Originally Posted by number1laing
World-wide the PS3 basically battled the 360 to a draw. Wiki has the PS3 at 70.2 million units and the 360 at 70.0 as of 9/30/12.
Wii at 97.2 /troll
Beat me to it. Then there's the fact, as the link in the previous page says, they both put them selves in the hole doing it.
Only console war winners this gen were fan-boys and their egos. In reality however, the competition really gave gamers some really good games and support. I've played more AAA (great) sleeper hits that pretty much bombed then at any time before, and still have a huge backlog of games ATM.
Originally Posted by confidenceman
I could rattle off a good handful off the top of my head, but I won't since it's totally not the place for such nonsense, as you say. If you play more than Western-developed FPS and TPS games, you'd know better.
The takeaway is that both consoles suck at the moment (tech-wise), and few developers are willing to work within the dated constraints of "ancient" hardware. Just look at how awfully the biggest new titles run right now on the consoles. It's not pretty. The best games right now are those that don't aim high (small games and indies). There are other reasons small games are really great right now, but again, this isn't really the place for that discussion.
First it's it too damn complicated, why should we have to learn about parallel processing on coding in threads? Now it's the tech sucks! These Devs sure are a bitch bunch, eh?
Still, the rumors are getting louder that we shouldn't expect much in the way of trans-generational leap this time around. Which makes sense. COD isn't a 3 billion dollar franchise because it pushed consoles to the limit, nor is kinect most likely the 360's biggest success story (profit wise) because some tech geek got excited about how it handles shaders and radiosity.