The Damned

This is correct. The internal memory on the GBA loaded up data from the GameCube and then the GBA did it's own stuff. The link cable was strictly for transferring data back and forth as needed. Even the Wii and DS connection worked the same (not that many games used it.. Pokemon Battle Revolution is the only one I can think of off hand). I'm still waiting for PriZm to explain this one.

How about this, then? It may get more realistic, but will anyone care at that point? You can cram all the real-time whatevers and get perfect photo-realism graphics, but will that matter? Take FPSs for example. On PCs, people will spend hundreds of dollars on each component to get that extra bit of power. So they have a system that can handle full detail, shading, anti-aliasing and all that stuff at max, at a rock-solid 60 frames per second. Then they drop the settings until they can get 100 frames a second or more. All of that realism is comprised for better overall performance. They fact that each blade of grass is an individual 3D model doesn't mean anything when you're running past it during a gun fight. Games that require you to never stay still so you don't die shouldn't be investing so heavily in details that none of their players will ever have the time to look at. Nerf Now! had a good strip on this. Take into account that the human brain only perceives a fraction of what the eyes take in, and it makes even less sense. I can't believe that companies haven't looked into how the brain works to see if there was any way to use it to their advantage. Surely,they would have looked at the studies and realized that there is a limit to how much they can cram in there before it doesn't register with the player. Games where you can take the time to look around, his might be a nice detail. Certain RPGs where you can take the time to explore and examine, they might benefit from it more. But action games, the ones that drive the desire for better and better graphics, are the ones that end up wasting them the most. So why are they the ones that constantly strive for more and more graphics power when most of it is ignored in favor of better framerates?

Agreed. The progress in graphics since the first generation of consoles has peaked, and is pretty much plateaued. I highly doubt that there is anything that can be done to make games look any better than they do now. At best, we might see a resolution increase (say, up to 2K or even WQXGA, but that would require TV manufacturers to also make new systems, as well as a new video storage format, possibly), but the overall fidelity will not increase enough to notice. This would help explain a lot of games that instead went for highly stylized art, instead of highly detailed realism. Now we have the technology to do real-time visual effects effectively, so things like making a game look exactly like traditional anime-style cel-shading is easier. It also helps to standout against the rest of the games out there.

Well, until Nintendo and Sony 9and I guess at some point, Microsoft) start getting into the phone market and give us a gaming phone...

Conning someone to stay with you is a valid tactic.

No! We perceived you to take a stance on a subject, and regardless of whether or not it's what you meant, we will continue to bringit up until such time that we forget it was made, because this is serious internet business and it must be pursued, even if there's no actual basis for doing so in the first place. And you will sit there and like it!

I think yours exceeds the maximum image height. It can be long, but there's a limit to how tall. EDIT: Yes, it does. Yours is 300 px tall, which is 50 over the limit. If you can scaleor crop it to 250 px tall, then it's good. Mine's only 216, so iz all good.

That plus the tactical command elements of squad-based FPSs makes the potential of the Wii U interesting. And that's just the obvious ideas. Who know what some crazy motherfucker will come up with down the road. But that name... If the U stands for something, then it's kind of cool. But just U is soooo boring and dull.

Wait... $250 and region free? Now to just figure out how to read Japanese.

Wait isn't the Vita region locked? How are you getting Japanese games?

Someone will always remember the Go, just like someone always remembers the Virtual Boy and the Atari Lynx. The real fun is seeing how long everyone can go before someone brings it up again.

LACK OF KINE = NOT DREAMLAND. DO NOT TRY TO DENY IT. Seriously, Kine was fucking awesome. He invented fishbulb before The Simpsons latched onto it.

Haa haa, ?

http://www.destructoid.com/bethesda-confirms-brink-site-hacked-personal-info-risked-203668.phtml No one is safe from teh LulzSec! But seriously guys, what's the point now? Are you trying to make these sites improve their security or is this just to show that you can? I'm not following you on this.

Exactly. The price alone is going to move units like fuck. But looking at it from a hardware point and critiquing it that way could yield some interesting discussion.

I'm not saying that it doesn't. I'm just saying that making the hardware "MORE ____" than the last one isn't the only reason why it could be more successful. I was referring specifically to that, nothing else.

I was under the impression that the PSP didn't sell as well as the DS because: 1. The price of a DS was lower. 2. The DS had better battery life. 3. The DS had the usual Nintendo first-party titles that sell systems. 4. The DS had a very unique control system at the time while the PSP offered the standard (but still perfectly fine) d-pad and buttons. This was a significant difference in 2006, but now, everything has a touchscreen. It's not unique anymore. 5. Certain major third-party titles went to the DS and not the PSP (namely Japan and and it's lust for all tings Dragon Quest), but this is less of a factor and more of an observation. Adding a second analog pad and making it even more powerful under the hood isn't "fixing" the PSP. The PSP had superior everything (screen size, storage, media support, graphics, etc) and yet it still took second place over a system that was technologically inferior.

So... you just arranged them by the year they were released?

Remember when people said that poking around on the bottom screen of a DS would make you look like an idiot? Or how much of an idiot you would be for waggling a Wiimote around? Or for jumping around in front of your Kinect-enabled 360? Or jumping around and waggling on a PS3 Move? Now people are saying that stroking the back of a Vita is going to make you look stupid. Brushfire, come on, you know you can do better than that. Remember that talk we had about not limiting yourself with lame excuses for trolling? Remember? huh? Do ya, champ? Yeah, that's better. You go give it another try. If you do it right, we'll go for ice cream after! Deal?

I meant more in terms of "look, ours is the cool system". The touchscreen is obvious. The DS showed that touchscreen gaming was not only viable but completely fun on some games. But the inclusion of the touchpad on the back comes off as overcompensation. "Oh shit, we have to catch up! How can we make up for not having one last time?" It may work, it may not. We'll see as developers find ways to use it that are actually useful. After all, there were many early DS games that tried to use the touchscreen when it wasn't very intuitive or functional. We may see games that completely ignore the touchpad on the back.

OK, just ignore the acting. Look at the Nintablet being used to control aerial drones and plotting waypoints for your teammates. That is how you should be using a tablet for a console. You can still use it to shoot and run around, but when you need to, you an get building layouts and track your teammates as they spread out.

Didn't the PSP go for the "hardcore" route? They sold it as the mature portable with awesome hardcore games like God of War and FPSde jour. They also touted it's much larger and higher res screen, and how you could watch movie and play music on it as well. If they couldn't do it last time, why should that change this time? While it may have some new tricks up its sleeve, it's the natural progression of the first hardware. Nothing has really changed this time.

Ahh, found better pictures at Neogaf. http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=28508220#post28508220 They look very close to microSD card, but subtle differences show they aren't SD cards at all. Notice the notch on the side of the Vita card, as opposed to the much longer notch on the SD card. Amending first post to correct assumption.

I don't know... I got my Wii at launch (it was also the first time I lined up for a pre-order... surprisingly warm for a Canadian autumn) and we did play the fuck out of it once we got it back to my friend's house. Creating Miis, trying out Wii Sports, playing Twilight Princess... But after winter was over, and I had played all the games I got, I didn't really want to play it much. Even with Mario Galaxy 1 and 2, I just couldn't get back into playing it. Meanwhile, my DS saw so much use I'm starting to have problems wit the L button contacting correctly. So it's not just me getting tired of playing games. it really is the Wii. There just wasn't enough to keep my interest in it. I suppose I should see if there's an update for it. It has been several months since I used it last.

I just like the core RPGs more than the spin-offs! I've played the Ranger and Dungeon games a bit, but I never really got into them very much. And while I had an N64, I didn't own a lot of games for it, and none of the local video stores rented game back then, so I never got to try it. Oh god, they're going to make me hand in my membership card.