Atomicfog

Haha, yes. That theme song cannot be unforgotten.

I remember loving Battletoads when I was 6 or 7, but I nor any of my friends ever did get past that f'ing ridiculous racing level -- it had me throwing my controller at the ground. I used to have dreams of what came after that level. I still don't know what is after that level to this day. Maybe I'll find out sometime. Also, Chrono Trigger, being my first RPG, will always be memorable -- especially since I played new game + on it until the cart battery died and my game was erased. That game was unusually deep for its time. Same here. Those games were completely epic when they came out, and they both still hold up pretty well considering their age -- though MGS holds up really well. Hah, it was great music. I remember I used to stick my grandpa's giant old tape recorder up to the T.V. speakers while playing Street Fighter II just so I could listen to the music

I wouldn't be surprised if they adopted the rating system partially so that games to look better on paper, as that would actually benefit Gamestop with little more than a slight spin. However, rigging ratings is far beyond that, and based on their averages they do stick to around an average of 7. Most reviews in the magazine get a 7 or less. That leaves more bad ratings available to GI than good. I would think that would indicate that they don't hesitate to give a game what it deserves. Yeah, I see what you're saying, and it's definitely worth taking an objective look. It's a shame, about society, too. I read GI, and it rings true to me, and the writers seem genuine -- more so than most gaming magazines I've read. Yeah, Gamestop is "big corporation" so naturally people seem to assume anything they do is bad, but it seems a little unrealistic to me that Gamestop is somehow so desperate for more cash that they'd resort to making a magazine with rigged reviews. Of course, that's just my take.

Then they've shot themselves in the foot numerous times. Wouldn't make sense if that "conspiracy theory-like were true, would it? I'm not saying it isn't possible that they do that, but there isn't any evidence to support it, and as DarkeSword said, they make money regardless of what games you buy. Also, I just thought I'd mention that many people come to these conclusions because they don't understand Game Informer's rating system. Game Informer, unlike most other review sources, uses a review system similar to that of school. They consider 7 average ©, an 8 is equivalent to a B, a 9 is the equivalent of an A, and anything above is outstanding. Because of this it may look like they give more games higher ratings, when in fact that isn't the case. The average review score in Game Informer is a 7, and a little while back GI said that is pretty close to what you get if you actually average all of their reviews scores.

Actually, I did know that. I just pointed to the fact that they don't even mention Gamestop, and there is no evidence that Gamestop influences what they publish. And it does that by spiking people's interest in games, not to mention it makes money through actual ads just like any magazine, and that's disregarding subscription fees. If their job was to rate bad games as good so they would sell, then people would know it. It wouldn't even make sense, especially seeing as a fair amount of games on their front cover have gotten bad reviews. That doesn't add up if they are simply trying to give these games PR. There is no evidence Game Stop fixes the reviews Game Informer publishes, and the only naivety lies in assuming that they do based on no real evidence. Simply maintaining that Game Stop is an interested party doesn't mean anything except that they make money, directly, by owning a good magazine. I agree with you in that I'm not a big fan of Gamestop either, and you not supporting them with your money makes sense given your dislike of them, but that has nothing to do with how Game Informer is run. Just because Gamestop is an interested party doesn't indicate anything as to how they run their magazine, only that their magazine ultimately makes money for their company -- which it logically would through ads and subscription fees as well as spiking interest in games throughout the gaming community.

Popular games are often popular because they're enjoyable. Game Informer has a perfectly good incentive to be critical of games -- so people will buy their magazine. Giving bad reviews to bad games doesn't hurt their parent company, it just makes it so that more people spend there money on good games rather than bad. Gamestop gets money regardless of what games you buy, as long as you buy from them. They have no incentive to "pimp" certain games and give them good reviews, and if even they did, there is no evidence that they do. Personally, I find that they generally give a good all around critique as shown in the example on the last page. More importantly they tell you what a game is, and what it isn't. When you said "Maybe it's my massive dislike towards GameStop" you might have a point, but if you examine Game Informer without your bias against Game Stop, you might see why people like it.

You don't consider reading reviews research? Granted I read reviews from several sources before even considering buying a game, but I haven't been disappointed by a highly reviewed game in, well, I don't even know. Highly reviewed games are almost always enjoyable in my experience. Examples? Last time I checked they don't even talk about Gamestop, so unless you're talking about the ads in the magazine, which are in most magazines, I don't see what you're talking about. I have to say though, it's nice to read without staring at a screen every once in awhile, and different magazines have writing styles and charm you don't always get online. Heh. Like Gameinformer.com? But yeah, online resources are nice, they actually keep me from buying Game Informer as I don't have extra money to spend on things like magazines these days.

Heh, wow. I had a feeling it was declining when I got my last issue, maybe in 2001 or so. I still do. It's great to go back and read them every once in awhile too. So much nostalgia. Also, when it comes to canceled gaming magazines I miss Next-Gen. They had great articles, and they predicted so many gaming related events long before they happened.

Yeah, I completely get where you're coming from. Generally, it's best to go with whatever review source best matches your tastes, otherwise you'll likely end up getting games you don't care for. Though I have to say, GI does rate based on personal opinion as well, they just try their best not to let it clout their judgment of a game too much.

Sounds like they simply made a good point to me. One of the reasons I like their reviews so much is because they always give a great general review rather than giving into their personal opinion. Not to mention their reviews are very elaborate and they try to mention both the good and the bad regardless of the rating (even with some of the lowest scores). And for reference the full review: http://www.gameinformer.com/NR/exeres/459184D9-C868-461C-8B9E-B77BCA2169B0.htm I haven't played the game, but I like that they are frank about the whole thing. A long RPG with bad dialogue and plot points does sound like an issue.

Oh man, it's about time. Now you can switch to a decent gaming magazine like Game Informer, Coop. So Gamepro is pretty bad these days? I didn't even realize they were still around.

They're talking about SciFi as in the channel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sci_Fi_Pictures_original_films

It's pretty annoying, that's for sure. I honestly don't know how they screwed up so badly. It's especially been a pain for me as I didn't buy a next-gen console (the 360) until late in the game, and I had used my friends consoles up until then for save files -- save files that I can't transfer to my account. As terrible as the memory card system is, it's not the worst of things. What's really terrible is the price gouging in the memory card market these days. Memory cards that are 8-64 mbs cost between $20 and $60, even for old consoles like the PS2. We know memory devices of that size cost almost nothing to produce, yet all the console manufacturers decided to force us to use their ridiculously expensive memory cards if we want to transfer much of our data. That right there is complete BS.

Rape! Ten Charapeters

You might want to consider not making quick responses seeing as you're a little slow...

Damn billionaires, living one of my dreams. I always wondered why nobody had done it already, but apparently they have. At least most of them sound pretty lame and seem to be skimping on spending much. With that kind of money you could probably build a much better suit than any of the heroes in that article. Man, that'd be pretty fun though.

Small Soldiers was fucking amazing, what are you talking about? It has toys trying to kill humans with mobile nail guns and flame throwers... How can you call that the worst of anything?

I'd say these are some pretty good recommendations based on what my friends have been enjoying -- especially LittleBigPlanet. Also, Drake's fortune is supposed to be pretty amazing. The sequel looks like it's coming along well too.

I loved the Dark Knight, but I would like to know why you didn't enjoy the Dark Knight if there are any specific reasons? The only reasons I could see for disliking it was: A. Batman speaking was... well... completely ridiculous -- I couldn't stop laughing. But that's a good thing as well as bad. B. The very end was kind of pretentious and dumb. HEY GUYS, BATMAN IS ACTUALLY A VILLAIN... EVEN THOUGH HE ISN'T. You can maybe call someone like the Punisher a villain, but calling Batman a villain is like calling The Joker a hero. But I don't think either of those things lessened my view of the movie very much. The box office is bullshit. Look how well Quantum of Solace did.

I ended up getting an Xbox 360 over a PS3 if that says anything. Honestly though, the PS3 doesn't have that many great exclusive titles at all -- mostly a few epic sequels. The second I heard FF 13 was coming out for Xbox 360 though, I had to get a 360. That said I might regret not being able to play Versus 13. Right now, neither console is too exciting RPG-wise (Come to think of it, the PSP is probably a better system than both RPG-wise.) I'll wait for the PS4 to play the few exclusive PS3 games I miss this generation. Of course, you never know, Sony could step it up a notch come 2009, but I believe this was the year a comeback was forecast, and, well, not too much happened.

OK, the community at large revokes your right to publicly judge movies. You can love the first, and maybe even like the second Matrix, but The Matrix Revolutions was an abomination, and nobody with taste can deny that

They were pretty great. So, not all Sci-fi original movies suck -- almost all of them do

I guess you guys never saw the "Cube" movies.

I'd consider buying it for $5. Edit: Heh, looks like Linkjing beat me to it.

I just saw The Spirit. It was pretty bad, but some parts, especially the beginning, were pretty amusing. I'd say it was a mediocre movie though, but it definitely wasn't a worst movie. The worst movie I saw in recent memory was There Will be Blood. No need to explain, but I honestly don't understand what people got from this movie, or if they simply liked it because it seemed artsy. I don't think I've ever watched a movie so long with so little substance. Oh yeah, and the Miami Vice movie was pretty terrible as well. I actually walked out of the theater after giving it a chance, and I've never done that before. Seemed like the editor, if there was one, just left everything they shot in the film. Of course those are only from recent memory. Luckily the worst of movies I've seen have likely been relegated to forgotten memories.