Yeah, I saw a similar slightly higher score at metacritic, but the data is misleading because the Wii version has 63 reviews where the GCN one has 11...when you're dealing with scores near 100% any low review will bring the overall score down quite a bit. Since the wii version has many more reviews, there is a much greater chance for deviation. I'm sure the sub 85% reviewers would have given the GCN one a similar score if they had reviewd it, but since they didn't, the wii version takes a hit where the GCN one does not.

On any heads-up reviews (really the only meaningful ones as far as our discussion is concerned) the sentiment that the wii version is better because of the controls is echoed throughout. The scores might be the same, but if you physically read the reviews (IGN and gamepro come to mind) they state that the experience is enhanced with the wiimote.

Whatever floats your boat though. FWIW I played it through on the wii and would never want to use a regular controller with the game. Hope you're enjoying the experience.

I totally disagree that it was tacked on. Parts of it were a bit lame (the spin attack nunchuck shake for example) but the bow/slingshot/hookshot/boomerang aiming was absolutely top notch. Playing the whole game without that control would be horrible IMO. One of those "once you try it you can never go back" type of things.

Let's hope they don't pull a Red Steel for MP3 though. The freaking Super Monkeyball minigames had better control than Red Steel.

It's funny that collectively it received better reviews on NGC versus the Revo.

No it didn't. Every reviewer who played both versions favored the wii because of its superior control. I have played both versions and there is indeed no comparison - the wii version is significantly better because of the controller.

The PS2 is still outselling everything else. That further establishes the user base that is most likely to upgrade to a PS3 once its price comes down.

I think this will play out over several years.

How long will it be though before the PS3 comes down to the $400 dollar range, if ever? Remember that the biggest the things the PS2 had, and the reasons it was so successful, was because it had tons of games and was relatively cheap. Neither is the case this generation. They are losing ~$240/console right now and you have to think they want to make a profit on the damn thing at some point. That would mean reducing production costs per console by over $240 to make ANY profit while maintaining the current price point. Add the necessity of a price drop and you've got problems.

Supply isn't even the biggest issue for Sony right now - it's retail and manufacturing costs. I think that Sony's console dominance in the U.S. might be over. The Europe launch should be interesting.

This comment was edited on Jan 3, 15:21.

Twilight Princess could have been released for the GC (as it was designed to be) and it would have been just as good.

Well, TP was released for the GC and is widely regarded as the inferior version of the two specifically because of the wii's controller. You sound like someone who didn't play the wii version (or any version for that matter) so I should take what you say with a grain of salt.

Let me just say this: anyone who has used the wiimote for an extended period of time would realize that it's not a gimmick and it's not going away. This controller will make RTS games possible on consoles and greatly enhance FPS when properly implemented. It will spawn new genres (trauma center comes to mind so far) that would never work on a conventional controller. I've wasted too much time typing this because you've already dismissed the wii and clearly have not even played it.

I should clarify what I said: the actual gameplay footage has serious framerate issues. The in-game cut scenes (which appears to be the lion's share of that trailer) was pretty smooth.

A perfect example of this is when the camera switches from cut scene view to 3rd person when they jump in the hovercraft. That is a point that I believe is definately actual gameplay footage and the framerate drops horribly at that point. It's at 0:37 of the video. Jumping over those crates at 0:53 is pretty bad too.

Again though, most of that video is not actual gameplay which means that it doesn't tell us what the game really looks like or how it really plays. I honestly do not think that any of it is real-time in-game footage. Notice how it's never from a playable viewing angle and there are never any crosshairs, huds, etc.?

Holy low frame rates batman! Seriously...I doubt that it will look that good anyways (given Sony's history of "gameplay" trailers), but even if it does, shouldn't it be running at more than 15-20 frames per second? That trailer was awful.

Go back an make a modern day Xwing vs. Tie Fighter with 64 people players, a commander that gets to control and position the capital ships, a campaign map, bam, instant hit.

Why game developers can't create the obvious is beyond me.

It's not that they can't create a game like that it's just that they won't because it would not be very profitable. You're talking about appealing to a small group of gamers even if they released it on consoles as well. It would either be too complex for the consoles or too simple for the PC. How many people buy flight/space sims on the PC these days? I doubt it's a very large group.

Overall, I think this is good news.

This is not good news, it's the best way to spin a horrible miscalculation. Good news would be Sony saying that they goofed and were actually going to produce double the initial unit projection numbers. Good news would be Sony saying that they actually started production.

No, this is not good news. Delaying a console for an entire year because you are forcing a proprietary format into each unit is terrible news. I am just glad I am not a Sony or Playstation fan...I don't have to get pissed on myself.

It just amazes me that someone would pay that...

Me too, me too. Honestly, if not for the uberhardcore fanboys (and the Japanese...who are all uberhardcore Sony fanboys anyways), I'm not sure Sony would sell many PS3 systems at all. At least not at this price.

It's too expensive for 99% of casual gamers (a very large portion of the PS2 crowd I would wager) to justify spending that much on a game system, and there aren't really any must-have titles at this point to push people who weren't going to get one "just because it's PS3" to buy one.

I will be very interested to see how these are selling in the Spring.

On a side note, I bet the bundles game stores force you to purchase to get a console early on just became significantly larger.

I thought before that we were looking at a minimum bundle of $900...now I am thinking that you will have to drop at least $1k to get a PS3 this Xmas.

I didn't even realize there were any Sony fanboys left. MS and Nintendo must be licking their chops at the neverending Sony blunders.

Anyone think they will actually meet the 400k launch unit mark in the U.S.? I'm finding it hard to believe they will do anything righ at this point...

PS3 will sell, and sell huge.

At launch, there is no question. 6-12 months after launch, are there still going to be droves people wanting to shell out $600 for a game console? I have my doubts.

Seems like every day I read a negative article on the impending demise of Sony, I just don't believe it.

Well, open your eyes. Quite frankly, Sony is already sinking, I was just wondering if other people thought that this was their last gasp. Financially, they are in horrible shape and it's hard to think they will pull out of the tailspin without totally revamping the company from top to bottom.

Does anyone else get the feeling that we are witnessing the slow demise of an industry giant? Can Sony really pull this off?

Also, WTF is this 6-10 years you're talking about?

Half-Life was released in 1998, and Halo was released in 2001..

What's so difficult to understand? Halo was released 5 years ago. Half-Life was released 8 years ago. Halo is not in the 6-10 years ago range. Half-Life is in the 6-10 years ago range. Understand?

I'm glad you liked Halo, but I don't see how many PC FPS gamers would think it was so great. It offered nothing new in gameplay and had worse multiplayer, controls, and graphics than PC games at the time. It worked very well on a console for console gamers, but there was a reason it was totally ignored when released on the PC...

"For the first few months, they should focus on the customers who will spend top dollar first and then gradually cut the price and appeal to a larger audience."

That won't work. The initial hardcore market would bear a price point of $1k or more, but once those sold out, nobody would buy it until Sony dropped the price significantly. If they did that too quickly, the people who payed $1k when it first came out would march on Sony HQ and burn it to the ground. As a gaming company you cannot take advantage of your most hardcore fans and expect to be successful.

This is why the original post is so stupid. He is suggesting that Sony basically take a big shit on their most loyal fans in the interest of squeezing them for top dollar and then turn around and sell it much cheaper a few months later to everyone else. I would absolutely love for Sony to try this guys pricing strategy. You think there is Sony bashing now?

Wow that was a dumb article...and the follow-up posts are actually praising the OP's comments. I guess he thinks that since demand will be high when it first comes out that Sony should raise the price to $1k to maximize profits and then all of the sudden drop it to $500 2 months later when nobody is buying it. Ya, I'm sure the consumer would take that sitting down.

You didn't read it did you?
You missed the answer to your question.
They aren't starting from scratch.


Grigon Entertainment is best known for successfully developing and launching several online games in Asia, including Seal Online, a light-hearted role-playing game (RPG) that took the online gaming world by surprise. Localized versions are available in Korea, Japan, Taiwan, China, Indonesia and Thailand.

How does that mean they aren't starting from scratch? They are teaming up with a company who has made a game already. It could be cool, don't get me wrong, but this is still a puzzling business decision. Popular online games in Asia don't really translate well to Europe and the Americas (see Lineage).

How, from a business standpoint, does this make any sense for cartoon network? These games are complex, take millions to develop, and more fail than succeed. I don't get it.

Didn't you answer your own question in your second sentence?

I should have been more clear. I meant that people cannot come up with valid reasons for buying a PS3. But you're right about the early adopters and harcore buyers. It will be the second wave of available PS3 and their sales that will tell the real story.

Having talked with many console gamers, the majority of whom are totally ignorant of the world around them, I have come to the conclusion that the PS3 will do just fine. People want to buy the PS3 just because it is the next Sony machine. It's sad really. I would like to think that the people of this country would look at the world around them critically and examine things thoroughly before spending their money.
If you really pin people down about why they want the PS3 they can't come up with answers. O tempores!