you folks are funny, you realise that while many people pre-order will not be able to get there copies on day one guess what, not everybody will take pre-orders. i would venture hundreds of thousands of peole will try and buy one without a pre-order.

Whenever something is fun people will hate it, friends of mine hate stuff just cause i like it. If you like halo you like halo and halo is fun. people will line up to play it xbl will be slammed with people like you and me trying to get into a match just to kill each other. I hope it breaks spider-mans face, and i love spider-man. But i love video games more. Fuck the haters let em hate!


Also you pay 5 to six times as much for a video game because its interactive you dont just watch and listen, you also control.

god damn i want bioshock

That's ok zomB Eter, Lukich 6-times posted his message 6 times somewhere. 2 Times is just normal.

I hope this obliterates the Spiderman record, people need to start understanding that video games are here to stay as a industry on the level of movies and music, and they better damn respect.

It's one thing to be excited about video games doing huge numbers, but the profound inanity of the comparison being drawn here is indescribable. Apples to oranges really.

Just wait a couple of years until they start charging $60 a pop to see a movie in the theaters, and $130 a pop for the IMAX versions, then the comparison will be a sound one. Just you wait. It'll happen.

Sharpless, you're reaching a tad too far to justify the comparison. We're not talking about how much it costs to produce a game vs how much it costs to produce a movie, we're talking about the cost to the consumer, and when you try and draw comparisons between something that costs ten bucks tops, against something that costs five or six times that, then your comparison is lopsided.

Basically, Halo wouldn't have to do as much in overall units sold by comparison to the number of tickets purchased for Spider-Man 3 in order to beat it, because the cost of a copy of Halo outstrips that of a film ticket by a wide margin, but they don't cop to that. They just say they're going to make more than Spider-Man 3, ignoring the fact that it's an apples to oranges comparison at best.

Yeah I get that the bottom line is all that matters to them, it's obvious them being in the business of making money and all. However, when they're tooting their own horn by drawing comparisons like this, they ought to stick to drawing comparisons that aren't faulty, and that are only really a win on the basis that their product sells for five to six times that of the product they're comparing themselves to. People like us, the perceptive people who read between the lines and don't take things at face value, see these differences, and it all just ends up coming across as unwarranted arrogance.

It's good that Halo is doing well. I agree with those who have said that games deserve to do as well as the competing media, but this comparison is indeed faulty, and in consequence comes across as the sort of posturing that Sony has been responsible for in the past couple of years.

I still think you're missing the point. What we were talking about was games being accepted as an industry on-par with, for example, movies. It's the sales figures - as in, how much profit they bring in - that matter, to the entertainment industry itself. The comparison is not faulty, when the focus is being placed in this area. Fewer people may buy Halo 3, compared to the people who went to see Spiderman 3, but if Halo 3 can bring in as much, or even more, money (and lower development costs + higher pricetag + excellent sales = huge profit) then they will take notice. They'll have to, because they love money.

Fair enough but, with all due respect, it doesn't really matter what you're interested in. It matters what The Powers That Be - whoever suddenly decides that games are as legitimate as other forms of entertainment and art - are interested in. Whatever you or I think, doesn't really matter here. That's all I'm saying.

But who are we kidding? It's not likely to work anyway.

Seems to me that Cyberxion is taking more of an economic approach, while Sharpless is taking the business standpoint. I agree it is way different to compare the two in terms of that gross income because the cost of these games. However, in terms of business, this is pretty damn good of them to make 170 mill.