I-n-j-i-n

Really strange but interesting game announcement... about a Naruto game: http://www.filmspot.com/users/SSJ_GOTENKS/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=m-100-24948374 I have no idea why such a high profile and great developer is doing with an anime license all of a sudden, but if they can pull it off, it could actually be great. EDIT: scans of the announcement: http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs414&d=07141&f=naruto1.jpg http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs414&d=07141&f=naruto2.jpg

Except even bad movies can have a very good, tight stories with funny narratives. The one thing I really am confused about are the soapbox rants that Tarantino has, especially when the action parts can be so good and energized. And most rants are either hit or miss. I think it works better when it is billed as an exploitation movie to begin with. Like in Kill Bill movies, the rants simply came out of nowhere. I wouldn't say that's necessarily a totally bad thing, but it does throw off some rhythm to his movies. But no serious harm done if the overall product is fun. But if he takes his direction more seriously, I feel Tarantino is a possible Oscar caliber director. But as it stands now with all these exploitation movies he does, he's still ways off from that. As for bad movies that are so bad that it becomes good even if they're exploitation flicks, I would recommend They Live with Roddy Piper. Absolutely hilarious dialog, actually pretty unique and interesting premise, extreme and gratuitous violence and sexuality. It had it all.

Um. According to many charts, it apparently has passed 10 million and is closing in on 11 million. "past 6 months" is a gross miscalculation since even according to VGCharts, the 360 had at least 1 million sales in December. So it's impossible it 'hovered' in that range. Also, the sales have peaked in December, but the monthly sales for the 360 hasn't gone too far down. It's still in the 250,000 range and it's still edging on even in the slower gaming months as of late. The PS3 still is a new console and still has some buzz about it so it's selling roughly on a similar level for now. The Wii obviously, still has the shortage and it's still selling very well as of now. The numbers speak for themselves. The numbers for Wii is that it's still riding the early wave (surely it can't stay that level forever. The Gamecube actually sold very well early on until it leveled down. We don't know what really can happen with the Wii, though I think it won't do as bad obviously). The 360 numbers can best be described as consistent. Look at every months' sales and it's almost always more than 250,000 a month. Pretty respectable overall sales numbers. Considering the long term goals and the money Sony still has, I seriously doubt it. Even if they trail both MS and Nintendo, Sony will have content for years. Hell, they already have some very good games on the PS3, even if they aren't all going to be exclusive. I don't really see what's so big a difference about the release schedule for those games as the Gamecube had a similar launch plan if you can remember (except for Wind Waker which came around two years in). I think the question is the next year as those stuff are more prospective sequels that have only been rumored or hinted at. Also consider that Halo 3 WILL sell new consoles and GTA4 coming this fall is going to make a huge impact for 360 as well as possibly the PS3. With the consistent lineup of 1st party stuff, I believe most Nintendo fanatics will have gotten the Wii around the first few years of its life. And the rest probably being the catch-up sales and the casual sales. The 360, as long as it can keep the unique titles coming along, could still remain consistent and possibly at the top even through the years. I think it'll still be a "Wii60" kind of thing in the end. They both do seem to complement eachother a bit better than the PS3 as of now, including all the variety of games the 360 has that the PS3 is supposed to deliver.

You have to be living under a rock not to at least see one or two truly great games the 360 has so far. I agree the Wii Sports is a very attractive option for gaming newbies, but I think something like Warioware uses the whole thing so much better and it still is somewhat newbie friendly. Also, the current generation of games haven't faded completely yet, but they will soon. I really haven't heard of any exciting game releases beyond 2007. Maybe except for a Nippon Ichi game or two for the PS2. Other than that, it's entirely next gen. The thing with both generations of Sony consoles were that they just had a mob of third parties backing them a year or two into their lifespans. PSX especially so, since the 3rd parties left what they perceived as a parent-complex Nintendo had for 3rd parties in that time (some would argue they still have a bit of that mentality today). But I don't think it is entirely attributable to only the Wii's early success either. The 360 pretty much snap up more and more token 3rd party Sony exclusives by the day, and Sony is playing a major catch-up to the Xbox Live online service and even that software revamp won't come until around a year from now. I would have thought people crazy if back in 2006, people actually thought Microsoft would be leading Sony around by its nose like this.

Too bad the story actually could have gone places, but it's actually all quite short. And they leave a lot to the supernatural powers instead of the deductions sometimes. Almost to a deus ex degree.

Agreed. As much as Nintendo is apt to a few truly great advances in gaming every year, they do a lot of boneheaded/genius stuff such as making franchise spinoffs with no real newness except for newness's sakes and $$$ (read: Mario Party, Pokemon Colosseum games, Mario Sports titles especially the ones not made by Camelot). To be fair, Sony and Microsoft and just about any other given companies (except maybe Bioware and Blizzard..) have the habit of sticking to the status quo in terms of the creative use of their licenses. I don't think I could have said it any better. The thing is, a lot of great Sony titles and Sony developed/published games that were very innovative didn't sell well. But of course, that is not a direct indication of their quality as unique games with innovative features. Even look at games like Shenmue and other low key, not-as-well selling games of the past, like even the first few Grand Theft Auto games, and come into the future with something like GTA3, which blew away the gaming market in terms of popularity and critical appeal, and all these little obscure games have paved the way for them, no matter how little they may have sold in the past.

Again, a lot of the smaller elements of those games definitely are innovative. Ape Escape used the dual shock to its full effect and it was almost like a precursor to the Wiimote in how the each analog sticks worked like the extension of the character and his arm. Parappa the Rapper may have spurred on the wave of musical rhythm games and Sony continued that with a lot of games even if they weren't commercial successes such as Frequency. Ratchet & Clank pretty much took the idea of the platformer and an action shooter and went with it further than any games of its type had so far. Sly Cooper added stealth into the platforming mix where no other game really tried to combine the two. Eyetoy may not have caught fire, but it's essentially the same overall idea as the Wii's own mini-game, body-moving gameplay. Again, by the idea of 'innovation', I don't just mean in ways that change entire genres necessarily. It's the whole aesthetic of unique games and franchises that can stand on their own and Sony simply has its lion's share of that. Sony has a lot of first party games and yet people are looking at Sony as if they have NOTHING. But that is simply and utterly not true. That's all I'm getting at. I'm not trying to knock Nintendo down or anything, but again, I simply feel that there's a disconnect with all the harsh criticism Sony gets over others. Since people keep comparing Nintendo, Warioware was not Nintendo's original idea either. Other developers in the past have made games with the 5 second mini-game motif in the past, even if they weren't commercial successes. Mario using the jetpack in Sunshine was reminiscent of other platformers experimenting with the idea before as well. If you are the most cynical and jaded of gamer, Pikmin was a yet another console stab at an RTS/Lemmings game (but of course, I'd disagree that is the case since it has its own unique qualities to stand out). I STAND BY Nintendo for these smaller innovations just the same. The smaller improvements Nintendo makes for each of their sequels are innovations just the same in my eyes. Even if they add elements that has been done in other games and match it in there, I don't fault Nintendo for some lack of innovation for it. I am NOT in that token mindset of choosing one or the other here. And of course, people only bash Sony due to one reason or the other and I simply don't see why that has to be the case. I like both companies and though I may sound the more pompous for it, I feel I have a good understanding of the workings of both companies. Because I follow them through their games and not their marketing or sales or public persona in this whole 'console war' BS.

I only elaborated it roughly three times now. And you say you're not offended? But you said in the previous post that you're stuck on my wording of the whole "bias" word. Because I said "you have to be pretty biased", that doesn't imply that I'm saying you're completely and utterly biased. That was a figurative way of speech in that it sounded biased to me. Also, all I hear from you is the constant praise of anything Nintendo and condescension of anything Sony. That SOUNDS to me like it's biased. I'm not implying with absolute certainty that you are either. And you keep on with the whole "i see no innovation whatsoever" and etc etc, and yet I'm providing a counterpoint. Then you come on at me with personal attacks. To get back on track here, my entire point is that there simply are a lot more unique and potentially risky intellectual properties in the way of different franchises and different games with Sony and that it's being overlooked. Again, that has no relevance to the quality of other companies or Nintendo as it's been called upon by other posters countless times before. My post is about Sony and Sony's games itself. As per this thread's title and subject matter. If you're going on saying "no innovation whatsoever", I simply think it's a matter of perspective and figurative meaning of what that wording even is.

Okay, care to go past being offended and actually arguing logically instead of jumping to conclusions? I did just that. TWICE. Why couldn't you? Did you not hear me say that it's a matter of me using the very word 'figurative' in the context of the whole thing? Also, why are you stuck on some semantics of a single word instead of reading what I have to say? If you're going to troll me on a stupid technicality, then why is anything you say ever relevant about this specific discussion? I'm only getting the vibe from you in this issue as it being a matter of being a standoff between two companies. If you are saying otherwise, why don't you make the discussion instead of going by some ridiculous "because I don't like you" route? If you can't even elaborate, not read any of my posts, keep up the condescension, don't bother to make this into a credible discussion, WHY bother?

Did you not read the rest of my point? Obviously not because I was talking more in terms of their unique qualities as games and not because of some one-upping of innovation in games. And by "innovative", it's not entirely in the realm of apparent innovation I have pointed out either. It's in the way of new experiences and unique games with their own development aesthetics just the same. Me getting pissy? But you're simply proving my point over and over again how people like you are condescending everything and anything about Sony simply because you do not like the name itself. Also, "dual shock FTL" isn't any technical grounds for why the game is or is not innovative. Again, the entire gaming aesthetic of Naughty Dog making such a game after creating a lot of platformers is a unique twist for the development team and the game has got solid reviews all around. Again, the innovation in question is not necessarily some obvious quality like Mario 'creating' platformers, but in the figurative way of it being a unique gaming experience. You can say that Mario and Sonic are both platfomers but they both have unique qualities.

You really have to be pretty biased to say that. The innovation in question doesn't have to be flat out apparent as they can be either. The whole usage of the dual shock for the swords, the crafty difficulty level and all can be small additions that adds up to the whole experience. Just because any other game had swords and monsters doesn't make them equivalent to God of War in terms of experience. Also, when did I say that innovation in itself is the focal point of the whole argument for Sony's games? It's rather that they have a lot of UNIQUE games and with many other brands and identities as actual separate games from one another. It doesn't necessarily amount to saying that each and individual Sony franchise holds as much weight as a Mario or Zelda game. That is not the point. Not really. Sony developers did a lot to add a ton of unique gameplay points. Super Mario Sunshine arguably copied some aspects of other platformers with the entire gadget mechanic as well. But nobody gave a hoot about that. You're simply wrong there. You apparently have never played a Sly Cooper game or Ratchet & Clank. And those games simply DO NOT have camera issues at all. Just constant condescensions, huh? I keep getting the typical "only Nintendo makes innovative games" idea here. Also, if you're talking about Pikmin, it's almost the same overall gameplay idea of the Misadventures of Tron Bonne game. But nobody dares accuse Nintendo of copying others of course. Because they're the only ones capable of innovation? Doesn't that strike some people as awfully shallow minded, incredibly biased, and condescending of other great game developers out there who has furthered videogames as a whole even if not under some unifying corporate banner? A lot of Sony's properties seems to go that route as they simply have more numerous development teams and they're more apt to doing their own things compared to the tightly run ship of Nintendo's. I do not see why one has to see this one way or the other. The fact remains that Sony's development efforts keeps getting undue condescension. And you guys are PROVING it.

The thing with those examples is that they were the rarity and not the norm. With Sony, most of their titles were innovative and in sheer number of new franchises and ideas in gameplay alone, again, people tend to overlook them simply because they may not be as visible as the usual Nintendo franchise fare. And I disagree that a lot of Sony's games necessarily fall into the hardcore crowd. A lot of games they pushed for, published for since the PSX era and has actually developed in-house were critical and popular successes. Also, whether a game is hardcore or not is NO indication to how innovative something is. That point is absolutely moot. Though in terms of how it may look on paper, I would have to agree that Nintendo does the better job of selling their games. But then again, that is exactly in line with my point that Sony's development efforts tends to be overlooked. There is really nothing wrong with the way Nintendo makes sequels, but in terms of unique gaming content, Sony really has them beat by a long shot. Again, that doesn't discredit Nintendo all by itself. But Sony definitely is a contender in terms of unique games.

That's the thing. In terms of pure creativity and totally new brands, Sony actually has bested Nintendo in the last several game generations. It doesn't mean Nintendo is a bad company for it, but Sony was the one pumping out the new and innovative and possibly risky projects left and right and they're STILL doing that (Resistance, anyone? God of War? Shadow of the Colossus?). Not to forget that they created or at least funded and published a lot of under appreciated gems as well. In the end, it's usually about Sony not being respected as a game DEVELOPER it is. I love Nintendo as a historical, nostalgic and continued sequel-makers all the same, but Sony has been the new face for gaming for YEARS now. This is not even a new revelation anymore.

Eh. I got VF games down to a science with D-pads and d-pads don't do anything too negative with 2D fighters for me. I think it's a matter of habit.

Chloe. Also, the whole "Cartman's intolerance and racism saving the day" also alludes to how Jack Bauer and other agents' rambunctious hunt of racial stereotypes (typically Muslim or Russian) tends to save the entire World. It only happened in every single season of 24 so far. Except the few times when the enemy actually was the United States itself..

Yes, great show. Possibly more solid than even some of the best Naruto or Bleach episodes. People keep mentioning Death Note, but if they liked that, they might get into Hikaru no Go. It's made by the creator of Death Note and it has a similar mind game aspect. But instead of being based on noir style crime fighting, it is based on the Go board game. But apparently a lot of board/card game anime out there are great.

^ Hopefully that's a sign. That's the one instance where the possible Kojima/Miyamoto meeting actually made something happen.

Or you know.. always the ISO option.. Someone said before that Suiko 2 is better, but I think it's common knowledge that Suiko 2 is probably the best Suikoden game aside from Suikoden 5. Suikoden 1 was okay but wasn't as groundbreaking as everyone said it was. Suikoden 3 just rode on the coattails of the franchise name I thought. Suikoden 2 is great, but $100 for a game? That's a third of a 360 price, that's ten premium virtual console games, sixth of a PS3, etc etc.

They copied 24 to a tee and that was pretty funny in itself. Too bad the entire thing didn't have the strong rhetorical punchline the show is famous for. But still cute with the British thing. And they name dropped so many internet blog/social/search sites. I bet that's what the actual crime investigators do anyway. Which was a funny revelation.

As for the format wars, apparently the HD-DVDs are selling better anywhere not named Japan. Which means the Bluray is winning mostly in Japan. It's eerily similar to how PS3 is selling way better in Japan while the 360 is outselling it in the rest of the world.

By saying 'narcissistic', that's exactly what it is. I LOVE Nintendo games myself, but as far as marketing the games goes, Nintendo looks only at their games and that's their entire world to them. I'm not necessarily implying anything bad about Nintendo just because they tends to do business only inwards. But I simply can't see how they really factor in how any other company does things. It would be nice if Miyamoto actually had some weight to his words nowadays instead of being a part of the Nintendo warmachine so to speak.

Maybe it's because you're an all around gamer with less biases towards these systems depending on how they're sold. Just like me and other gamers who can look beyond the marketing tactics and product campaigns. I agree that nobody should be hunkered down to their supposed demographics and go from there. But according to that Xbox sales rep, his job is all about looking out for such demographics and serving them. This is not an attack to Nintendo, but you have to admit that they're going for a family (aka kiddy, kid-friendly) atmosphere with the Wii more so than they ever had. Xbox obviously seems to go for the slightly tech-savvier group of young adults for the most part. It is not indicative of which groups are better gamers or 'kiddy' or anything like that. I know plenty of young pre-teen relatives who are into 360. As far as 'mudslinging' goes, the rep saying "We think that as soon as the Wii customer turns 14, they want something else." doesn't strike me as offensive. It doesn't help that the IGN editors are pretty biased with these assessments as well. At least that MS rep said "we think" and didn't outright proclaim that Nintendo was a kiddy/inferior system the way Sony does it.

If this news is true, then I'll turn up my nose and ignore it like all the mediocre spinoffs like 90% of Mario Party and Sports games. Another thing to factor in in with the Super Smash series is that the thing is not very inclusive of games done by any other company. It's like a self-pleasuring-fest in terms of Nintendo brand names with the thing. It doesn't really matter how popular Sonic is. If anyone would be against the idea, it won't be Sega. It'd be Nintendo and their narcissistic attitude towards their franchises.

I don't think that remark is too far out of the line. So far, Wii channels have offered a lot of cute little content along side Virtual Console. Xbox Live offers full video and movies right now. The demographics are different, that's all.

Ghost in the Shell and Black Lagoon are great and 'serious' and all that, but they strike me more as pop-culture fancies of violence and cyberpunk to me. Still worth a watch though. If you want more anime in the same vein as Haruhi Suzumiya, you should check out Kanon 2006 made by Kyoto Animation and Air. Both are cutesier and less openly comedic as Haruhi, but they both have much more serious and dour dramatic aspects to them. I think some great under appreciated shows are Akagi and Black Jack. Akagi for the sheer fun of watching the main character 'defeat' his enemies with nothing more than sheer intellect and wile and Black Jack is a really well made medical thriller anime based around one of the oldest, 'serious' manga stories ever made.