games that just didn't make the list. ) I personally don't know how to qualify the list since it just seems to be a list of stats without context. I know that is the whole point but some people need to know when those games came out and sort them by say what has been introduced in the last 6 months. Others are more interested in what is coming out and none of that will get a review until release. Also the games may need to be sorted into genre since some people would be looking at family games while others are looking at shooters ect.

I am sorry but I don't see how this list is needed again? I have a console that I like to play. I prefer not to buy any other system so it is not useful to me ,but how does one make a personal decision and try to be objective? Should the choice always be subjective since you need to get the system that fits your needs? It seems that the title suggests that objective is a better choice than the subjective but since each persons needs are different than the next guys it seems that the person should be partial to the one that meets those needs.

As an answer to your PS3 questions at the bottom. GH2 cannot be played with PS2 guitars and Sigma I do believe should be included into the Library just like Black should be in the original 360. I know they are the same but I never owned Black so Sigma was well worth it and should be in the list for a lot of PS2 users getting a PS3.
 
damonposey said:
thats an objective take on current and past games. no one plays COD2 anymore on the xbox360, how about a current objective take, like games that have come out in the last 3 months and onward. That's what matters to people now.

The xbox360 had a head start on the ps3, which is why past numbers are going to convolute any type of conclusion you make based off numbers.
Click to expand...
Well, to people who already have one or both consoles...none of this matters at all. However, if you're just not thinking about buying a console and can only afford one...this can help quite a bit. I didn't buy a PS2 until it was already on the market for 3 years and had a pretty sizeable back-catalog of games. Just because a game is newer doesn't mean it's always better.;)
 
Crighton said:
When this list was made it takes into account all the games for both systems up to this date right? ( I understand that games scoring lower will not rate so there are many games that just didn't make the list. ) I personally don't know how to qualify the list since it just seems to be a list of stats without context. I know that is the whole point but some people need to know when those games came out and sort them by say what has been introduced in the last 6 months. Others are more interested in what is coming out and none of that will get a review until release. Also the games may need to be sorted into genre since some people would be looking at family games while others are looking at shooters ect.
Click to expand...

I think you're on to something - subdividing the lists into genres and adding dates would add a lot to the discussion. I'll try to get around to this granted people are interested. The problem with making groups that are too specific is that people tend to lose interest, ie the "wall of text crits YOU for 9999 damage!"

I am sorry but I don't see how this list is needed again? I have a console that I like to play. I prefer not to buy any other system so it is not useful to me ,but how does one make a personal decision and try to be objective? Should the choice always be subjective since you need to get the system that fits your needs? It seems that the title suggests that objective is a better choice than the subjective but since each persons needs are different than the next guys it seems that the person should be partial to the one that meets those needs.
Click to expand...

As per the first part, this doesn't do you a whole deal of good in terms of choosing a console given that you already have one - its more useful for people who havnt made the jump yet or are considering switching teams ala ebay. It also provides primary support for people trying to make subjective arguments of 'which console is better'. As per the second part, I agree in that the choice is completely subjective. Thats kind of where I was going with the "general conclusions". I think that the data presentation should be objective, whereas the choice should truly depend on your circumstances (ie your taste for certain titles, whether or not you have/like your PC, blu-ray, etc)

As an answer to your PS3 questions at the bottom. GH2 cannot be played with PS2 guitars and Sigma I do believe should be included into the Library just like Black should be in the original 360. I know they are the same but I never owned Black so Sigma was well worth it and should be in the list for a lot of PS2 users getting a PS3.
Click to expand...

thanks for the input
 
Psychotext said:
Yeah, people buying consoles never play the games in the back catalogue. It's a damn shame that you're only allowed to buy the stuff that has come out in the last few months-
Click to expand...

Exactly!

no but seriously, there are a bunch of 'exclusive' games on the xbox360 that are old and are only exclusive because the ps3 wasn't out yet.
 
damonposey said:
no but seriously, there are a bunch of 'exclusive' games on the xbox360 that are old and are only exclusive because the ps3 wasn't out yet.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant though really. The PS3 has either got a port since, or it'll never get them. The fact that they're not on the platform just because it wasn't out at the time doesn't really change anything for the person interested in playing the game. :D
 
Psychotext said:
Yeah, people buying consoles never play the games in the back catalogue. It's a damn shame that you're only allowed to buy the stuff that has come out in the last few months.

What?

Anyway... interesting thread OP.
Click to expand...

I dont.

Buying old games is lame.
 
Furystrike said:
If you must have the 360 exclusives, then get a 360.
If you must have the PS3 exclusives, then get a PS3.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you made us all aware of these facts. I'd like to see a thorough investigation on the pressing question "what console should you buy if you want nintendo wii exclusives".

Waiting breathlessly,
 
Technoob said:
I'm glad you made us all aware of these facts. I'd like to see a thorough investigation on the pressing question "what console should you buy if you want nintendo wii exclusives".

Waiting breathlessly,
Click to expand...

duh,

gamecube :D
 
Based on this list its clear that they both have sucky exclusives (real exclusives, being on PC and 360 is not exclusive at all in my book). The 360 dominates the racing genre but it looks like thats it as far as exclusives go. The PS3 has MGS4 which is great but thats it again.
 
idividebyzero said:
Based on this list its clear that they both have sucky exclusives (real exclusives, being on PC and 360 is not exclusive at all in my book). The 360 dominates the racing genre but it looks like thats it as far as exclusives go. The PS3 has MGS4 which is great but thats it again.
Click to expand...

Clearly, you have not played Uncharted (which is absolutely amazing, second best PS3 game thus far, just behind MGS4).

Granted, we're going by scores in this thread... but that's just my opinion.
 
I still haven't found an XB360 game that isn't on PC that is fun enough to warrant having to sit through the vacuum-cleaner-level noise of that damn DVD drive. Being somewhat platform agnostic, I'm still shocked almost every time at how cheaply made the XB360 hardware is compared to the others (Wii graphics aside).
 
I played the uncharted demo, I thought the controls were terrible with really annyoing ammo management. Tomb Raider Legend was a much better game.
 
I haven't played uncharted, but the zero punctuation review of it was very amusing. Given how much I agreed with his bioshock and halo3 reviews, I doubt I'd enjoy uncharted much. I'll definitely be giving it a go though when I pick up a ps3 very shortly.
 
as an RPG fan this does nothing for me becuase you left out many of them.
 
wildfire99 said:
I still haven't found an XB360 game that isn't on PC that is fun enough to warrant having to sit through the vacuum-cleaner-level noise of that damn DVD drive. Being somewhat platform agnostic, I'm still shocked almost every time at how cheaply made the XB360 hardware is compared to the others (Wii graphics aside).
Click to expand...


something that always baffles me about this argument: how do you play without any sound in your games? because thats the only way i can hear the dvd drive. also not a very good argument considering hard drive installs are coming in the fall update.
 
It's funny anyway... most high spec PCs around here run louder than the 360 when their GPUs get fired up. :D

Let alone those with delta fans.
 
wildfire99 said:
I still haven't found an XB360 game that isn't on PC that is fun enough to warrant having to sit through the vacuum-cleaner-level noise of that damn DVD drive. Being somewhat platform agnostic, I'm still shocked almost every time at how cheaply made the XB360 hardware is compared to the others (Wii graphics aside).
Click to expand...

dead rising
 
Psychotext said:
Both have their review average in the 80s so it's not like they're worlds apart.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Uncharted has an 88 average on metacritic. Tomb Raider Legends barely broke into the green with an 80 average.

8 Points is quite a spread. The real kicker are the user reviews. Uncharted sitting at 8.8. Tomb Raider Legends is at 5.5. I never played the X360 version, but the PC version stunk. Uncharted is a much better game. It's subjective, but people with a contrary opinion are in the minority.

And how interesting the OP mentions nothing about hardware reliability. :)
 
Technoob said:
I'm glad you made us all aware of these facts. I'd like to see a thorough investigation on the pressing question "what console should you buy if you want nintendo wii exclusives".

Waiting breathlessly,
Click to expand...

Then get a wii.

seriously though, i dont think there is anything wrong with emphasizing that the most important factor in deciding your first console is the exclusive games for said console. I don't mean to talk down to anyone or insinuate that they cannot figure this out on their own, but I do think that those two lines are necessary for their emphasis.

Regardless, the point of the post was more or less to provide guidance for those who are having trouble figuring which to get, especially if they do not have a strong attachment to either party's exclusives.
 
pandora's box said:
something that always baffles me about this argument: how do you play without any sound in your games?
Click to expand...
I do play with sound.. the thing is LOUD. I popped in Mass Effect last week and played it for about an hour before I had to turn it off. It was so loud (newish Elite model) that I actually thought it was a whooshing sound effect of the game coming out of the surround setup until it didn't stop when the logos came up. Anyway, loved the game, but I'm getting it for PC now. I was really surprised at how choppy and low-frame-rate it was. But that's a different thread.

Maybe I just have bionic hearing. Maybe I just sit only 6 feet away from the box. But it's ruining the play experience for me. I hadn't played a game on it yet without using headphones, so it's also just new. I hope it's limited to a problem with that title (ME). The PS3 fan is loudish but not even close to the 360's fan, and the 360's drive really is like a dirt devil going nuts. I barely found the time to actually use the thing after buying it so I'm also just disappointed that all my 360 gaming experiences are going to be marred by that noise. Maybe that's why when my neighbor plays Halo I can hear it through the wall like it was in my own living room. :)

You know, with regards to the original topic, I have to say I'm surprised counting up the games I own for the next gens. The Wii, for all the hate I spew upon it, easily comes in first (thanks to lots of cheap $35 specials and $10 GC games), followed by the PS3 with 3 or 4, and the 360 comes in last with just one, mostly because if it's a AAA title for 360 it's probably on PC, and for my gaming habits the PC kills them all ($5 steam games and $15 gogamer specials FTW). Game price is pretty important also.

also not a very good argument considering hard drive installs are coming in the fall update.
Click to expand...
I forgot about that. That should help immensely, and probably shows a lot of people have the same concern. Makes me feel better about getting the bigger HDD.

Technoob said:
dead rising
Click to expand...
Yeah I need to rent that. I love (to re-kill) zombies! That and Drake's Fortune are on the short list, after I figure out what the hubbub is about MGS 4. Before Mass Effect I was playing RE4 (Wii) and I had to turn it off also, due to poor play control (Capcom's fault not Nintendo's... the wiimote aiming was actually really nice) and graphics that due to excessive aliasing honestly had to be some of the worst I've seen in a long time, even including PS2.

The ONLY win for me in this console war thus far (omitting the PC) has been the PS3 as a true media center. Mine is on nearly every day, not for video games but for media/DVD/BD. I'm going to wear the thing out. And I didn't even have to pay extra for a wifi connector.
 
I do play with sound.. the thing is LOUD. I popped in Mass Effect last week and played it for about an hour before I had to turn it off. It was so loud (newish Elite model) that I actually thought it was a whooshing sound effect of the game coming out of the surround setup until it didn't stop when the logos came up. Anyway, loved the game, but I'm getting it for PC now. I was really surprised at how choppy and low-frame-rate it was. But that's a different thread.

Maybe I just have bionic hearing. Maybe I just sit only 6 feet away from the box. But it's ruining the play experience for me. I hadn't played a game on it yet without using headphones, so it's also just new. I hope it's limited to a problem with that title (ME). The PS3 fan is loudish but not even close to the 360's fan, and the 360's drive really is like a dirt devil going nuts. I barely found the time to actually use the thing after buying it so I'm also just disappointed that all my 360 gaming experiences are going to be marred by that noise. Maybe that's why when my neighbor plays Halo I can hear it through the wall like it was in my own living room.
Click to expand...

I sit 8' from my xbox elite and it is virtually silent.

Might consider you have a defective unit.
 
I just beat Uncharted yesterday. It's one of my favorite games and MUCH better than Tomb Raider IMHO. Everyone I know who has played it or even watched someone play it has liked it. You sir are in the minority.
 
I prefer the PS3 over the XBOX360 because
1) PS3 is also a multimedia device (excellent blu-ray player + upscaling capability)
2) PS3 is more silent
3) XBOX 360 exclusive games (Gears of War, Mass Effect ) are generally available on the PC as well (if you do not mind a delay and if you have a decent PC)
4) PS3 hardware is superior

Now, the XBOX 360 is a very capable gaming console and it also a good (cheaper) choice. I think it depends if the multimedia capability is something you want or not.
 
RadXge said:
I prefer the PS3 over the XBOX360 because
1) PS3 is also a multimedia device (excellent blu-ray player + upscaling capability)
2) PS3 is more silent
3) XBOX 360 exclusive games (Gears of War, Mass Effect ) are generally available on the PC as well (if you do not mind a delay and if you have a decent PC)
4) PS3 hardware is superior

Now, the XBOX 360 is a very capable gaming console and it also a good (cheaper) choice. I think it depends if the multimedia capability is something you want or not.
Click to expand...


As per 1, you could argue on the flip side that the 360 is on par with the PS3 in terms of media. I'm thinking of the new rental agreements in particular. Ill give you 2+4 on a broad basis

3 is exactly as you put it. For me, playing through mass effect on my 42" and big leather couches while going on the bioware discussion forums to talk about the direction I was taking my Shepard and hear how other people were taking theirs was pretty cool. The experience probably wouldnt have been the same if I had bought it for PC later on. However, my PC consists of a clawhammer and radeon x800 gto with 1gb of ram, so you can kinda see how It'd have been lacking in the graphics department ;-)
 
Furystrike said:
As per 1, you could argue on the flip side that the 360 is on par with the PS3 in terms of media. I'm thinking of the new rental agreements in particular. Ill give you 2+4 on a broad basis

3 is exactly as you put it. For me, playing through mass effect on my 42" and big leather couches while going on the bioware discussion forums to talk about the direction I was taking my Shepard and hear how other people were taking theirs was pretty cool. The experience probably wouldnt have been the same if I had bought it for PC later on. However, my PC consists of a clawhammer and radeon x800 gto with 1gb of ram, so you can kinda see how It'd have been lacking in the graphics department ;-)
Click to expand...

No, you cant argue on 1. The ONE thing the 360 has thats better is the rentals, but for absolutely everything else its media capabilities are far below the PS3. Its HD on demand is nowhere near the quality of Blu-ray for one. Either way this thread just fails. As do all of these that get made every month or so.
 
4saken said:
No, you cant argue on 1. The ONE thing the 360 has thats better is the rentals, but for absolutely everything else its media capabilities are far below the PS3. Its HD on demand is nowhere near the quality of Blu-ray for one. Either way this thread just fails. As do all of these that get made every month or so.
Click to expand...

Well...I donno, I think you could argue on 1. I'm much more likely to stream a movie on impulse than jump through the hoops of getting physical media in my hands. As for media capabilities, it acts as a media center extender, which is all you can ask for if you have windows xp or vista computer. However, I won't deny that blu-ray is certainly superior in IQ. What I would ask is that you take a step out of your subjective shoes and try on a pair of objective ones - try to see that the different pros and cons of both systems appeal to people in different ways; there are those who walk among us that believe streaming HD movies is the way of the future and there are those who will stick by their physical media until the end.

As for the thread failing - why? I'm trying to make a PS3/360 comparison that is as unbiased as possible instead of the normal garbage we get. Citing parts of the original post that you disagree with would be much more constructive, albeit more difficult, than saying "this thread fails".
 
I think Uncharted and Resistance fall under the same category as Gears and Halo. Overrated as hell by each console's fanbase. Not surprising since they are all first party games. I dont know what people see in them, Resistance is just blah, Uncharted is ruined by the unacceptable amateur-ridden controls, Gears is one of the most linear and repetitious games ever, and Halo is just mediocre. None of them are terrible games but they are far from being great. I think people just put them on a pedestal because they are the only first party games worth a damn.
 
idividebyzero said:
I think Uncharted and Resistance fall under the same category as Gears and Halo. Overrated as hell by each console's fanbase.
Click to expand...
You probably have a point there. Had they not been exclusives (any of them, the PS3 or 360 games) then they'd have mostly been "just another shooter" etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top