LOPcagney

This is partially for me, as I get the feeling most of you here (or at least a few) know eachother from outside of this forum. I think it would be interresting to find out how everyone found this forum. Post your story. I found it after getting a link here from some review of the game Another World that was discussed some months back and joined after reading the article on (and buying) Gibbage, that indie-platformer from around the same time.

Speaking of tarnishes, I heard the PS3 collects dust as though it were it's primary purpose of existence. Scratches too. Now, with the obligatory disappointed finger-wag at Sony, I think the phone looks cool, but to some extent, how much do you really need? I'm not so excited about it, just because it's going to be so damn expensive.

Gah. Damn spirit-quenching bureaucracies the world over.

http://www.thebbps.com/blog/2006/06/26/super-mario-room/

I guess this is true. I just see innovation on PCas being equal to that on the consoles. Half-Life 2 Portals for example, and Prey, with their portal gameplay mechanics. And the indie game market will still always dominate on PC. Spaff basically said just what I was trying to and wanted to, just better than I managed to. In some sense, I see consoles as taking two paths. PS3 and 360 are one step closer to being PC's, with equal or better graphical capability and features like DVD players, messaging, etc. The only real difference between a gamer's PC and a 360 is the games specific to each system and the easy indie development for the PC. When I said that the development was easier, I guess I didn't mean in terms of what's being created, but the ease of obtaining the means of creating and distributing games. Something like Gibbage would never make it to a console, despite it being an excellent game, because making the game is as easy (or as difficult) as writing the code and physically designing it, without the additional trouble of finding a publisher and making cover-art, etc. On the other hand, the only way to really be innovative in a broader sense is to look past gameplay mechanics into how the user interacts, which is what Nintendo has done with the Wii. So I see PCS360 in one corner, and Wii, DS, etc. in the other. And again, it just works out that all the great 1st-tier games are heading for consoles, while the PC has the indie circuit. Not to say Vegas, F.E.A.R., and Prey aren't fun, and SPORE, BIOSHOCK and Portals won't be.

"Jesus was Jewish" -Avenue Q

I'm an exclusive PC gamer now (until I can find a Wii) and I'll tell you why I chose the Wii over the other two systems. I has another lump-worthy category I think far too many console games becoming lately: All-age-appropriate Party Games I could say the same thing about PS3 and XBox that you did about the PC, but with fewer categories. You've got your first-person-action games. That pretty much covers it. Then 3rd-person action games. Those last two can be grouped together. Then racing games and RPGs. Unfortunately for us, all the dialogue-heavy RPGs went to PS3, and that seems not to be doing so well. I like the Wii because it adds some interactivity and group enjoyment factor that is necissary for parties etc. Frankly, thats the only thing the PC is missing. Not only does it have at least 100 times the number of games of all the consoles combined, but it can always be upgraded and best of all can play older games just as easily. It's a different experience. For example, as my signature says, I'm juggling Half-Life the first, Final Fantasy VIII, No One Lives Forever 2, and Rainbow Six right now, 3 for the four of which are better than anything coming out for PS3, or perhaps even 360. What I'm upset about is that all consoles are pretty niche in and of themselves. 360 has to live up to it's predecessor's legacy and be a testosterone powerred shooting machine. So-called groundbreaking games like Gears of War, while fun, aren't really innovative in any real sense just because the blood looks realistic. None of the mechanics themselves are new. PS3 has it's long-since established franchises, most of them Japanese (i.e. Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, etc.), but is all in all a system for RPGs and shooters. Wii is as well. It will never hit the audience looking for a more "adult" gaming experience. It's fun and extreemly innovative, but it's unlikely to have a shooter that any hard-core FPS fan will take seriously. Red Steel and Far Cry are evidence of this. I maintain that the most innovation, game-wise, will come from Nintendo or a computer-software company. Nintendo has a recipe for interractivity, and you really don't need blood and bullets to enjoy a console game. Computer programming, on the other hand, is such a fluid industry. Advances in technology can be deliverred to individuals who can instal plug-and-play graphics card, etc. To modify a console, you essentially need to be a programmer or a hacker. Plus it's harder to develop for consoles than it is for PC. PC gets the indie game market, which is always 5-10% of the best gaming out there. Simply put, due to the high development costs of games for consoles and the inability to modify individual systems will mean developers will be less likely to take risks and from risk is born innovation. That being said, it is true that there's been a scarcity of good 1st-tier computer games lately because, frankly, what everyone wants now is another Source (or Doom 3) Engine shooter, and there's not enough people who want another Grim Fandango. And there are some amazing games for the consoles as well. Final Fantasy is supposed to be good, Zelda too, Lost Odyssey's cutscenes are jawdropping, and Lost Planet looked interresting to me. But I think there's more quality gameplay out there for PC, even if it means sticking with a few categories you think we've seen a little too much of. Looking back on what I've written, it seems kind of harsh. I'm not snapping or anything, I'm just passionate about my PC gaming. Well, if anything, the one reason 1st-tier PC gaming doesn't (or won't) suck is: SPORE.

What pattented technology are you referring to?

WHOA! This is too good to pass up, following Sony's terrible publicity from the "All I Want for Christmas is a PSP" scandal: The Sixaxis Award reclarified.

Did the wiimote not win!? How could they even compary. Sixaxis was supposed to be poorly integrated and rushed and the Wii is just... Wii.

exactly But I've got a question for Erkki: First off, I haven't played Oblivion, so I'm not trying to draw a comparison myself, but the two are essentially contemporaries, so if you've played Oblivion, I'd be interrested to know how they compare. Oblivion is supposed to be more open-ended and Sim-like, to use Spider-Monkey's analogy. And they are similar in many respects, being first-person RPG's and all. Obviously, the combat in DMoMaM is far superior and much more interractive, but does it outballance the sheer scale of Morrowwind and Oblivion? What do you, or anyone else for that matter, think?

WHOOOAAA! Look how much stuff that guy has.

The thing is, it was pretty, but it wasn't very deep or intelligent. I played it with mild interrest, and found myself wishing for the more emersive and original worlds of Myst and the like, and even Dungeon Seige and Morrowind, since those games didn't need incredible graphics to make them feel worth playing. Even the kicking parts, fun as it was, felt scripted at times when a soldier would be standing at the edge of a cliff, back turned, practically saying "PUSH ME" and not turning around as you approached. Dark Messiah was a linear shooter that was an excuse to be able to kick ragdolls into pikes. That being said, it wasn't all bad. It was a beautiful, shallow shooter.

WHat? Can you say, shameless advertising.

haha, I feel your pain. i've got twilight princess and monkey ball, but no wii yet...

Yeah, noway I'm paying more for a Wii than a PS3. I got a great birthday present, which was a promise to get me a Wii from Best Buy, as their $250 pricing is reletively sane in the world of consuls. But now it's a bitch just to find one. Any they don't tell you when the next shipment gets in either. It's really all just luck. Anyway, I got a tip that a Best Buy near us is getting their next shipment between the 13th and the 15th, so I guess I'll start phoning around/camping out then. By the way, if anyone's interrested and wants to just splurge, I have found a site that sells Wiis for $499, but you could probably find a much better deal on Ebay. Any other tips as to who to talk to to find shipment dates etc.?

My Favorite Game of the Year has to be Guitar Hero 2. I picked it up just a few days ago and already it owns my soul. For PC, Rainbow Six Vegas was good if you get over the fact that you can't plan strategies pre-combat like you did in Ravenshield. Gridwars II too. For me it was a year of playing older games, which I find are often better made than the shiny, shallow new ones they're churning out: Final Fantasy 8 Half-Life (can you believe I'm just playing this through for the first time now? of course I love it. arghhh "Surface Tension") Oh, and The Ship was awesome too. A fun break from the mayhem of Half Life 2 multiplayer. It's a more sophisticated action game. Slightly off topic, I'm thinking of buying Trauma Center: Second Oppinion, and it looks like a fun puzzle game, but I was wonderring what the replay value was like. I don't want to buy the game and be done after I beat it. Do they offer like an instant-challange mode where you're given some random combination of malidies to cure?

Ok, the backstory to this thread. I was thinking recently about an old friend I had who was for me the expert of all things computer. I must have been about 8 at the time. And we'd load up his computer and experiment with this game that I think came with his computer. Azrael's Tear. It was some strange, pretentious game with a story based on the Knights templar and the Holy Grail. It's first person and I remember having no control over it at all. This was before computer games really caught on with me. But for some reason, it not only scared but intrigued me. Looking back, it was kind of funny. In fact, I think you even start out mulling about these dinosaur like creatures, I don't know. And I remember falling into a pit I didn't see, dying, and giving up on it ocmpletely. For some reason I just started rememberring it recently and wanted to knwo if anyone else remembers this game... http://www.gamespot.com/pc/adventure/azraelstear/index.html

Let's start one of these shall we? They always spark interresting debate. Just ask a difficult oppinion question or answer one that's already been asked. Would you rather die instantly right now or live forever? and another, for good measure Would you rather burn all the books you own or wipe all your electronic data irrecoverably?

ace ventura bruce almighty seemed not to be able to handle his power and the mask just weirded me out. of course, ventura's a weird guy too. tough one

it has to be that or ocarina. I have to say one of my favorite video game moments ever is in ocarina (i think, or Mask) when you are in the temple with a ceiling of vines and eventually flip the temple and find yourself walking on the vines with the level above you and the abyss of the sky below

supposedly it doesnt have the same depth, and it's a little too fast, but I've never played geometry wars, so ill take your word for it in this case, think of grid wars as a demo like it? buy the xbox version

oo. definately the person. there are some unbearable games, and at least people I hate are often less repeditive how about: would you rather do something you don't like and make alot of money, or do something you do and make much less (think doctor's salary as opposed to that of a convenience store owner)

Year Two DOES= sex and I knew what that link was going to be before I even clicked on it. Those village people man.

Yesh. See, I was kind of imagining not aging, or, not becoming senile. Theoretically that would be the best choice, not only because dieing is selfish, but, elaborating on the sleeper ship idea, you could just bury yourself in ice in some polar climate and simulate death whenever you're ready (since you'd be theorietically perminantly frozen without hope for recovery). Or you could put yourself into a coma I guess. But wouldn't that be surreal to get to a point where you freeze yourself and an eternity passes and you somehow resurface and have to bury yourself again. It would be like a slight annoyance. Theres some kind of romantic irony associated with immortality; how if you couldn't die, your chief concerns would eventually be passing the time, and if you were mortal, you'd never think you had enough time to do everything you planned to do.