|
|
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Best PS3 Game Deals
|
Best PS3 Game Deals, See All the Deals » |
Top deals |
New deals
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() $15.05 | ![]() $14.99 | ![]() $39.99 | ![]() $28.46 1 day ago
| ![]() $26.91 1 day ago
| ![]() $19.50 3 hrs ago
| ![]() $26.69 | ![]() $16.88 | ![]() $32.24 3 hrs ago
| ![]() $59.95 | ![]() $39.99 | ![]() $39.95 |
![]() |
#1 |
Blu-ray Champion
|
![]()
I have a question that I haven't seen addressed, although it could have slipped past me.
On the POP trilogy HD release, they include the PS2 releases AND the Sands of Time PS3 Release. On the Tomb Raider Trilogy HD they released Underworld which was a PS3 release in addition to the previous PS2 releases. What is the point of including the games that are ALREADY on the PS3? I can't imagine they improved the graphics, did they? I'm sure the trophy sets are probably the same, so can someone explain to me why they did this? Is the "Trilogy" moniker THAT valuable? Why not do like God of War, and release the "Prince of Persia Collection" or "Tomb Raider Collection" and focus on the two other games? I would think the more space it would free up would allow them to add some other bonus features such as making of, featurettes, or whatever. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
|
|