1/1 LowViz Lurker

I agree here. They are mutants with super powers ffs. It's only when it looks fake because it wasn't done convincingly that I have an issue with cg. I hope gambit makes it into an xmen movie soon. Or maybe Psylocke. If they are going with a more gritty real style these need to be there imo. I want to see a character with ninja/thief skills in there somewhere. They've got the mages: Storm, Xavier, Jean Grey, warriors: Wolvie, Collossus, Rogue freaks: Nightcrawler leaders/strategists: Cyclops now give us the cool 'we rely on skills and cunning' characters who do risky sneaky things.

Yep. I'm his younger brother (*proud boast* ) and despite being his punching bag and hating being beaten up when we were kids I can remember all the cool stuff he drew and amazed how good he was at drawing and art in general - even when he was young his stuff looked as good as any professional imo. He would have just finished high school at about the time he was in aus and that's when he moved with my dad to the philipines for a time. (I don't think there is much work for comic book art here) Unfortunately as I mentioned he fell ill and couldn't continue the work and this is why the comic may not have lasted due to cancer. Sadly he didn't win his battle against cancer and that is why you would occasionally see page "dedicated to nick manabat" on some image comics at the time. Really sad times, he had a lot going for him. I remember too that because of the way the comic was printed, the final outcome was a bit messy due to lines being too close together and making everything really dark so you couldn't make out the detail in the comic. His biggest achievement was to be able to work and meet with the artists he really admired since looking at some of his work you can tell he was influenced by them. And I know he would draw stuff (here growing up in australia) that looked similar to Jim Lee. During this time he would be in the philipines and from his win in a competition; I think to "create and draw your own superhero" he would get noticed and later move to the US. The use of crosshatching is evident in lots of stuff he did - I think I might have still have some original work of his still, where he drew a Ghost Rider vs the Punisher scene in a Jim lee style. The atmoshpere and tone is very dark though, with lots of shadow, a forest with lots of trees with no leaves, and flaming skull boy looking very evil and bad ass. The actual bike looks very demonic. If you've read the 2000 AD comics when simon bisely was drawing ABC Warriors, it reminds me a little of one of the characters from that. (also rode on a bike, had some kind of necromancer-ish zombie mind control ability) He used to spend hundreds of dollars a month on comics and pretty much collected everything. (keep in mind I was only little when he was here in australia so I couldn't apreciate the sheer fanatacism or see the reason for it all, but some of the interest rubbed off on me as I got into some titles like Xmen, although I'm only a casual comic fan now.) My memories of my bro in australia are filled with him mainly going to comic stores and getting all the back issues of comics and stuff. (there was a guy there we all nicknamed "the fat man" ) Think of the comic book guy character in the simpsons. This was all around the 80s when he was in his angsty teen years before the flashy, glossy paper era and before Spawn and image comics. I still have a "Homage Studios" cap lying around somewhere which I wear now and again and some of the old cybernary/dethblow issues that he did work for lying under a pile of old videogames mags.

I might start getting back into comics again. The 90s are back! My fave artists were jim lee, and simon bisley (he did the ABC warriors in 2000 AD and Slain:the horned god, and also covers for Lobo.) It's been 10 years since I bought a comic though. I think I got out when all the artists went away to form image and paper started to turn shiny. The thing I most remember were spawn comics, (I had the first print ofthe first issue) the maxx, (a kind of purple hulk - crap description I know) the savage dragon, three-armed cyborgs (not sure what image title this was from, I think wildcats?) and comics that had lots of black in them (Cybernary: my bro was an artist for that, until he couldn't continue due to illness. This is probably why it was cancelled The darkness was due to printing problems) The problem I have with comics now is like tv, I have a short attention span and tend to lose interest after a story is spread over so many issues/episodes forcing you to wonder WTF is going on unless you've been paying attention from the begining. I tend to like reading a large volume in one big chunk rather than waiting a whole month to just to get a bit more of a story and have to make several trips to the comic store to get back issues. See I'm paranoid that if the writing or art quality doesn't stay consistent over time (similar to how in a tv series that you like, suddenly gets cancelled, pissing you off) it's not worth the effort or hassle trying to follow it. What if it is awesome the first 5 issues and then gets really bad later?

I agree here. Even though I'm sick of japanese rpgs (I much prefer western ones now) after playing them to death, (thank you final fantasy and your primitive, random, repetitive, 10 second turn-based battles ) I think ms needs all the help it can get to fill in this gap to help broaden the appeal of thier console. Remember that looks can be decieving. When ff7 came out for ps many thought it was great based on the graphics alone. Like an EA game, the presentation was there and the production value was impressive. But games like Suikoden which had the more traditional look, turned out in many ways more enjoyable and easier on the eyes. I think I had more enjoyment playing that then squares rpg. Better music, characters were more interesting, an epic feel to the game that let you control armies. Contrast this to a boring story involving the hunt for sephiroth (no emotional charge at all with any of the characters) and narrow decision making freedom and flat gameplay. (maps were also disorienting, like parts of a painting that you weren't sure was part of the background or an area you could explore unless you looked carefully) Variety is the spice of life. Play too much or one thing, or over-represent one genre too much (when developers clone other developers work) and you pigeon hole the system and take away the excitment in gaming. It's not so much that MS has to conquer japan, just get thier foot in the door to please existing owners who might ordinarily have to get another console to play a japanese style rpg. This is one of the weaknesses of the xbox imo. No matter how you look at it, it's a positive thing to be able to fill the rpg gaps in the library.

I'm disapointed. Really liked the first movie. It's a classic. And to all those who are worried about muscles on arnie not being close to what they were, see terminator 3. Maybe they should just get that german guy who did the conan tv series and who was in the gladiator movie? jk Also I hope they stay true to the original in character. Conan should be violent and cruel, not nice and soft so that female audiences will like him. (in fact they should fear him) I feel what's going to happen is they might try to make the movie lighthearted and funny and sanitise what could normally be a violent movie, into something that is mainstream friendly or safe for the family. I just get this feeling in my stomach that money is what matters more than what fans want. The days that violent stuff like robocop, predator or even stuff like the recent punisher movie, draw the attention are gone. I was watching punisher (I didn't think it was that great but the way it was done reminded me of the old classic violence from the 70s and 80s) and I just realise these kinds of movie represent a kind of dying genre now. I think that part of the reason why they are going to go with another movie is becuas of the success of fantasy epics like LOTR. (Now I can totally imagine CG fx used in the next conan: fake CG swords instead of real ones, actors standing in front of bluescreen fighting invisible people, over use of magic etc) Hell, maybe let conan be some kind of ninja that can flip off walls and react in slow motion to dodge arrows in bullet time? Fine you can do that for heman, but I would rather something more like conan the barbarian for the third movie.(ie no more stylised action, but violent and bloody)

Stupid question but I gots to ask: was that one on the right official work for some gay pron or something? If not, looks like somebody went to all the trouble to draw the covered arm and stuff.

that wasn't roy, just an actor playing roy. The real roy went into depression and started drinking heavily and feeling suicidal (the drug overdose wasn't covered) after witnessing all the magical stuff which he needed to seek help for as well as dealing with the loss of his GF. (he thought he was hallucinating or the drugs he was taking had made him crazy and it was all a dream.) Ya see, like DYRL macross Zero was made as a movie documentary of the events that happened before the aliens arrived. This also explains the height differences of the actor and the real roy in SDF:Macross. Also explains the technology being so advanced, since the real VF0 had been lost in the zentradi attack of earth which resulted in the loss of all the older craft that UN spacy were developing. The real events will be presented (with proper explanations to what happened to the characters) in the macross zero tv series with cg valks. This is where the low visibility vf1 makes its debut. *post may not be true

The "are we gonna see them nekkid?" girls-in-the-locker-room scene almost qualifiess, too bad they all finished changing by the time the two peeping toms got there. Also the very first part about the unlocking of the limited edition costume kind of reminds me of the controversial dead or alive nude patch. (ie He should know better and just create a nude hack for the game.) Yeah it's like mr miyagi from the karate kid. They try to make the characters do stupid or embarassing things to make a point while at the same time making them change thier attitude. It is hinted in the first ep that the leader himself is blocking his memories of when he was the aquarion pilot in ancient time, possibly because he is scared. And not to mention now he is obsessed with beauty, and finishing his enemy off in style without caring about the effecitveness of the strategy or fast response time. Beast boy mentioned in one of the fights that the "legs are heavy" probably reffering to sluggish response from this pilot. Maybe he is afraid of ugliness and is too consumed by theneed to look good in front of people? (due to his failure in a past battle? which effects his behaviour today?) I get the feeling that he is the proper reincarnation, but that his repressed memory is making the team less effictive so they are relying on beast boy(who may have once worked for the shadow angels and then defected). Without the correct emotions (say a traumatic event like a friend being captured) to awaken the fighting spirit, the memories of the pilot stay buried in thier mind never to be used properly which affects the performance of the robot. I think the spirit may be more attracted to the emotion itself like on that day when the beast kid first piloted the robot, he only recieved help because of the emotions he was feeling in his head and his desperate need to save his friend. All the pilots seem to have thier own unique weakness, which I think causes them to fail each time and cost humans. This episode highlighted the fact that shoes are getting in the way of feeling the vibrations on the ground which desensitises the pilot to the enemies moves (remember how the blind chic could hear the step?) and blocks thier psi conection to the earth which allows them to keep thier feet firmly planted. Having hieghtened abilities, uber-sharp senses and powers, these people can probably sense the shockwaves better when they don't wear the shoes, allowing them to keep balance. Any fine shakes in the ground they can react to them in realtime, like trying to maintain balance on a surfboard or not falling over in an big earthquake. By tapping into the whole earth itself (and not just react to what happening to the earth's surface) they are better able to sense the movement below and then cancel out the shaking with thier fast reflexs and ultra fine heightened senses. (eg the hearing ability of the blind chic, like that of when tiny insects can hear and feel the vibrations of giant human feet touching the ground and causing tiny shockwaves which allows them to react. No normal human can hear it or feel it but insects and superhumans might.) The teacher's lessons on balance seem to involve a lot of this "standing on one leg thing" which again reminds me of the karate kid movies If you can't maintain balance, you have no power in your moves.

Saw 3 eps so far. Really funny that the shy glasses chic thinks the bad-luck chic who keeps losing is hot. And why does the main character crawl on the ground like an animal? Was he raised by wolves or something? It kind of reminds me of the character in dragon ball z. All he needs is a tail. There is also a hint that he is the "Dark beast" and that the blonde herself has animal strength. (along with the usual psi powers) Maybe he can transmute into a giant were-ape and go beserk? In ep2 it suggest that the atlanteans were destroyed from a big ball of light which exploded and destroyed the land a long time ago, created by apollonius and that these guys want the light back to feed from it. That could explain the blind chic in the wheelchair. I think she got that way because she was blinded by this light and maybe she once worked for the fallen angels. (why does she have those fangs and why did she say "delicious" when she realised apollo was the one?) She seems mysterious and a bit suspect imo. I think the solar aquarion might once have been used as a weapon of destruction by the fallen angels once in the past until it turned into a defender of humans, which reesulted in a holy war in heaven between the two sides, which could explain the main villain's familiarity to the pilot. Just a guess. All of the souls from the dead got put into the remaining humans (the planet lost 2/3 its popultion I think) as reincarnated spirits and the battle of armageddon happens on earth with select humans who have the psi ability.

That is if they gave away free gbp armor and fast pack parts with every valk I'm all for it. Banpresto Boxes: massive amount of wasted space for such a small and easily breakable toy. I wish there was a way to order heaps of these without the box. Make it so that you assemble the toy yourself.

Personally I think having the gunstrap is a pain in the ass in other modes besides battroid. Mine ended up ripping where the ring attaches to the end. Grr. Now everytime I want to transform into fighter, the strap hangs down and detaches from the ring. Taking it off looks much better.

That's not the point. I think they cut it all out just so they can sell different versions and make the most money, not because of morals. Fans want everything. Personally I hate censorship even if it cuts stuff out that is irrelevant to the story. (although I do understand the reasons for it.) It's about having the complete thing. Same thing with tv shows: Completists will seek out the best, most complete version of something to feel content. The same issue with videogame censorship: It's ok to have extremely violent images, but hardcore sex is bad bad bad! Am I the only one who finds this a little strange? And lastly, same thing with movies: They cut out violence in the aliens vs pred movie to apeal to kids.. and as a last minute decision. If they ever make a scary sci-fi horror movie (say like another sequel to aliens with cameron directing: and if you've seen HR Gigers art books there is some pretty disturbing dark stuff) then I hope and pray they make it as gory, violent, and adult as possible. Yes it might seem shallow at first but I want at least an R rating. That's what horror to me is. Although it doesn't happen all the time, too much censorship and toning down can be bad. I'm still a little pissed that there is a hardcore Street Fighter: the animated movie out there that I can't see. I wish I could see everything that was cut. I heard there were 3 versions made. One was M rated, the other might be higher rated than that, and above that there was one without any cuts. (the one I want to see) --- Oh and if that link didn't work just go to the homepage. Some websites don't allow direct linking and force you to go through thier site. Common sense.

Nah, you don't get it..I understand that the whole thing wouldn't be destroyed but I disagree a normal person should have survived the blast. You see heero fully intended to kill himself in the blast. Otherwise the characters wouldn't mention: "He gave his life so others would live." In other words, by standing so close to the cockpit he wanted to die in the blast too. But because the kid has special tough body, he recovered from the injuries as if a normal human would recover from the flu. They were playing around with this idea that his body was extra special, and that he could take the G forces of the gundam unlike Zex who had to train to be able to handle it, thus making the Tallgeese usable. Also Zex mentions in the anime that his advantages (merely being skilled and experienced) against these pilots were somehow not that big advantages when you could take into consideration that thier abilities and bodies were able to make use of the gundams. (he overestimated the skill aspect of combat alone, there's also the disipline that comes in training yourself to handle a better, faster machine, and not just handle it, but master it to be able to use it at its full potential to be on a level playing ground with the kid using the gundams.) The idea here is that the gundam can't be piloted by just anybody, otherswise they would have just mass-produces the tallgeese. Only little kids with special abilities could make use of them without killing themselves. (ie similar to the yf21 when the limiter was taken away: way too dangerous to handle if alowed to go at max speed, but the advantage of using it to its full potential can turn the tide of a battle if the odds are against you with many inferiour mechs outnumbering you.) Not until the Mobile Dolls, which are PILOTLESS; thus eliminating the danger of killing the pilot, were the scientists able to take advantage of faster, more-manueverable mecha in combat, and one of the reasons Traize was against thier use: because it wasn't fair one-on-one combat where the opponent can respect thier rival's skill, just a way to conveniantly win wars at the push of a button - which was a way of saying "you only won because you relied on a way better weapon than me, shameless coward!" If there's no honour in fighting, soldiers would have no reason to enter combat since it's just a race to see who has more money. These dolls were, however offset by the fact they are predictable and easy to outsmart because thier information or learning behaviour is only based on outdated past information which governs how they fight. It's just not the same as dueling a human who adapts in-realtime to the skilled opponent they are fighting against and whom expects the unexpected when he sees a extraordinary skilled ace in a good mecha. Good intuition is half the battle too, and robots ignore who it is that they fight against by not caring about the enemy pilot. This is why Zex's newer VR helmet style control system outclassed the AI-controlled mobile dolls since the human's thoughts are in control of the dolls rather than the dolls being controlled by whatever experience they've got from past battles against easy enemies. A good master-strategist who is a war fan, could learn to control the dolls in certain formations to make up for the lack of skills they would have in one-to-one. It wouldn't have been as honourable to win this way, but it gets the job done if you are severly outnumbered. In the end Zex entered the war to fight for the people of space, (thinking only these people know peace) and Traise entered to fight for the earth. (cuz he loves flowers and nature) But they are both elitist pricks who think they are better or more important than others by looking down on us normal people as well as being hypocrits. They both have stupid ideologies that involved killing innocent people, but its a good excuse to watch mech battles anyhow.

Yeah I have a similar theory: That movies tell the true agenda the government has been wanting to push for a long time, BUT.... because they know people will violently oppose the themes (take enemy of the state for example) they have structured the movie so it softens the blow for when events similar or identical to the ones in the movie really happens and people's defenses are disarmed. Politicians plot and time thier events in a certain order to best shape the opinions of the public into accepting whatever they have up thier sleeves. Anyone who has seen the movie "Wag the Dog" knows what I'm talking about here. The reason they do it is to condition you and desensitise you enough to "give up" the debate and let them carry it out, or to just test the audiences reactions to see if they are ready to carry the plan out yet or not. In some movies the true messages are there but wrapped around fictional characters, events, places changed from the real-life people, real-life events, and place they are modelled off. (probably to protect the identities of the people involved) Star War's fall of the republic into an evil empire is equivalent to the building of a single unfiying government power that will have nothing in its way but terrorists (rogue freedom fighters) to fight as an enemy combatant now that the villains have achieved close to world domination. You could say that in the bible, revelations warns people that when the messiah makes his second appearance it will be as a judge not as a nice guy sacrificing himself. Earth has been secretly manipulated behind the scenes all along but people don't know by who or what due to the secretive nature of the villain. I think this parrallels nicely with the themes of destruction and violence that are going to be happening as more and more war is waged in future and machines become technologically advanced and are perfected in thier killing potential. De-mock-racy will soon turn into a dictatorship if it has not already. (from behind the scenes where leaders are forced to stick to thier original plan of unifying the world into a single powerful empire ie neocons ) Soon schools, hospitals, all sorts of public services will go private as predicted in all the dystopian sci-fi movies where laws are strict and prisons are full of innocent people whose disagreement led to thier enslavement. Men will be hand picked based on thier DNA (Gattaca) and eugenicists will have a field day picking and choosing who is worthy to live. (Terri Schiewhat-ever-her-name-was) The future is going to be depressing as man is replaced by more efficient machine workers, and the meaning of existance is contemplated as unemployed and poor people struggle to compete, just to survive and crime goes out of control necessitating a surveilance society with brutal police patrolling every area and big brother watching the moves of the population every minute of the day to keep dissidents in line. (play that blade-runner-esque game "shadow run", where the people living on the bottom are forced to either wear a suit in comformity to the empire or join a gang and hack into security systems and corporate networks to steal valuable information. This is a very realistic depiction of the future when you think about it.)

I will not go to see the next bond movie if it at all becomes like XXX. Phuk the kiddiez. No offense to people who liked that movie, but I agree that bond movies should be serious movies. Maybe just have the uber villains be a young guy or girl, that bond defeats would be a better idea this time around? But not change it into an extreme bond. Forget the teenyboppers who only go to see popcorn flicks with thier GFs, bond isn't just action only, but about the tensions and suspense. (the "omg he almost died" effect) And you just don't get that when you make an action flick. Sure you can have outrageous stunts but only when they have a sense of realism about it too. (good example are the car chase scenes in Ronin, and maybe the fighting bits in borne identity.) No wire stunts, no unrealistic charlies angels' "suspension in mid-air in slow motion" crap. He's not a superhero. Just give us more of what we like. That was one of the reasons I couldn't stand the resident evil movie. The scene where the chic started jumping off walls to kick the dog is just so much BS. That would be Eric Bana. I think he'd be good. It would definately be a role that would contrast the rough character he did in the Chopper movie though. I think this was Bana's best stuff. If you haven't seen it yet do it. And even though this is not meant to be funny movie, like the psycho in Taxi Driver, the character is. The funny thing about him is that he is just a comedian who does impersonations and his acting ability really surprised a lot of people. Interestingly, he did not audition for the role in this movie but the real-life "Chopper" picked him to play the role off the top of his head.

My fave mechs were the virgos. The scientists own hair styles don't even have realistic physics. I bet they put that in just to make the gundam pilots seem extra special (they studied thier dna and found it wasn't human) so that only gentically modified little kids would be suited to be giant robot pilot experts. I can now see the zentradi being similar: bodies that have been modified in some way to withstand stress. Increased bone desity so that they can ram thier fists into the chest of a valk without breaking anything. Sometimes you see a valk busting its arms through the wall of a ship with barely any effort yet when fighting one-one one with britai, the valk couldn't beat an unarmoured giant. After all didn't the main character in Wing not die from an explosion that destroyed his gundam?

Back then computers were kind of mysterious and things were expensive and slow and very clunky. I still have fond memories of loading up my old commodore 64 games on Tape which tok like 10-15 mins to load a crappy game. By the time the game loaded you couldn't be bothered wanting to play. The atari did have some ok gameplay for a system with such limits back then. The kind of games that are truly timeless classics are ones that are surprisingly non-resource hungry. ie pacman, space invaders, breakout, asteroids, even a starwars game that mimmicked the classic arcade game 'Defender'. Think of these as the 'Tetris' or 'Super Bomberman' of thier era. Simple, no-frills graphics or sound, or even any animation, but yet even with all the limits, surprisingly addictive even to this day! Keep in mind it was either this or those pinball machines that were popular in the 70s. There was also this 4 player game called Warlords that was surpringly addictive. You used paddles instead of a joystick and had to wreck your opponents barriers on the side of the screen by throwing this white ball on the screen at various angles to kill the centre which resulted in thier death. You could bounce the ball off your body like tennis game, or just catch it when an opponent tried to use the walls to attack vulnerable parts of your shield. Many hours spent playing and loving this game. What killed atari (and the very reason nintendo were able to resurrect the game industry after gaming died out as a mere fad due to pacman fever) was very poor quality control. Games like ET were the kind of nightmare that drew people away from gaming and the masses must have believed it was a fad that would die out. Games were getting worse and eventually people would feel ripped off. Then nintendo with its recognised classics (ie donkey kong, mario bros. etc) started to once again attract the public back to games and the home console and the rest is history. It is noted that when E.T. failed that was a signal for the videogames crash. Today with the sheer number of people playing games, I doubt a similar thing will be repeated. There is just too much money to be made even if a lot of the titles are shovelware. This is why the need by nintendo to innovate. What might seem like a gimmick to the more hardcore crowd are fresh gameplay possbilities to the masses. Games like Marble Madness in the arcades were fun not just because of the software, but the unique interface (using the trackball to roll around) that offered a new challenge. And with the popularity of games like DDR and the rythm action genre, I'm thinking that its working. The 'gimmmicks' people love to complain like Sega's fishing controller, the use of the lighgun in duckhunt, nintendo's drums for thier new donkey kong game, games like animal crossing etc all have thier own unique feel towards them. Not all experiments succeed (virtual boy, power glove) but that's no excuse to not try, which is why jaded gamers are so critical of the lack of originality in games these days. Companies would rather not take some risks once in a while because simply put, if something is hella profitable just being recycled over and over again, they don't NEED to. (even nintendo is guilty of this with thier pokemon games.) Basically nintendo don't want to repeat of the atari days when crap games like ET were released and ended up drawing more and more people away from gaming as more and more people got pissed at paying for the crap and had nothing to look forward to.

OMG parents beware! Your kids are computer hackers trying to steal your credit card details! They've been encrypting thier messages all along. What will we do? Alarmed parent: "Lets start a campaign to ban the internet. It ruins thier spelling, makes them into cyber criminals, perverts thier innocent minds, and there is no control." Welcome to last decade. By the time the parents have discovered thier kids secret, the kids are now adults and are still using the hackerspeak. Given how long it took for them to figure this out, it shows how little attention parents pay to thier kids.

I wonder if we'll see an anime version of spongebob squarepants? I heard the movie was funny but never really got into the cartoon.

Well I'm actually looking forward to the next GBA. (not the DS. For some reason I just don't feel compelled to get one..for now) I hope GBA2 will be the true psp killer or at least result in some fierce competition like the days of sega vs nintendo. But I'm worried that there is too much hardware released at once which wil divert the software companies' attention. You might have heaps of shovelware and like 1 or 2 good games that are good, but not the "killer-app" kind of good. ..and then..bang MS themselves decide to compete in handheld market, making it even more fragmented. I always felt that nintendos threat was the wireless gaming that mobile phones might offer. I'm glad the ngage thing died! The prophets of doom could have thier day when it all collapses, but I think it will survive. I just feel nintendo see themselves as more of a toy company than high tech sophisticated gadgets kind of company. (whereas extra features on the other two companies are multimedia add ons, nintendo gimmicks are gameplay related in some wierd way, or at least they try to be - again this reflects the difference in atittudes: one is gadget focused, the other is family oriented fun, attracting people who are not necessarily the hardcore type, to get into gaming. eg the donkey kong game with the bongos.) I think it will be here to stay, it will just get to a point where people are sick of playing the same stuff and stop buying at the rate they were. Maybe people will abandon consoles altogether and go back to pc games or just play emulated old classics.

I'm not a fan of ratios I would rather used total number of games. I'm glad nintendo does make an effort to appease the "mature" gamer, but it feels almost as if they would prefer not to because it is not thier style. (think of all the negative publicity when nintendo first announced "cel"da. People were disapointed they went with the celshaded look instead of the traditional darker look of the n64 OOT. Personally I was glad they tried something new, but the reality is when you've been to as many different boards as I have and seen people's general attitude and perception of nintendo: that they are family oriented, it's usually that they have preffered to let second party and third parties handle that kind of content. People truly love and expect to see realism versus cartoon style graphics to show off the power of the system. They loved the idea that Link could be this adult character, they loved the dark atmoshpere of OOT and that early demo of link fighting ganondorf. When the next Zelda was going to come out, what they were dreaming about were dark and moody and atmoshperic castles with realistic FX and stuff. This is why effects ARE important because it draws you into the world of the game and tells the person, "this is the reason you upgraded to a new system". (not so different to why people buy graphics accelerators to have the best image they can) It doesn't matter who supplies it, but the idea that third parties prefer systems with highest userbase and imo are better focused on a specific machine rather than trying to be everywhere at once. Inhous dvelopers are not the make or break facotr in systems success imo as they used to be. You will see certain companies (both crap and good ones) tend to shrink thier support for systems where they feel the userbase isn't big enough once a dominant system takes the biggest share and constantly expands. This has an effect on fans of certain companies who make on average A grade stuff that you can't afford to lose support from. The very reason nintendo needs someone like capcom to help secure the areas nintendo inhouse may be weak in. Frankly I'm glad they are making attempts to be proactive about it. I love RE4 for example and think this is the kind of thing nintendo really needs. I think in general though if a certain niche is under-represented (this refers more to the past because back then nintendos third party relations were not good) it tends to go to a system that might have increased chances of finding its audience. A system where it might be less risky to release the title on. A game in the early ps1 days like Carnage heart, may not have done well on a system where the userbase hadn't already estblished itself strongly. (and if the sales were poor it would mean bad things ie unsold catridges vs unsold cds) The more sales you can get on your title, the more of that niche can appear, the more of that niche appears, the more you will see attempts by other developers to clone your idea. If an idea isn't popular at first, no biggie. Maybe you will sell enough, (thanks to the medium being cheaper and the system being popular) just to make enough profit to survive. I think it has to do with brand recognition and timing. MS has made a great attempt to enter the mindshare of gamers for its first attempt. (they got a much better online strategy than sony and nintendo have pretty much been anti-oline gaming in the past due to thier belief that there isn't enough profit in the idea to interest them) And people were very skeptical that MS wouid screw up. The next attempt may be a bigger threat to sony then many people think. Don't count them out just because they failed to catch up with sony yet. The fact that every Xbox version of a game I buy is one less version of a game bought for sony's platform must count for something. Yeah I know that. But it is ever moreso apparent now than then. Because as costs to make games gets higher, we are seeing the same developers and the same franchises in the top ten over and over again. Big name titles draw lots of the attention away from equally-good-but-less-known software that struggles to compete. If a good third party does to nintendo what nintendo did to others in the past, this could be the thing that drives the hardcore gamer away from nintendo. And that's lots of money now as gaming is more mainstream and hype-driven than in the past. It is no wonder why a fan of konami who wants to play metal gear 34 would first choose a PS platform as his console of priority so he can have the goodness earlier. Personally I'm scared of this happening, because I feel it is better to spread support out. Once a system does too well, and a successful software developer has less incentive to be original or try to bring freshness to thier franchises and rushes the games to cash in early, (eg releasing a game by the holiday period instead of tweaking it to perfection) it can only mean bad things. The masses might not give a poo (EA games anyone?) but hardcore or jaded people do, because once they get bored they soon leave gaming as a hobby. Before nintendo was comfortable ignoring third parties. Nintendo can't afford to be arrogant like they were. They need third party content as much as thier own in-house developers to make thier system attractive to the hardcore gamer. Companies that don't listen or want feedback, poo me to tears. It's why I don't want another monopoly becuase it is a fact that without competition fro msony we'd all still be stuck in a less technologically advanced genreation of hardware. And it's why the n64 did not do well: they did not have a system that could allow developers the freedom to put as much content into the game through a better medium. Also: Technology and specs IS important. I want my worlds to have the detailed textures, I want my world to push more polygons (the ps1 is superior in this to the n64) so that the 3d objects look more realistic, and I want my system to have the best chances of getting games ported to it from the arcade. (if you are a fans of 2d fighting games, you wouldn't get the same treatment on n64. You needed either a saturn or ps1) Now at the end of the day we can all say "gameplay is all that matters dude..." but it's when your system offers that and the best specs that you have reached contentment. I'm so glad that sony is finally entering into the handhld market because I'm sick of the price of carts for handhelds. GBA even when it was first released is an underpowered system. And nintendo have had the market all to themselves meaning increased prices, less healthy industry overall, and less happy handheld gamers. I love nintendo for the games they make, and am a fan of thier software, but they have been a block in the advancement of technology due to having had it too good for too long. I'm happy that they've been profitable for so long but as a gamer I know it can be better. Ok but it doesn't change my point about how it was a big blow to them due to crappy treatment. I'm just glad we moved away from carts just as I'm glad we are moving away from them now with the handheld gaming systems due to some competition. It was a good kick up the ass to Nintendo to lift thier game. Which is why it is important that MS secure third parties that mean something and why they may be a threat to sony in the future. Whereas Nintendo are more comfortable doing thier own thing rather than competing directly. (n64's library vs ps1's library) There was a huge rpg gap in the xbox library before morrowind. The main gist of what I was saying is that without a broad range of games (from talented developers) you lessen chances of increasing your userbase quickly. As the masses have chosen sony, you've got to compete in terms of sheer number and variety of titles to dominate. That can't be achieved unless you care who you are catering to. Nintendo don't care as much for the adult market as sony and MS. Adults are the bulk of the people who buy the most games. Agreed. But Sony established themselves from PS1 success singlehandedly thanks to good timing, compatibility with arcade hardware, good prtnerships (namco), good third party support, a focus on 3d. These factors lead to the doanfall of saturn (specialised in 2d) and n64 (cart based gaming) and they had no competition so it was easy for them to be successful with ps2. With MS this next go is ther chance to hopefully bite into pie early and not give sony so much of a lead. By forcing people to choose the system by securing the best companies and franchises, sony's domination can finally be challenged. In stead of just blindly choosing the system that already has the most marketshare, people will have to think more about which system is worth owning based on content, not because other system are simply dead. (like n64 and saturn) Maybe they are right. But those kinds of people probably haven't had a chance to try them to confirm. I would say that overall, if you've played most of the top games and still want something more (All systems have great games on them) you are better off having experienced what those other games have to offer form third parties if you are just itching for something new. (don't just play games that are in the top ten, or get high ratings from reviewers) Everyone has different taste but the more third parties you attract, the more chance of seeing something original, new and interesting. I remember a little known sim on ps1 called carnage heart. It is the kind of thing you wouldn't say stands out amoungst all the best stuff but it was interesting game nonetheless. Then there are the 'dying niche' type games that are garuanteed to not get the highest scores or the biggest hype due to not using the latest fx. Games like Castlevania SOTN on ps1, or just a port of a simple arcade game that many mainstream reviewers couldn't care much about like raiden. Just because they are not the best, doesn't mean they weren't worth experiencing. I love the ability to have lots of choice in a library. But nintendo failed to do that in the n64 period which is how people who play games measure "success". A system is successful when there are a superior library of good third party (and first party) titles to choose from. This is the basis for why there are console rivalries and people needing to buy more than one console if thier favourite games or company defects or doesn't show much support for a system they buy. You don't dominatethe market by pissing fans off or limiting thier choices. I think GC is nintendo's first step into redeeming themselves. I like the system much more then the ps2. Maybe but not as much as the other two. Again to dominate means superior userbase, which gets developer support, which leads to more game sales and thus more profits, and expansion. More games are then rleased taking more shelf space, leading to retailers devoting more space to the 'winning' system. Same here. You're happier when you research the games and reflect on your own tastes. Not all games are designed t be enjoyed by everyone. And there is only so much time in the day after all, so by at least knowing something about each game you have at least saved yourself some time and effort by avoiding the crap. I keep the classics based on a gameplay consideration, sell the stuff I don't want and at least get the market value out of those ones that I've played so I can use that money to pay for other game I might want to keep. Not all games are even worth keeping. The guy who sells his system after owning and playing the AAA stuff and being done with it, isn't an example of somebody who hates nintendo or anything, just that at the time, it would have been a wise choice based on the idea that as console hardware prices go down over time due to retail price cuts, he is getting back closer to the value he paid for the system than if he kept the system and did not do anything with it for ages. (during this time he may have just wanted to use the money to buy something else he wanted, which is fair enough) As for the title of "best games" that is all in people's heads. Everytime a poll of the best games is done in a gameforum, there are list of different titles no one can ever agree on what is best. Just like those lifestyle mags that choose the most beautiful man and women based on popularity. My view is there is no best game because game developers leap frog each other in quality over time. What you thought was great 5 years ago becomes standard (and almost unplayable) for average developers to achieve later as the bar for quality is raised, and the demands from fans are heightened exponentially to reflect the times they are living in. It is true you can go back to old games to play them out of nostalgia but I prefer playing enhanced versions of them if I can, barring those games that are truly timeless. (for eg I used to love super metroid but it isn't the tpe of game you play over and over again non-stop especially if you were a perfectionist like I was when playing it for the first time and are now sick to death of it) One of the things that worries me is this: as developers get fatter, costs to make worthwhile games increase, we might reach a point where we see little improvement over what has gone before. There may be a chance that a good talented developer loses its magic. (it can happen to all software developers) Sure the hardware and production values of games has risen, but that fuzzy feeling you get when you experience a new game is gone as originality fades and people become more jaded. I'm not trying to point out that we've already lived through a game "golden age" or anything, just that as more and more developers are bought and owned by bigger companies, some of that individual touch is missing and things have a more mass-produced, manufactured feel to it. (even miyamoto's stuff) That's one thing I think nintendo are good for in the industry. I believe they genuinely want to branch out into something new not just to save themselves but because it is needed to maintain that "fuzzy" feeling of excitment that I mentioned earlier when you play a game that is way before its time, is both addictive and balanced/well-thought-out, and you can't stop.

Agreed! I too often hear about how this and that looks silly because it won't fit in with my Home theatre set up and other sophisticated-looking eqiupment. It's like they are embarassed that if thier friends are over they will laugh at them for owning a game system that doesn't look cool and high tech because of this pressure to justify the price they paid. If a console looks anything like a toy (take GC for example) they fear it will harm thier image they have of themselves. It's stupid but true. (like when people compare thier mobile phones with everyone else and feel pressured to show off. The exterior says "this is who I am") You may have to lose money to start making it. Once you dominate the market, that's when you can celebrate. I don't thnk MS are trying necessarily to satisfy the gamers so much as prevent other companies (sony) from cashing too much in on the "set top box entertainment" area where everything (movies, online gaming, music etc) converge and people get used to the idea of accessing everything through a home console system. In short the games console was going to be this vehicle to start making profit in all these other areas while at the same time, giving the existing gamers what they wanted to begin the uptake of the system as a dedicated game console (and not the dirty "mulitmedia" thing which does lots of things but doesn't excel at what areas the "gamer-only" people want) to appease the early-adopting crowd. After they got these devoted early-adopting people to buy thier system to get them used to trustig the MS brand seriously, hopefully after a time, they could then expand from not just gaming, but other things. (music etc generally being the mainstream gateway to all kind of broadband entertainment accessed from the living room) The ps2 was a good alternative to a dedicated dvd player for a lot of people who were slow to get into dvds in japan, so I can imagine that a game system with extra features was a big deal when sony first did it because there genuinly was an interest here. (ie peope back then were not expecting this dual ability of game consoles as standard, like they do now so because the console could double as a dvd movie-playing system it helped sales and was good timing on sony's part) Timing has a lot to do with it which is why we are seeing this generation sort of die out, for fear that if you don't have something around the corner you might let the competition get too much control. I believe the DC totally was destroyed in the US once people knew and were anticpating the next Playstation and because of sony's successful hype compaign, this would have detered lots of gamers from getting DCs. (even though people knew very little about the next PS, it was still exciting to imagine about what this could do before being able to get one) On the subject of nintendo dying out: I genuinely think that sony is a big threat here because nintendo fail to understand that gamers have grown up and are now adults. (they got it right with GBA SP exterior design which looked nice) This is why all this pressure to make your system and the content on it "mature", because as graphics, audio, AI, physics technology/engines gets better and better and more sophisticated, people demand that things have more and more realism to match the system's power rather than going to waste. Whereas sony and MS are aiming to better thier game realism (remember all that hype early in sony's PS2 life about how games would start to look just like movies and be almost like virtual reality where the character's behaviour would be like that of real humans with expression and emotions to match? ) Nintendo are happy to go at it all alone, forgetting that third parties are most drawn to a system with the highest userbase (the one the mainstream will recognise) so that they can make the most money and appeal to the largest audience out there to make as much money in as short a space possible. Also the more 'niche' genres your system caters to, and the wider the variety of the audience you are aiming for, the better for all. (both third parties wo want to streamline thier profits, and gamers who have more choices in the game library when they see everything release for thier system) I believe nintendo if anything are not in the same threat to sony the same way MS are because of this tradition of nintendo's to go it alone. ie Big name, inhouse-made, first party titles being the main draw to thier system more than third party stuff. In the earlier console wars it was always about the first party titles that determined whose console was going to kick more ass because back then third parties did not make up the bulk of AAA+ quality games. But now things have changed and the manufacturer's of these consoles need to realise that half the battle is going to be about teaming up with the right talent and drawing the crowds who are interested in the properties those third party companies have made in the past. (rewind back to the days when Squaresoft announced they would not be making final fantasy 7 on n64 because the cart limits were too crappy and expensive for them to realise thier cg-graphics-infested wet dreams. The loss of support by a big name company like that was a big blow to nintendo who needed an rpg making company to fill the gap that sony was going to benefit from. So you see it's all about content for todays systems and established franschises from the third parties. Not just in house made software. Otherwise sony would not have bothered with all this BS "first year exclusivity" crap to prevent the competition from benefitting too much from highly anticipated games by fans of the franchises. Often the most important thing that determines which system you will be getting is "what games are going to be available for it? And which companies are supporting it" This is no different to the idea of somebody choosing what OS they will install based on what software is available for that OS. (of course now we have emulation and all. But I'm reffering to games, and which OS has the lion's share of the market and overall game support.) If you are a hardcore gamer, often times you will not care too much what inhouse software your system will have because you buy lots of games often and this is where the third parties come in: While nintendo are spreading thier sequels years and years apart to perfect thier games, third parties are all to eager to keep people busy playing thier games in-between the big name titles like the marios and zeldas and metroids etc If you buy lots of games a week, a month, a year, you tend to care more about a system which has a good sheer qaunitity of good titles. The key to why sony's success in the playstation 1 days. (taking advantage of overall superior third party support) This is why I tell people, if you ever buy a nintendo system also be prepared to be tempted to get another system to supplment the deficiencies in the nintendo's game library. As a stand alone game platform nintendo sometimes neglect a certain "genre" and leave people thirsting in the desert. (friends of mine have often bought a nintendo system at launch, sold it when they no longer played the system to get back the market value, then amazingly when a new sequel or big name title comes out, they bought the system again just to play the new games that are finally out for that system. Its as if the nintendo platform is a disposable item )

Thanks kin. I actually sucessfully visited and bookmarked it earlier, went back to it later, but at the time of returning to it, it wasn't working for me. But now it is. *shrugs shoulders* Good luck with this legioss. It will probably be more sturdy than a toynami.

From what I've heard from some sources explaining this on the internet, she has a side business selling VR porn. If you want to see the missing pics censored from the first us release you can get it here. *looks at pics* Warning: not for viewing with the family No wonder it was cut..they need to appeal to the broadest market and not put the comic in the adult only range. There's something about that, that reminds me of battlestar galactica and how that scientist keeps virtually doing that chic in the red dress and everyone thinks he's creepy.

I'm not sure about you guys but I'm not even sure I want a new hardware leap. I would be happy if we stayed on the current generation of consoles a bit longer. Once software developers start releasing games that take total advantage of the hardware and max it out to its abilities that when I start getting excited. There has to be a launch title (or a title early in its first generation) of AAA quality like what happened with dreamcast's launch - too bad sega couldn't stay alive long enough thanks to the hype of the coming ps2 launch *sigh* Nintendo are great for games that range in the general audience as a casual gamer's system. (ie you don't buy 10 game a month ) The titles they make themselves are great but you end up waiting between each game for something new to play if you are a frequent gamer. What often happens is you end up buying a nintendo system as well as another system rather than relying on nintendo alone for a constant stream of good third party software. (doesn't help that sony try to get the exclusive 1-year license on things before others, and then turn the third parties against the competition. This is why I would hate for one comapny to gain too much power, or we will see a monopoly instead of a healthy competition between rivals with consumers gaining from all the choice)