Talk Show Host

Yoy really haven't played Halo 2, have you? Come on, admit it, we won't bite. Surely, PDZ can smell badly like a 6, but the multiplayer elevates the fun to 7. No more, though. Maybe if it had some A.I. in it the score would be better...

So, we will participate in a poll that is filled with symbolic choices... So the result will be symbolic too... I'm sorry, i do not have any symbolic time to loose! Great Poll by the way!!

Xbox 360 is a must, for the online and the upcoming software. PS3 is a must, as long as it's price can be endured by my logic. Revo is a must too, because it's price -as it can be heard- will be too endurable by my logic. I am hoping to add some serious software to my Revo logic though -once they show some stuff- because a 'fishing game' or a 'hitting the flies' game don't cut it for me. Well, i must add though that now that i have reached 30 and have been playing games for the entire span of my uber life, my logic sucks! I will be spending money as an idiot once more!

No, that is the realm of fiction! Try the holodeck!

Well, i love Nintendo and i have grown up with it. But i do not really give a f#$@ if they are profitable or not. It is not logical to suggest that Nintendo is profitable and see this as some kind of big win, especially when they are profitable in the 1/10 of gross profit of what Microsoft or Sony operate. I could be a baker and, in analogy, be more profitable than Nintendo. Does that make me the big winner? Of Course not. Game Boy Micro? Is that a genius bussiness move? Should I care? No. Why should i care if Nintendo decides to make money by selling the same product-technology it did 5 years ago to some people who find the new device more stylish? Sure, it is a genius move (and a way to drop the SP price as you will all see) but why should I, the gamer, care? What will i gain by seeing Nintendo profit and not giving me the software i want or the 3rd parties to support my dear old GameCube (which i spent my dear money on). Should i care if Nintendo plays it safe and profits in the next generation, when all i will get is more Marios and Links and Smash Brothers? I am sorry no. Especially when they do not decide to upgrade the franchises and give me another SMS and WW. Don't get me wrong, i love those games, but speaking as a gamer, where is my next generation character development, mature themes presented in a meaningful way, some good directing, good stories, interactivity, physics based worlds, things that will, in the end, make my experience more complete? Sure, it is nice to have the DS or whatever the revolutionary controller brings, i love new ways to play. But is that trully the next step for videogames or a niche offering that will supplement the industry? By following the other road as Nintendo claims, isnt it true that it turns the back on the revolution that the other companies will bring? And by doing so, it is a way to play safe and, as the article above says, come on top as a company in ten years time... Should i care if the company is profitable and come on top in ten years time? Why should i? Because Reggie and Shiggy will bombard me with the 3121241234 Mario sequel? I love Nintendo and i have followed it all my Life, the whole 30 years of it. But should i give a f@#@ if Game Boy Micro makes it more difficult for Sony to compete, making more and more money to Nintendo? I respect myself, so i really shouldn't... This money are not coming in my pockets... Maybe the analysts do not see the genius bussiness plan of Nintendo, but as it stands, they should... Aright. Do i care what the analysts say though? F#@$ no. Because i am not an analyst, i am a gamer. Where are my games?

Ι agree. But wouldn't u say that if people knew that ICO is better than any Harry Potter they would stop buying the latter? Most people don't care to learn the difference between a good game and a bad game and that certainly isn't EA's fault. I think EA is simply exploiting the circumstances, like any company. That is good for them, bad for some uf us and great for the rest... (i can't believe Stranger's Wrath had such a low chart entry by the way... )

Maybe u didn't read my post correctly. I said "Well, u can't really blame the Publisher then for NOT selling something the consumer won't buy.... " The above means that EA won't sell anything if it won't be bought. So, EA sells something that is going to be bought (franchises and not fresh ideas and innovation). The public buys the games so... there u have it, the choice determines the games that r made. The consumers like to buy horse shit, then horse shit is what the Publishers offer... I agree, although it's controls are horribly out of date and need a radical makeover...

Well, u can't really blame the Publisher then for not selling something the consumer won't buy.... EA may suck on all fronts, yes, but it's the consumer that makes the choices and dictates which games to be made.

Well, then u missed some great titles along with the rubbish... Boycotting is hardly the solution for anything, and EA has long been known for it's bussiness model, work ethics and franchise logic. It is pure paranoia to blame Nintendo for the bussiness model of the industry, as it has long been forged by the likes of U.S. Gold and Ocean. Noone was blaming them then though (except a few prophets) because the industry was not marginalised in any way, everyone wanted the industry to expand, to become a mainstream form of recreation... Well, it has now become one, though everyone seems to curse their luck because innovation is dying. Spector was spot on in my opinion, as the death of innovation is the death of the indepedent developer. On the other hand, when i was younger all i was hearing was "there is not enough time for the game to be made", "our budget is too small and we are only bedroom coders", "as game developers we must expand and get money for our projects if we are to survive"... Well, the game developers have now more resourses than ever, yet the games they made are still overlaping their assets, so everyone seem to blame the publishers who want to create FIFA 2433223 - and NOT the consumer who buys the same products over and over again. If we will not be taught to buy innovative and fresh games alongside the established franchises, then yes, innovative and fresh games will die and the industry will reach a stalemate. Not a "crash", a stalemate. Unfortunatelly, the problem also lies with the consumer and not only with the big bad publisher...

Hello all from Greece, first post here... I think the buyout happened with the next-gen in mind. The new consoles will run titles like RTW without breaking a sweat, so if they find a some kind of solution for the controls (which r already simpler than most -if not all- RTS games on PC) we will see great stuff... (At least my hope has a base theory... )