GwiDan

"But it was cheaper!" protests his mum.

Are MS trying to change the videogames demographic by pricing the 360 out of children's birthday present budgets, making it only available to 25-40 somethings with large disposable incomes?

If you get Live, you'll need a HDD for your downloadble content; Microsoft are targeting the 360 at people likely to get Live by means of PGR3, Halo 3 etc. I've come to the obvious conclusion that the "basic" package isn't going to sell that much - if it does, there'll eventually be a run on hard disks.

It's going to cost around £350 to get it with just one game and an RGB cable. Being first's just not worth it.

What would (did?) Jack Thompson make of that baby "playing" Goldeneye007 years ago?

BAN THIS SICK FILTH!!

on-rails shooter anyone?

On-rails is what I was thinking, and the movement of the raft on the water seemed totally unnatural. Ubi would do well to take a leaf out of the "Wave Race 101 ways to water effects" book.

Good points: the T-Rex was mighty impressive, as were the set-pieces (T-Rex chowing down on the bridge for example). Why on earth did the developers think throwing spears at a massive dinosaur would be more likely to kill it than shooting hot lead into its face, though, I don't know.

They mean when it tips you and gravity acts on you, don't they

←

I hear you're accelerated to an impressively high velocity by the time you hit the floor.

But OPS2 gave Driv3r 6/10!

←

They were very generous to give it that.

This isn't going to change anything for me, personally speaking. I've always bought the official pads due to there already being no competition from third-party manufacturers and their awful pads. There are two ways this can go: the third parties will be forced out of the market, or they will raise their game and manufacture decent peripherals that are capable of competing with the official stuff. Hopefully they'll just be forced out, their cheap plastics and "turbo" buttons banished to oblivion with them.

How can they review a game that doesn't have a conclusive release date yet? The official line is still "Second Half, 2005".

←

I'd mention "DRIV3RGATE!!!11oneone" but it's so completely unnecessary for this game. This isn't a glitch-ridden trashfest made by a sub-par developer with no reputation to uphold.

How can they review a game that doesn't have a conclusive release date yet? The official line is still "Second Half, 2005".

Aah, the sweet stench of irony....

←

Forza - the best reason yet to do away with demos.

Hmm, if that head thing's any indicator of scale, aren't the controller and console humongous?

←

Maybe the head's just very small.

The controller's guaranteed to be near unholdable if it's going to have prongs that wide though.

It looked more expensive on ourcolony. Now it just looks like cheap silver plastic.

New shot of the controller, this time with a wire! I'd imagine they'd have a wired version for debug units because I can't see devs/testers being too chuffed with having to change batteries all the time.

←

Charging cable, maybe?

what, like Lara Croft, the defining 'mascot' of the 32bit era?

←

And look where she is now. Can you say laughing stock?

GameSpot gave GT4 a reasonably honest 8.9, so it's looking good for Forza. I'm glad I've got it on pre-order.

GT sells blatantly to the masses.

GT isn't on Xbox.

No-one's heard of Forza.

If they're expecting it to be a GT beater, surely MS won't let it out in the state you've described? It's too hardcore a game to sell to the masses, so it needs to be good to sell to the hardcore.

what if it's a feature!?

You rip the pages out.

Every word that comes out of the Sarge's mouth is pure comedy gold.

But also:

"I was so busy kicking ass, I forgot to take names!"

Or they could colour the page based on the format reviewed?

EA have a history of receiving average ratings from Edge, principally due to the low A.I...

For me, E.A. have always made "ITV Movie Premier" games; the kind of braindead material you can play when your brain won't kick into gear (after a night out, or whatever). Rogue Agent's (I refuse to call it Goldeneye) score reflects that.

If I can dual wield... why can't I pick up a dead enemy and use him as a 'human' shield?

what about all the driving games that don't NECESSARILY depend on finishing the race "first"?

um...

They do when you have a position counter thing at the top of the screen.

How about she reads a manual before mistaking her own crap skills for the crapness of gaming as a whole?

When it comes to Ten out of Ten (or [10] or whatever) I expect (read: demand) Edge to be extra careful and make damn sure the game deserves that score even if that means delaying the review for one issue.

Why is it so important that they go the extra mile with a [10] and not a [9] then? A review is a review - all the score does is differentiate a game on a scale of one to ten from others. So again, why make "damn sure the game deserves [a ten]" but not an seven, eight or nine?