I-n-j-i-n

Which is basically nothing and even the French government is apparently behind the company being its own entity.

It's a Nintendo game so they most probably didn't bother with the marketing too much since it'll sell with word of mouth anyway. Also, Nintendo 1st party games usually don't seem to get the in-store hypetrain that a really big 3rd party game tends to. PS- I actually have a copy in my hands but I'm burnt out after too much Halo 3, Virtua Fighter 5, Phoenix Wright 3 and Company of Heroes expansion. Too many games......

I think I'll go for an Ubisoft two-bee tomorrow. Naruto Rise of the Ninja and Assassin's Creed. I swear Ubisoft is becoming one of my most favorite game companies. Everything they touch seems to turn into gold. Even a Naruto game.

I think the only correlation is in the more fair distribution of profit, nothing else. But as subjective an issue as writing quality is, it's still a genuine job. To say that they deserve less in a unionized setting just because their jobs are of subjective quality doesn't sound very logical to me.

I'm pretty surprised at how many people are actually aiming to get the whole set, even near my dorms. It's like kids have money to burn or they really, really, really love music simulation games.

The thing is that the whole situation is simply unjust. The studios and networks hog all the money and they treat the writers and the actual creative staff (arguably THE most important aspect of any show: the writing) like trash and relegate them to a barely surviving salary, and they expect to get away with it. It really has nothing to do with how much money someone else is making. Just that the distribution could be a lot better. And I think anyone who works and has a real input into their job and gets ripped by hierarchy could and should feel sympathy with that. Though apparently some higher writing talents do get the requisite six figure contracts, what's irksome is the revenue flow. Hollywood and the music industry should've been crucified for their monopoly on the revenue a long time ago. Eventually gaming development talent have to have a union to stand up for their rights too. But the movie/TV writers deserve it in the historical terms since they never had much revenue power since the birth of television.

I don't. Because finally, after decades of lousy TV with a few good shows in a season, the last year had almost too many decent/good/great shows to watch. Then again, I watch mostly through the internet..

Nice jabs at serious Guitar Heroes players, but it almost felt rote. It's like they re-did their sports-movie parody. I loved the part where the kids were thinking the game's cooler than the real thing. Because that is the actual opinion now.

37/40 is a ridiculously high score for Famitsu. They tend to be very Japanese-biased. In retrospect, Halo 3 got 37/40.

I wouldn't worry about TV too much because they have so many gameshows and reality shows nowadays and I watch a lot of them if I'm feeling bored. Also, I would expect the movie industry will be hit hard if this strike goes on for months like it's expected to. I want my Transformers 2..

Manhunt 2 is absolutely terrible and people should be ashamed to bash it and make a big deal out of nothing. And it has the stereotypical "use the elaborately intricate wiimote to slash but you can only do one frame of animation" thing. I'm so glad I rented it. First one was way better. On the PS2.

I hear a lot of reviews say the slowdown was from the too-similar emulation of the slowdown from the original game. I wonder how much of it is due to the PSP loading.

Wasn't there a new, relatively secret update of the hardware for the PSP? I think there is a loading screen and brightness comparison floating around. If it's true that the games load faster thanks to the new PSP, I'll have to start saving for it.

Miniplanets?.............. I get the Poke-float vibe. Worst stage in history of all gaming.

It's sometimes strange to find really good arcade machines though. Like how a somewhat run-down theater nearby actually had a F-Zero GX machine and a relatively normal mall that obviously isn't gaming oriented has the latest Virtua Fighter 5 machine. The most updated version too. There must be some rabidly loyal VF fan nearby.

I actually expect the online aspect to be riddled with problems as it was the case for just about all Nintendo online games so far. But it obviously doesn't need it. I played single player just fine for majority of SSBM matches. If you can just go online and even use the horrible friendlist to do so, it'll be good enough.

I actually mellowed a bit through the argument if you paid some attention. I know I'm being very opinionated here. Aside from the very fact that backward compatibility just is not all that consistent especially with the HDTV leap with most consoles nowadays. Even with the PSP, the problem of possibly putting downloaded PSOne games on it was the widescreen format.

Again, why bother with BC games alone? Look at Virtual Console for one second: You BUY all those games. Gamecube games (which has a dismally small library compared to the mammoth NES/SNES/Genesis libraries), that is where the real draw is. The games you BUY. The idea behind the sale of older PSOne titles is the same thing. If they can sell the old and now hard to find older games with a cheaper price, it's going to sell like wildfire. No way it'll be entirely dependent on the current backlog of games. It's a part of it but selling it like with the VC/Xbox Live Arcade style will most definitely work. Also, future PS3 game projects at least look promising and it will have its share of AAA multi-console games right alongside 360 with Wii games on the rear as far as the highly graphical games and M-rated stuff are concerned. But it's still dismal compared to how strong the 360 looks at least for western audiences. That's not the console's fault, nor the company's policy's fault or the fault of the system's technical aspect. It's yours. If you decide to skip it, that's tough nuts for you. Sony didn't snatch away their consoles from under your nose. You did it yourself. Also, those systems are DIRT CHEAP online by now. You can get a good, $20 PSOne if you bid right in eBay. I did that just a few months back to get a better, cleaner system. I think you mean software backward compatibility such as a possible downloadable backlog. Also, if it hinges so much on not buying the newer console for the factor of old games, then why is buying PS3 even an option? That's what I'm getting at precisely: If you want new games, get PS3. If you want older stuff, buy older stuff. I couldn't give a crap about system politics and which systems sell. It's just silly that a backlog of games is the sole decider as it may be with PS3. It's just sad. I suppose that makes sense if you're really coming from the side of a totally new gamer of any one type of system or generations of consoles. Maybe I don't see that perspective AT ALL since I follow just about every console out there. I still think it's silly to just blow by the perfectly fine older systems in favor of lousy backward compatible games. It's like playing console games on a PC. Can it be done? Yes. Is it appropriate or the best option? I'd really say no. Then good. Sony ought to be revamping their new features like I kept saying. Their downloadable content idea has so much potential, it is strange how they are making such drama with the BC of older titles. Look at the 360. Their backlog of games aren't perfect and fans know that most games do work (albeit not as well. Sound being garbled is the norm with Shenmue 2 for example), but almost ALL of the visible effort put by Microsoft is with the new content, new games, new features, new online, new new new new new. It's a matter of how you sell things. Just to make it a bit clear, I'm not writing up entire essays to disprove everyone who actually likes BC in their systems. But I still think it's an overblown 'problem' which was never something that was featured in older systems. Repackaging games sell well and sell like crazy. So that is a good knock of ancient games where a lot of the copies you either can't find or they're $200+ for a good copy. Even if you do find them, they do no justice to HDTVs anyway. Touched up remasters of older games can and often do it justice in flying colors (IE: every f'n Xbox Live Arcade game ever.)

Eternal Sonata is really really nice but yeah. Some moments are so peaceful, so pleasant, you can't help but fall asleep. Happened to me a few times. Some great games have a habit of doing that. The battle system could've been less of a cruise control and it would have helped. On another note, Mass Effect is getting RAVE reviews everywhere. As usual, gameplay is suspect but apparently 99% of the rest is awesome. It's like the storm before the launch that Bioshock had.

Sorry if this sounds blunt, but I almost consider my stance a fact. Maybe that is because I'm a bit of a purist with oldie titles and that I think it's a ridiculous idea to replace things entirely. I don't know. I don't know many people who takes care of old consoles like I do. And the idea of trading in entire consoles for new ones is almost nonexistent for me. I'm not backing away from that stance by an inch. Even if you may say that you don't, then what's keeping you from NOT buying the newer system? You don't buy newer systems to play older games. That is a nigh fact. It'd be NICE if the newer system can play older games, right? But do you buy it for that sole reason? Ask yourself that. Certainly I can appreciate playing some old PSOne games on the PS2 days or the Gamecube titles on the Wii, but is it critical? I'd say no. And there is no reason at all to not consider getting the new systems if I didn't expect all the NEW games to come. I would not stop myself if the backward compatibility was an issue. I'd ignore it as the vast majority of gamers (in their right minds) do. Exactly. Why make promises you can't keep? Why even promise backward compatibility? Here is an idea: No more slapped on backward compatibility. Or better yet, no backward compatibility at all. Focus all attention on new products, get new customers, etc etc. It worked in the past systems, it works today. There is that subjective side and I wouldn't question that. But is your entire buying decision hinged solely on older games? If there is a game you absolutely, positively must play (Let's say: MGS4, Smash Brothers Brawl, Halo, etc etc), then what's keeping you? Backward compatibility? That is a total joke. Also, a new gaming console being backward compatible isn't really necessary in the grand scheme of things. It's simply not all that crucial at all to the equation. Gaming politics wise, it just creates a lot of headaches and nothing else. If game companies feel they don't want to provide the compatibility, I'd be really, really happy for that decision, or I wouldn't care at the slightest out of anticipation for that must have new game. Not because of older stuff. Also, PC games are really not much of an issue in terms of compatibility since most games were still pretty pixelated from the start and it's only a matter of applying patches. There is no worry about a computer not being able to play older titles (without the patches and programs to run old OS programs). And new PCs do not make it some sales clique to pitch backward compatibility. Game consoles do that. And it's exactly just that: a sales pitch. Okay. That is just silly. Because the BC issue is only hurting Sony in terms of its public relations and yet it's one of those features that really is just a tacked on extra. Instead of the BC issue, why not bolster their potentially biggest-goldmine-ever with the PSOne downloadable library? Patch it with a wide screen format, put some new extras, slap on a small fee, then watch millions of gamers contently download them. All BC is doing for Sony is giving them a huge headache. Do you really argue that point? How do you think this issue even came up at all? But is it THE selling point? No. Unless you're out of your mind, it was the Wiimote. Not even the system's last generation power or BC. Actually, I think Virtual Console was THE biggest software factor with the system. It basically sold the console for me. I play older games constantly and I did say I have around a dozen games plugged in, but I wonder if all that is really necessary. I can do just fine plugging in a single system while putting most others in boxes until I need them. My brain would go bust if I tried playing more than three different games in a day. Seriously, do gamers really play like schizophrenics and play 5 different consoles on a single day? I wouldn't think so, unless it's a bit of a habit to just put the systems in an accessible setting. I don't disagree with the convenience. But Sony or Nintendo or Microsoft or anyone else aren't obliged to do so technically. It's been since become the norm since the PS2 and Gameboy Advance, but it's more a yet another selling point. But it still does not strike me as something crucial for game system sales at all. I would think colors for the system boxes would have a much bigger impact in the grand scheme of things.

I specifically mentioned the technical feasibility of backward compatibility with games in an HDTV with a modern system. Way to read it totally wrong. Also, I highly, highly doubt that backward compatibility is a SELLING point. Is it a sticking point? Yes. Did it create an unnecessary shitstorm? Yes. But do people really buy entire game consoles on backward compatibility? I'd have to laugh at that notion.

A stretched out standard definition television program isn't more than a nuisance. A stretched out, pixelated, blurry shit with lousily 'backward compatible' gaming efforts? Why bother? That is not the selling point of new systems. Most people (read just about every gaming poll ever) KEEP their consoles and get new ones to get new games for their NEW system. New, new new new new. Older games? Play older systems. No they do not. People do NOT replace DVD players, people do NOT replace their entire setup if they know it's going to jeopardize the integrity of their current experience. Specifically for Bluray and HDDVD players, they're so perfectly tuned to play old DVDs. Game systems are not. An HDTV may as well blow up trying to run Atari games. In terms of oldschool games, they are MADE to be played with standard definition. They aren't meant to be stretched, corrupted and basically bullshitted into HDTVs where they do not belong. It may work with a select few PS2, Xbox and Gamecube games that have a preset widescreen option, but for the 99.999% of the games? They belong in the old boobtube. This is really not up for argument. Just about any gaming purist won't say otherwise. I think you're right on that one. I really think the whole backward compatibility issue is too blown up. Casual gamers may as not care and the hardcore types know that it's a compromised experience. This may sound like a ridiculous case for downloadable games, but I think the whole promise of a truly screen-fitted, high definition, widescreen formatted games are a real selling point with downloadable games. I don't know when I started taking notice, but it's somewhat hard not to with all the problematic backward compatibility. PS2 had it perfect because at least it stayed in the standard definition with the same exact hardware catered for PSOne games. The Wii as well, does backward emulation well.

No, no. Cheaper or not, that's not the point. Backward cataloges are a nigh distraction and nuisances that only the most hardcore stuck up gamers may even give a cent about when it comes down to BUYING decisions. It'd be nice to get good backward compatibility, but is it a selling point? NO. No it is not. You buy new consoles to get new games. It's that simple. Maybe people should have prudence to just keep older systems and play older games on those with their dingy old analog TVs. I do that too. All the time. I have a dozen systems hooked up in various configurations and I don't even consider myself all that hardcore a gamer compared to some others I've seen. I love roms and emulations and etc etc, but if you want to play Genesis games, get a Genesis out. Really, who else really whines about all this other than those who trade in systems all the time? I could play dozens of my Xbox games on the 360. I never do it because these systems aren't supposed to expand and stretch analog TV games to an HDTV. Try playing NES systems on an HDTV and experience a huge headache. NOT compatible.

I seriously doubt that because 2D games did not need much on the control side. Up, down, left, right, diagonals, that's IT. You would think 3D games would be ridiculously diffuclt with the complexity, but that's not true. Also, plenty of first/second generation PSOne games had the controls perfect and yet they were still pretty difficult too. And most people may swear that they were actually better games while they were younger. Scientifically, our responses and hand/eye coordinations gets worse too. I hear StarCraft and other fighting game players have their 'prime years' at around 20 years old. Much older than that, then their physical skills deteriorate and can't compete in the pros the same way. I doubt it has to do with accumulation of skills. You play Galaga once, for 30 minutes, then you have the basics down pat. It's not some accumulated knowledge but how you deal with the game in a fast pace or with some planning. Also, all the old, hard games I played like Batman NES or Gradius 1 are still hard to me similarly to the time I first played them. I have better knowledge, but I still need to be serious in order to beat them again. Ultimately, I do think it's because most games tries to cater to mass market. Especially with the Wii games, the name of the game is to mass appeal. While some PS3, PC and 360 games may try beating the gamers' heads in with harder difficulty due to their more hardcore appeal. But there seems to be a lot more games now on all consoles that are a bit too forgiving in difficulty.

Oh god, not that garbage again.