An unbiased look at PS3 games vs 360 games, this year vs last year

S

SpaceInsomniac

CAGiversary!
PS3 Games VS 360 Games, Last Year and This Year, By the Numbers

All scores are taken from metacritic.

===============================================

-=October 2007 List=-

Highest scoring console exclusive:
PS3: Resistance: Fall of Man - 86
360: BioShock - 96

First or second party titles scoring at least an 8.5:
PS3: 1 (Resistance: Fall of Man)
360: 5 (Halo 3, Gears of War, Forza, Project Gotham Racing 3, Geometry Wars)

Games scored 9.0 or higher:
PS3: 1 (Oblivion)
360: 9 (Orange Box, BioShock, Halo 3, Gears of War, Oblivion, Guitar Hero II, GRAW, Forza Motorsport 2, Call of Duty 2)

Games scored 8.5 or higher:
PS3: 8
360: 27

Games scored 8.0 or higher:
PS3: 29
360: 73

Games scored 7.5 or higher:
PS3: 45
360: 119

===================================================

-=October 2008 List=-

Highest scoring console exclusive:
PS3: Metal Gear Solid 4 - 94
360: Gears of War / Halo 3 - 94

* Second highest scoring console exclusive:
PS3: Ratchet & Clank Future - 89
360: Braid - 93
(Or substitue "Mass Effect - 91" if you'd like to count only retail games)

* Third highest scoring console exclusive:
PS3: Uncharted: Drake's Fortune - 88
Geometry Wars: Retro Evolved 2 - 90
(Or substitue "Project Gotham Racing 3 - 88" if you'd like to count only retail games)

First or second party titles scoring at least an 8.5:
PS3: 6 (Resistance: Fall of Man, Ratchet & Clank Future, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, WipEout HD, Super Stardust HD, MLB 08: The Show)
360: 6 (Halo 3, Gears of War, Mass Effect, Forza 2, Project Gotham Racing 3, Geometry Wars)

Games scored 9.0 or higher:
PS3: 5 (GTA IV, Call of Duty 4, Metal Gear Solid 4, Oblivion, Rock Band)
360: 15 (GTA IV, BioShock, Orange Box, Gears of War, Oblivion, Call of Duty 4, Halo 3, Braid, Rock Band 2, Guitar Hero II, Rock Band, Mass Effect, GRAW, Geometry Wars 2, Forza 2)

Games scored 8.5 or higher:
PS3: 27
360: 46

Games scored 8.0 or higher:
PS3: 68
360: 113

Games scored 7.5 or higher:
PS3: 98
360: 184

* Highest Scoring Download Only Game:
PS3: WipEout HD / Bionic Commando Rearmed - 87
360: Braid - 93

* Second Highest Scoring Download Only Game:
PS3: Mega Man 9 - 86
360: Geometry Wars 2 - 90

* Third Highest Scoring Download Only Game:
PS3: Super Stardust HD - 85
360: Castlevania: Symphony of the Night / Rez HD - 89

* Download Only Game's scored 8.0 or Higher:
PS3: 11 (Binoic Commando Rearmed, WipEout HD, Mega Man 9, Super Stardust HD, PixelJunk Monsters, Everyday Shooter, Gran Turismo HD Concept, Super Puzzle Fighter II Turbo HD Remix, Tekken 5, Echochrome, PixelJunk Eden)
360: 22 (Braid, Geometry Wars 2, Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, Rez HD, Ikaruga, Puzzle Quest, Geometry Wars, Mega Man 9, Bionic Commando Rearmed, Bomberman Live, Duke Nukem 3D, Castle Crashers, N+, Super Puzzle Fighter II Turbo HD Remix, Prince of Persia Classic, Sonic the Hedgehog 2, Sensible World of Soccer, Uno, PokerSmash, Catan, Cloning Clyde, Doom)

Note : (* = New catagory for 2008)


===================================================
This data was originally compiled by myself, around this time last year. I wanted a "fanboy proof" way to show, by the numbers, why I felt buying a PS3 was likely not as appealing to most console buyers as purchasing a 360. I really don't think you can argue much with last years numbers, but I can certainly now admit that the PS3 seems to be catching up.

Especially interesting is the category of "First or second party games scoring at least an 8.5" where Sony has not only caught up, but they've surpassed MS. On the other side of the coin, you have the "Games scored 9.0 or higher" category. Although Sony is also catching up there, MS still has three times the number of games in that category. With the big Christmas game rush soon approaching, it will be interesting to revisit these numbers sometime in late December and see which company's exclusives made the bigger difference.

Another strong suit for MS seems to be downloadable games. While I've seen a fair share of Sony fans who point to Microsoft's decision to de-list some of their really crappy games as proof that PSN games are generally better than XBLA titles, the numbers seem to tell a different story. Although I didn't collect data in this category last year, you can definitely tell that MS currently has the upper and in this area.

As this console generation moves on, it's becoming more and more apparent that owning both a 360 and PS3 is a good idea for gamers who don't want to miss out on some fantastic games. As Sony catches up to Microsoft, it's just going to make MS have to try even harder. If Home wasn't in the works, we likely would not be seeing a 360 dashboard update in November. Since XBLA is such a success, I'm betting Sony will put more effort into their PSN titles in the future. Either way, competition is good, it's a great time for games, and it's a great time to be a gamer.


I hope that seeing this data has been interesting to some of you, and I hope it spurs an interesting--and fanboy free--discussion about how well Sony and Microsoft are doing against each other. Personally, I think it's proving to be a pretty even race.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Everyone's different. Some people play Halo 3 four times a week, and others play Metal Gear Solid 4 more then they might play Halo, Mass Effect, Bioshock, and Braid combined. Hell, LittleBigPlanet already got 2 10's for reviews so far, not to mention how many tricks it has left up it's sleeve. This data doesn't effect the future at all, and to that I have only one conclusion: Data don't mean shit.
 
[quote name='Kendal']Data needs to be in chart form. Graphs or pie, I don't care.[/quote]

Feel free. Just let me know when you've finished. ;)

[quote name='Filler2001']Hell, LittleBigPlanet already got 2 10's for reviews so far, not to mention how many tricks it has left up it's sleeve. [/quote]

Not only do I think that LBP will be a massive hit for Sony--and an awesome game for that matter--but I also seriously hope that the game's success will force MS to take their head out of their ass when it comes to allowing user made content.
 
I don't think its that even at all. There's double the number of games in each category for the 360. A lot of third party games look better on the 360. Live arcade eats the PSN games for breakfast in terms of volume. There are few first and second party titles worth playing on the PS3, along with MGS4, and thats it. Little Big Planet is the only interesting game I can think of coming this Winter, though if I only owned a PS3, I'd be a little more interested in Resistance.

As this console generation moves on, it's becoming more and more apparent that owning both a 360 and PS3 is a good idea for gamers who don't want to miss out on some fantastic games. As Sony catches up to Microsoft, it's just going to make MS have to try even harder. If Home wasn't in the works, we likely would not be seeing a 360 dashboard update in November. Since XBLA is such a success, I'm betting Sony will put more effort into their PSN titles in the future. Either way, competition is good, it's a great time for games, and it's a great time to be a gamer.
Click to expand...

sure, it's always a good idea to own all the systems. Then again, people missed out on great games on the 3DO, Jaguar, and 32X as well ;)

One recurring theme this gen is that every time Sony takes a step forward, MS somehow takes a few more steps forward than Sony. Some MS rep said something like "we've got a plan to beat them every step of the way" at the beginning of the gen and that's exactly what they've done. It's impressive how MS turned things around. The weird thing is that Sony doesn't seem to be fighting back.
 
[quote name='Filler2001']Everyone's different. Some people play Halo 3 four times a week, and others play Metal Gear Solid 4 more then they might play Halo, Mass Effect, Bioshock, and Braid combined. Hell, LittleBigPlanet already got 2 10's for reviews so far, not to mention how many tricks it has left up it's sleeve. This data doesn't effect the future at all, and to that I have only one conclusion: Data don't mean shit.[/QUOTE]

Further expanding upon this, my own quirk between the two systems is that I happen to prefer the PS3 controller over the 360 one. The 360 controller is a pain to use, mainly because of its sticky right analog stick. I can't count the number of times I've moved that stick expecting it to recenter itself like I'm used to from all PS2 gaming I've done, and suddenly the camera is spinning because the stick stays in place. The other thing is that the 360 controller, for me, isn't as comfortable to hold as the PS3 one. My only major complaint about the PS3 controller is how they shaved off the back ends of the controller near the R2 and L2 buttons making them mushier to press, and sometimes I'll press them but whatever game I'm playing won't register it. I still find that easier to live with than the devil of the right analog stick on the 360. It's ironically made it so that I'll be considering purchasing most multiplatform games on the PS3 and only getting 360 exclusives which I know is quite the opposite for everyone else on these boards it seems.

But then I don't play many console games online since I have MMOs for that, I don't buy the download (XBLA/PSN) games because I already have enough games to play and don't need more, I don't see a difference between graphics on the 360 and PS3 versions of many games, and finally I think the fact that I was a fool and bought the 20gb 360 several months back makes it a less appealing console for me since I have the 80gb PS3. But hey that's just my own unique quirk in how I view the 360 vs PS3 debate.
 
[quote name='evanft']The right stick sticking is a problem with your controller, not with the 360 in general.[/QUOTE]

I was under the impression that it was designed that way to supposedly allow better fine tuning in mostly FPS games. So the stick is definitely supposed to function like the right analog stick on a playstation controller? Is this something that commonly happens to 360 controllers? I ask because I remember the right analog stick being like that on a demo unit at a Best Buy, and thought it was just due to heavy use. But when I got mine, I figured it was an intended design.
 
This comparison would be less biased if years-in-release were compared.

Of course the 360 is going to have higher numbers - it simply has more content. You could make an "unbiased" look at the flipside and argue that the 360 has more trash than the PS3.

EDIT: I'm also curious why Castlevania: SotN shows up an 89 on the 360 release, but doesn't show up on the PS3 side, considering it is higher than the 87 Bionic Commando Rearmed brought in.
 
Most people don't need numbers to be shown that 360 has more and better games, but the ones who do don't give a shit about them anyway because they're too blinded by Sony love.
 
You said this would be unbiased, yet you also said you specifically looked for ways to show the 360 was better. Wha?
 
As long as Microsoft doesn't have blu-ray and Sony's first party games there will always be a reason to own a PS3, and the same goes for the Wii if you wanna go that route with the exception of blu-ray.

Regardless, the 360 has the most "current gen" content out there and is still the best choice this generation as was the PS2 the best choice last generation.
 
[quote name='Chacrana']It hasn't been that interesting. Neither system is really very good :/[/QUOTE]
You've been getting a bit too emo lately.
 
Also, the 360 has been out for a year longer, and the two systems are already neck-and-neck in numbers. Now stick that in your pipe and smoke it, good sir!

That will be all.
 
- 360, per the stats above, has "more" and "better" games (based on the rating stats).
- 360 has been out a year longer. Some normalized stats would be nice (games released in 2008 only, percentage of total game base, etc). So the quantities should be greater.
- Stats are important, however, one cannot quantify the subjective "enjoyment."
The right console for you is the one that offers the features and games you want. For me, at present, that's the 360. If you're into high-def movies (I'm not) and gaming, then the PS3 would be a nobrainer. Ideal solution would be to get both :)
 
[quote name='dtcarson']-
The right console for you is the one that offers the features and games you want. For me, at present, that's the 360. If you're into high-def movies (I'm not) and gaming, then the PS3 would be a nobrainer. Ideal solution would be to get both :)[/QUOTE]

Exactly.

And who cares about "objectively" proving what console is better? Just by the one(s) that suit your needs and enjoy them!
 
[quote name='Rei no Otaku']You've been getting a bit too emo lately.[/QUOTE]

Either that or my calendar for those two systems is blank because they kinda suck and my calendar for the DS and PC is lookin' pretty damn spiffy.
 
[quote name='jer7583']Most people don't need numbers to be shown that 360 has more and better games, but the ones who do don't give a shit about them anyway because they're too blinded by Sony love.[/quote]

That's exactly the stupid fanboy bullshit that I didn't want in this thread.

Anyhow people could look at these numbers and think that the 360 is still way better when it comes to game because it has more titles, but they can also look at these numbers and see how quickly the PS3 is catching up. The first or second party exclusives over 8.5 is especially impressive.

I'll also say that while the 360 might have higher numbers of games in each category, many of those games are from the first year and a half or so of the 360's life, and people in the market for a new console would likely not even bother with them.

Really, the data is open for interpretation. My intention here is just to post the data and have people make up their own minds. I'm not pushing any sort of agenda for any specific console.

[quote name='thelonepig']This comparison would be less biased if years-in-release were compared.

Of course the 360 is going to have higher numbers - it simply has more content. You could make an "unbiased" look at the flipside and argue that the 360 has more trash than the PS3.

EDIT: I'm also curious why Castlevania: SotN shows up an 89 on the 360 release, but doesn't show up on the PS3 side, considering it is higher than the 87 Bionic Commando Rearmed brought in.[/quote]

Years in Release: I'd wager for most people buying a video game console, they don't care about who had the best lineup of games at a specific point in each console's life, they just care about who has the best games right now. The data here only is intended to examine that issue.

The Flipside: In the same respect, I don't feel most people buying a console care about how many bad games vs how many good games, they only care about how many good games. It's also obvious that some people want to play Gears and Mass Effect, while others are more interested in Resistance and Warhawk, but again, I'm only interested in looking at objective data.

Why this game, but not this game? Why have the score for this game on console X, but not console Y?: It's all Metacritic data. Take a look for yourself:

http://www.metacritic.com/games/ps3/scores/
http://www.metacritic.com/games/xbox360/scores/

If you find any errors, just let me know. I'll be happy to correct them.
 
[quote name='Chacrana']It hasn't been that interesting. Neither system is really very good :/[/quote]

The 360 is the next best thing to the Dreamcast.
 
[quote name='lolwut?']The 360 is the next best thing to the Dreamcast.[/QUOTE]

How is it even close or similar at all? Next best thing to a Dreamcast is still the PS2 (which is actually better, but I digress.)
 
[quote name='cochesecochese']What is the point of this thread.[/quote]
honestly. It seems skewered and it's not like the data provided wasn't known.
 
[quote name='akilshohen']honestly. It seems skewered and it's not like the data provided wasn't known.[/quote]

If you think you can "un-skewer" metacritic data, then by all means go for it. Once again, I'm not pushing an agenda here.
 
It's a nice attempt OP, but your data doesn't prove your point. For instance you have Forza 2 listed in both 2007 and 2008, ergo your totals are based on the total of all games through the life of the system as opposed to the # of "decent" games in each year which would be significantly more telling of where things are moving.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Geometry Wars 2 isn't a first/second part game. It's an Activision game.[/quote]

I didn't notice that, and thank you for pointing it out. I'll have to correct that. It makes me wonder why they don't make a PS3 port though. :(

[edit] It's been removed from the first/second party titles scoring 8.5 or above category. Thanks again.

[quote name='nasum']It's a nice attempt OP, but your data doesn't prove your point. For instance you have Forza 2 listed in both 2007 and 2008, ergo your totals are based on the total of all games through the life of the system as opposed to the # of "decent" games in each year which would be significantly more telling of where things are moving.[/quote]

That's actually a good idea. As I said, I just wanted to show things as they stand now, rather than show each console's standings at one year in, two years in, etc. If you or anyone else wants to work with this data and do a year by year thing, that would be great. I'd be interested in seeing it.
 
[quote name='SpaceInsomniac']I didn't notice that, and thank you for pointing it out. I'll have to correct that. It makes me wonder why they don't make a PS3 port though. :(

[edit] It's been removed from the first/second party titles scoring 8.5 or above category. Thanks again.[/quote]
I imagine MS had something to do with it not appearing on PS3.
 
[quote name='SpaceInsomniac']Why this game, but not this game? Why have the score for this game on console X, but not console Y?: It's all Metacritic data. Take a look for yourself:

http://www.metacritic.com/games/ps3/scores/
http://www.metacritic.com/games/xbox360/scores/

If you find any errors, just let me know. I'll be happy to correct them.[/quote]

So does Metacritic not have scores for all games? I've got a bit of an issue with the data if they're including games on one console, but not the other (i.e. Castlevanis: SotN, which shows up on the 360 but not the PS3).

Honestly, I think both consoles have games that are worth purchasing. In my case, I picked up a PS3 and a buddy of mine got a 360 so that we don't have to own both consoles to enjoy all of the games. I'm just tired of people trying to prove that one of the consoles is better than the other.

Can't we all just get along? ;)
 
I agree that there is no amount of data that can present this case, as each person will prefer and buy different games. I love my PS3 to death but had to buy it to supplement my Wii (have loved Nintendo games for 20+ years now) since they dropped the ball and gave us a Gamecube on roids with novelty motion controls. When Nintendo and Sony have a illegitimate child and poop out one system with both of their 1st/2nd party support then I'll be happy.
 
I'd be interested to see a percentage of titles in the various score brackets. Also, were the score brackets for a range or for total? That is to say that 8.5 and higher is 8.5+ or 8.5 to 8.9 then 9.0+? if it is 8.5+ then it will encompass all 9.0 games as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top