Why did this game do better on PS3?

#11The 1 ExecutionerPosted 12/26/2012 8:59:05 PM
I own both consoles and versions of this game, and the reason why there are more people in PS3:

1. XBOX has a large MW3 population (ps3 also but xbox is 10x more - think the opposite of RE6 population between ps3 and xbox).
2. PS3 has RE1-RE5 + CVX, so why not keep/buy RE6 in the same console as the others?
3. XBOX has more 'distracting' games such as Halo series (exclusive) and Gears series (exclusive).
4. PS3 is much easier to purchase and more popular in Asia (where most of Resident Evil fans are) rather than American's XBOX.

Those are few things I can think of and I'm sure there are others.
---
XBL: The1Executioner | PSN: It's Private!
http://www.youtube.com/the1executioner
#12The 1 ExecutionerPosted 12/26/2012 9:04:19 PM
Degalon posted...
Vivaldi7 posted...
Maybe because the x360 crowd is used to higher standards ?

Hate it all you want but as far as cover-centric 3rd person shooters are concerned GoW had this game beat years ago.
True, RE6 is more than that but it is how a lot of people who played the public demo dismissed it.
---


To be fair, Mass Effect and Tom Clancy games have Gears beat as cover based third person shooters go. Gears is pretty sub-standard.


With all due respect, this is where you are wrong. Gears, the series, is one of the 'big' XBOX games. Microsoft would lose substantial money if PS3 has access to Gears. GoW3 has been out for over a year and the game's population is still huge (not as MW3 but still big). Big = not much time required to find ranked matches. Goldglove is able to eat and have a roof over his head thanks to all of his YT vids (which 90% are Gears).
---
XBL: The1Executioner | PSN: It's Private!
http://www.youtube.com/the1executioner
#13DegalonPosted 12/27/2012 3:40:17 AM
The 1 Executioner posted...
Degalon posted...
Vivaldi7 posted...
Maybe because the x360 crowd is used to higher standards ?

Hate it all you want but as far as cover-centric 3rd person shooters are concerned GoW had this game beat years ago.
True, RE6 is more than that but it is how a lot of people who played the public demo dismissed it.
---


To be fair, Mass Effect and Tom Clancy games have Gears beat as cover based third person shooters go. Gears is pretty sub-standard.


With all due respect, this is where you are wrong. Gears, the series, is one of the 'big' XBOX games. Microsoft would lose substantial money if PS3 has access to Gears. GoW3 has been out for over a year and the game's population is still huge (not as MW3 but still big). Big = not much time required to find ranked matches. Goldglove is able to eat and have a roof over his head thanks to all of his YT vids (which 90% are Gears).


Which does nothing to disprove my point that Gears is sub-standard in comparison to most other third person shooters, especially anything tom clancy, and the Mass Effect series.

Popularity has nothing to do with game quality. A ton of the most popular games on the market pale in comparison to a good chunk of other games in the respective genres.
---
GT/PSN: DEGALON
MK: Sheeva/Mileena, SSF4: Guile, BB: Makoto, DOA4: Leon, SC4: Astaroth, SF3: Alex, AH3: Zenia Valov, Tekken: Bryan Fury, VF: Vanessa
#14MashYouGoodPosted 12/27/2012 6:03:02 AM
Delkura posted...
Why did this game do better on PS3?

- lower standards
- nothing better to play on that doorstop (speaking from first-hand experience, here)
- 360 has a million TPS' a million times more worthy of gamers time than RE6
- Japan

Also, the very fact it did do better in contrast to the statement by Crapclown that they wanted the RE franchise to be Call of Dullards, speaks volumes for how many fronts they failed with this game on.