Messages

[Spak-Spang]

1

General Gaming / RE:This really pissed me off

« on: November 01, 2007, 04:35:29 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
That is not a fair comparison.  Every Government and Country creates requirements for its citizens to be able to perform certain things.  

Driving a Car requires you to have 1) A driving License so that you prove you can drive and 2) Insurance so that if/when you hit another car or get hit by another car you can be protected and get your damages back.  It is designed to be free market to give you the cheapest insurance and the best options.

Also to carry a fire arm in many states you must get a conceal and carry permit.  It helps make sure that the people with legal guns know how to use them properly.  

But even with the forced purchases you bring up.  You can still decide not to own a car or drive.  You can decide not to own a gun.  

But getting back to an apples to apples comparison the Government is not going to force you to buy a luxury item that is basically for entertainment.  That is just crazy.

Besides that even if that did happen, how does that justify theft of DVDs or Video Games anyway?

It's your choice what you consider to be a fair comparison. I think it's more than justified simply because I see them both as luxury items. You don't NEED car insurance to live just like you don't NEED entertainment. You don't need a car either but at least the government hasn't left it up to private corporations to determine how people are given a license to drive. The system would completely explode were that to happen.

Driving a car requires you to have a license to ensure that you know how to drive. Insurance is a "what if" precaution. I may drive for 5 minutes and get killed. Or I may drive for 50 years and never even scratch my bumper. Do I really need car insurance? Either way, if they're going to require you to buy it, it's no longer part of a free market. The government has basically subsidized the product which ensures that it will never disappear because you are forced to buy it. And leaving car insurance to a so called "free market" once the government has made it mandatory is a HORRIBLE idea. Just look at what has happened to health insurance if you need any further proof. Prices are sky rocketing, corporations are cutting benefits left and right as well as terminating coverage for high risk clients while profits continue to sore to new heights. That's just bad business. Requiring people to purchase it would make the problem 10 times worse.

As I said though, piracy is what you make of it. Most people see it as greedy individuals who are simply unwilling to spend a few bucks on something that's considered luxury. I don't necessarily see it that way. I see it as consumers fighting against a system that is now set up to fight them at every turn. You no longer "own" almost anything that you buy. You're purchasing a license, which can be revoked at any time and for any reason. Corporations have gone out of their way to be as antagonistic as possible to their customers. Trampling over explicit rights, getting patent and copyright laws changed whenever they see fit, and now having the government actually force consumers to buy certain products. Isn't that something akin to a government sanctioned monopoly? Where does it end? When does it end?

The point is, you can't look at piracy in a vacuum. It's a symptom of a much greater problem. Consumers feel that they are losing control over their market, and they are.

[Strell]

2

General Gaming / RE:This really pissed me off

« on: October 31, 2007, 02:12:07 PM »

Originally posted by: Strell

Quote
It's always hard for me to read text, because I can see several meanings in the words.  Thus, I cannot tell if you are saying this as a cold fact, or as a justification.

Just fact, I wasn't justifying.

Quote
First off, at no point should it be phrased as an adversarial relationship.

Whether or not it is people still think that it is, which right there says that there is something wrong with the relationship. If it were really still the same as it's always been why is there so much anger and distrust from consumers toward corporations today?

As for DRM, that's simply idiotic to the extreme. It's not protecting these company's rights, it's limiting consumer's. The law says you have the right to make copies, but DRM stops you from doing that. Then the companies go out and get laws passed making it illegal to circumvent copy protection which makes your legal right to make copies void without them having to actually get that right revoked. Now who just did what to who? Will the DRM stop the pirates? No. Is is stomping all over everyone elses rights? Yes. Is piracy being used mostly as a smoke screen in order to milk consumes for more money? Hmm.....

Quote
If you want to be totally Draconian about it, you don't really have that many rights.  You have the right to buy it and use it in the manner it's meant to be used in.  You have the right to get it replaced if it breaks prematurely.  You technically have the right to back it up in case of unforeseen disasters.  But you don't suddenly have the right to do absolutely anything you want with it JUST BECAUSE you own it, because then that's essentially asking for complete and total carte blanche.

First off, where did this "technically" part come from. You DO have the right to make copes. It's the entertainment companies that have trained you to believe that you really don't have that right. Beyond that, alright. Let's be draconian. You really have no rights when it comes to entertainment. But do you know what entertainment is? It's an idea. You know what else are ideas? Art. Science. Technology. History. Who controls them? Who dictates our rights to them? All of them are simply ideas. These companies want to own ALL the ideas. They want to control everything. It's not just entertainment that is being restricted, it's everything. But you only really see people get upset over entertainment because entertainment is used to placate the masses.

Quote
Throwing out hypothetical situations that don't have ANY CHANCE AT ALL of ever happening doesn't make your arguments any stronger.  It actually makes them weaker, because you have to resort to throwing out completely nonsense that preys on the feeble imaginations of people around you.

Also, I can do the same thing.  What if every entertainment company stopped distributing their merchandise in any retailer channels, and instead forced you to have to be registered with them, and further forced you to actually physically travel to a place of their choosing, where you had to present them a sort of ID card that THEY only had the power to authorize, and only THEN could you buy their product?  And what if we take it a step further and say that they could look at your records, and actually refuse to sell it to you, because they found out you used an emulator back in the day?

I can take this "what if" a lot further, by the way.

Hypothetical??? Who was being hypothetical? The government has already gotten into the business of forcing people to purchase products that they don't need. Right now, if I want to drive a car, I HAVE to have car insurance. Do I really need it? Nope. Is there a socialistic option that I can choose from since the government has decided to require it? No. I am being FORCED to buy a FREE MARKET product. Sound hypothetical any more? And right now they're trying to pass a law that would REQUIRE everyone to buy health insurance. Simply being ALIVE and not having health insurance would be illegal. Existing and NOT buying a FREE MARKET product, which in a free market you're supposed to have the choice of buying or not buying any given product hence the term "free", would make me a criminal whether I can afford it or not.

To be quite honest, I don't give a damn about "entertainment piracy" when the rest of the world is so quite clearly screwed up far worse than the idea of a couple of kids sharing a copy of the new Britney Spears CD online. Besides, I don't think anyone should have to spend money on that kind of tripe. To be honest, they shouldn't be wasting bandwidth on it either. SEND THEM PUNKS TO JAIL!

3

General Gaming / RE: This really pissed me off

« on: October 30, 2007, 05:46:14 PM »

Piracy is what you make of it. Certain people will always pirate simply because they can. It has nothing to do with cost. There will always be some level of piracy.

However... that doesn't make the companies being stolen from completely the victim. These same companies are also constantly in the action of trying to limit your rights as consumers. Of trying to find new ways to force you to buy what they want you to buy how they want you to buy it. And they'll do it any way they can. They don't care what's right or what's fair. They only care about how they're going to be able to squeeze you for a few extra cents the next time. And then the next, and the next, and the next.

Just because something is codified in law that doesn't make it right.

If tomorrow the government passed a law stating that everyone had to purchase a copy of such-and-such DVD for whatever cost the company wanted to charge, would everyone here agree with it and just do as they're told simply because it's a "law"?

[BigJim]

4

General Gaming / RE:Microsoft showing their true colors once again.

« on: October 24, 2007, 12:37:53 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
It's definitely early, and the best estimates are that the combined HD media sales account for only around 5%. It's still so early that we can say "both" or "neither" are winning. Heh. HD-DVD isn't out yet, though it's slanting in BRD's favor in a tiny "66% of 5%" kind of way, which in the grand scheme of things means little. I read about a $400 universal player coming out soon, which seems like a good choice.

This is going to drag out a while. It's funny to see how loud the debate is on the internet, considering their virtual irrelevance on the whole.

I think it'so going to be pretty easy to pick which one is going to win out eventually, if the market ever decides to support either of them fully. The one that reaches a mass market friendly price point for a PC burner will win plain and simple. That doesn't bode well for Blu-Ray considering Sony's iron fisted determination to completely own and control the format. Even if dual players become the norm rather than the exception, the format that's easiest to pirate will win. I've already heard about HDDVD PC burners. I haven't heard word one in regards to Blu-Ray.

[Kairon]

5

Nintendo Gaming / RE:Looking at Wii Third Party Support - Post TGS - Big-Name-Small-Name Developers - WiiWare

« on: October 11, 2007, 08:45:15 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
That may be true denjet, but it's still a psychological factor in discouraging developers to make games for Nintendo. Remember, there are more Dave Perry's out there in the industry than there are NWR forumers.

The thing is, it's a factor that's been around since the NES era and one which developers have been more than adequately aware of since then. But now it's an issue? And it's an issue that cannot be resolved short of Nintendo ceasing to make games all together. We all know that's never going to happen. Developers are either going to have to get over their fears and insecurities, or greed and pride as the case most likely is, and start making games for Wii or they're going to find themselves further and further away from solvency as PS3 and 360 development costs continue to skyrocket.

Nintendo is going to continue moving forward and forward thinking developers will move with them. The dinosaurs, like the unnamed developer who is referenced in this article, are going to go extinct.

6

Nintendo Gaming / RE: Looking at Wii Third Party Support - Post TGS - Big-Name-Small-Name Developers - WiiWare

« on: October 11, 2007, 08:20:13 PM »

More or less this is basically just some developer saying that they're afraid that they won't be able to compete with Nintendo's own software. Wouldn't that be an issue with them and not Nintendo?

The whole argument is beyond suspect. If what is said here were to actually be taken at face value then there shouldn't be any developers today beyond Nintendo. They're the ones who started the new video games industry with the NES. How could anyone have possibly been able to compete with them on their own system against their own blockbuster software? Obviously they all went bankrupt. *rolls eyes* Thing is, the NES era was probably the most profitable era for developers ever.

It's just smoke and mirrors from close minded developers that are terrified that they'll fall between the cracks if they have to stand up to actually competent software... or that they'll actually have to spend money *GASP!* in order to become competent themselves.

[Brandogg]

7

General Gaming / RE:Microsoft and Bungie Part Ways

« on: October 06, 2007, 07:33:48 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Brandogg
You guys are reading this wrong, at least I think

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2007/oct07/10-05BungieEvolvesPR.mspx

Microsoft will retain an equity interest in Bungie, at the same time continuing its long-standing publishing agreement between Microsoft Game Studios and Bungie for the Microsoft-owned “Halo” intellectual property as well as other future properties developed by Bungie.


I'm pretty sure this just means Microsoft might let Bungie make games on other systems, but they'll be published under Microsoft Games Studios, just like RARE's GBA and DS games are. I don't think this is a split by any means, if anything, it's just going to make Microsoft more money. Notice the part about "other future properties developed by Bungie" part.

Does no one else find it strange that MS basically let go of a company that they already owned? This is MS here people. They're not interested in making money. They're interested in owning the world. This move would be akin to Nintendo releasing EAD as it's own company, although still maintaining a publishing agreement with them. How quickly would the news stories appear about "Nintendo Doomed!" or "EAD Goes Multi-Platform!"? Yet Bungie makes the same move and people assume that nothing is going to change just because MS says so? Uh... no.

To put it bluntly, Bungie is breaking away. Hell, MS is probably slamming them with anything and everything they can find just to keep them in the position they have them in now. We'll have to see just how long this "publishing agreement" holds out.

[MLS_man_64]

8

General Gaming / RE:Sony getting hit Hard lately (With the Prize Wheel of Harddrive Size)

« on: September 29, 2007, 07:05:54 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: MLS_man_64
Nintendo #1 in hardware and #3 in software...

Sony #2 in hardware and #1 in software...

Microsoft #3 in hardware and #2 in software...


Am I getting this right?  And why would an analyst make this prediction the week that Halo launches?  To embarrass himself?


Link

Well if an analyst says it it must be... Wait. Aren't these some of the same analysts who were, less than a year ago, foretelling the complete and utter failure of the Wii followed by Nintendo's inevitable shift into a 3rd party developer?

Analyst seems to be just another word for "don't believe a damn word I say unless it's already obscenely obvious that it's correct".

9

Nintendo Gaming / RE: Current WWII Shooters Are Unethical

« on: September 14, 2007, 09:19:41 AM »

The only real situation that I can take a stand against is causing physical pain to another person without their consent. Outside of that everything else is so ambiguous that you can't really stand on any of it. Psychological. Emotional. It's all really a person by person basis.

WWII shooters? I don't like them myself. I don't like anything that glamorizes violence... But I own a number of Resident Evil games and have enjoyed them. So do I believe that fantasy violence is more acceptable? I find GTA to be despicable beyond comprehension however. Much like everyone else I'm filled with conflicting ideals.

I think the biggest issue that I have with shooting games in general is that they're all the same. There is so much more than can be done with them. Where are the games where you're the general and you have to make real sacrifices? Where you have to knowingly send your troops, who you've grown to care for and look after, into a situation where you know none of them will return and that there's little to no hope of actual success? Where are the games where you're a field medic who has to care for your injured companions while at the same time trying your hardest not to get killed yourself? Will you help the injured enemy as well, or will you let him die? Worse... will you actively kill him? Where are the games where you play as the enemy? Where you live as they do? Where you learn to see through their eyes and come to understand that just like you, they only think they're doing what they think is right? Where are the games that take place after the war? Where you have to learn how to survive and rebuild after success and even failure? Just because a war is declared over that's not necessarily all she wrote. How will the winners treat the losers? Was there even a winner or was the devastation so great that neither side could claim victory? Or even better, how did this war begin in the first place? Who was the real aggressor? Who stepped up when they needed to and who hid behind rhetoric or politics so they wouldn't have to get involved? Only one aspect of these situations ever seems to be explored: The super heroic soldier who single handedly saves the day with little more than his gun and his wits. It's so incredibly fake. Video games now a days are little more than the glorified superhero comic books of the 1950's.

Of course with time and age that will change. But for now the medium is still in its infancy.

10

TalkBack / RE: Manhunt 2 Confirmed For US Release

« on: August 24, 2007, 06:40:09 AM »

I find it rather interesting that the title is now slated for release on Halloween of all days.

Massive publicity stunt anyone?

11

Nintendo Gaming / RE: Cruis'n (aka: more ugly racing game screenshots)

« on: August 23, 2007, 06:58:24 PM »

Wow... Does Sega have people on loan to Midway?

Either way it must have taken a LOT of work to make a game that ugly.

[Chozo Ghost]

12

General Gaming / RE:Sega insults it's mascot, talks about focus on western games

« on: August 22, 2007, 02:53:44 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Chozo Ghost
Sadly, Nintendo and Sega chose to take their mascots in the more cutesy-poo direction. But Mario could have been some towering hulk with rippling muscles and beard stubble and sweat. They just chose to go the cartoonish route, and Sega did this as well.

Sadly nothing. Mario is Mario and has always been Mario. All the way back to Donkey Kong he has always been himself. He lives in a very whimsical world filled with fantasy and adventure. He was never about maturity or bravado. If you need proof of that look at other NES games from back in the day that were. Sure, sometimes he looks a little more cute than he should... sometimes. But on the whole he's still himself. How many games from the 8bit/16bit eras have been revised for this new "mature" market only to suck mostly because marketing thought it would be cool to give Sonic a gun? Excuse me, Shadow. Really big distinction there.

Besides, since when has Nintendo ever been one to follow trends? Trends get you killed. One minute you're on top of the world and the next you're just a hack. I wonder why Sega can't manage to figure that out.

13

Nintendo Gaming / RE: NiGHTS Revolution!

« on: August 20, 2007, 10:17:24 AM »

Hey... Where'd the jaggies go? If the Wii wants to be the next PS2 it needs jaggies!

Seriously though, those new screens are head and shoulders above everything else they've shown so far. It looks like a completely different game now, one with good graphics.

What I don't understand is why they're having trouble with the graphics at all. It's essentially an on-rails flying/adventure game. It should be able to easily keep paces with the best looking games on Wii if Sega's even half trying. Until these new screens came out the game was looking rather crap in that regard when it never should have in the first place.

14

Nintendo Gaming / RE: Dragon Quest IV Screenshots

« on: August 20, 2007, 09:58:23 AM »

The environments are in 3D, or at least the buildings are, but it's played from the traditional overhead 2D perspective. I just wonder if you're going to actually be able to manipulate the camera perspective as you can obviously see is going on in some of the screens.

15

General Gaming / RE:What's with EA and fighting games?

« on: August 20, 2007, 09:52:53 AM »

Umm... All you really needed to say was:

Quote
This weekend I rented "Def Jam: Icon"  for my 360 and came to the realization that EA seems to have trouble developing...

and the rest is just filling in the blank with, well, EVERYTHING.

I mean, come on. EA sucks threads are a dime a dozen.

16

General Gaming / RE: IN2Games reveals RealPlay Games (these guys sure are original)

« on: August 20, 2007, 07:18:17 AM »

Wow... they're actually releasing this abortion of an idea? And at $29.99 a pop for the game AND the controller? I wonder how badly this is going to suck.

Anyone taking bets on when they're going to release this for the Wii as a compilation of mini games in a pointless effort to recoup all the cash they're going to loose on it?

[UERD]

17

General Gaming / RE:2d vs 3d

« on: August 14, 2007, 02:31:39 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: UERD
Ultimately, realistic 3D graphics and surround sound shouldn't exist just to make the game bigger than its competitors. They should exist because they are the best means through which the game director can express his vision, immerse his audience, and touch their emotions- better than two-dimensional realms, better than stylized graphics.

This is exactly why I loved Wind Waker so much. It wasn't cell shaded just because they could do it. It was cell shaded because that look best conveyed what they were trying to do with the game. They were trying to recapture the more childlike nature of the Zelda games. And it did that in spades. I liked it far more than Twilight Princess, which although technically incredibly I've still yet to finish and I doubt I ever will. It was basically Ocarina of Time on steroids and I didn't really like that game much either. Don't get me wrong, they're both incredible adventure games, head and shoulders above everything else out there. They just never felt like Zelda to me.

[ryancoke]

18

General Gaming / RE:2d vs 3d

« on: August 14, 2007, 06:48:15 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: ryancoke
I think 2d style games are great on the DS and GBA (castlevania, Metroid, etc.).  I don't think they are as viable as full priced console games anymore. Great for the VC, PSN store and XBLA as value priced software though.  Castlevania: Symphony of the Night for like $10 is a great buy but I don't see many peeps buying it for $60us

The thing is, a lot of old school 2D games have WAY more content, playtime and even replayability than their 3D brethren. It's sad that so many people seem to think like you do. Too many people would rather have 3D games no matter how short, easy, or shallow they may be.

This situation reminds me a lot of like how CGI films are taking over for animation. The only CGI film that I've seen so far that's even halfway passable would be Shrek and even that felt very sterile to me. The rest of the lot is just garbage. But yet people eat it up and studios continue to make them no matter how bad they are. And as for animation? Outside of anime it seems to be all but dead. Still, CGI is not the end all be all. Just by being it does not make a film better. In fact I think it's murdered the quality of animation because people are too focused on how it looks to actually realize that they're making a bad movie to begin with. The same thing has happened with 3D games.

The point is, people simply haven't realized that both 3D and CGI are abstraction tools. They're there to allow you to look at and build situations from a different perspective and yet most are using them simply to mimic reality. Bad form. Until people get over their gaga with the technology nothing is going to change. And the worst part of it all is that viable techniques and technologies are getting trampled in their wake for no good reason.

19

Nintendo Gaming / RE: Ever say to yourself "I wish my DS had more Hello Kitty"?

« on: August 11, 2007, 01:28:47 PM »

SASSY-RIO!

*wink*

*barf*

I am in the market for a new MySpace motif though...

[Mashiro]

20

General Gaming / Re: Resident Evil 5 is the greatest thing ever.

« on: August 07, 2007, 08:37:01 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Mashiro
The vast difference between GC to PS2 games and Xbox 360/PS3 to Wii games is the technological gap between the systems.

While GC was more powerful than PS2, it didn't "blow it out of the water" when comparing system specs. This gen, there is a considerably larger gap between Wii and PS3/Xbox 360.

This isn't to say the Wii can't make beautiful looking games, it's just to say that it COULD be a far more difficult time downsizing the game to run on Wii.

I'm not saying it will be but it could be, and that could be one of the factors that prevents it from being ported.

I remember last gen when there were all these PC games being ported to the XBox and everyone saying that the games wouldn't be possible on the GC because it wasn't powerful enough. The truth of the matter was that the only reason the XBox saw those PC ports in the first place was because it was basically a self contained PC. But the whole power argument stuck with me. I was trying to figure out exactly what they were talking about since the GC seemed plenty powerful enough to me.

Flash forward a bit and Doom 3 is announced. People wet themselves over the games graphics. I said that if the XBox was capable of it, then the GC was to. Everyone jumped down my throat calling me dumb and stupid and blind. I asked why. The reason? Because the GC didn't support all the effects that the XBox did. So the game would be missing a few graphical effects. So what? The XBox didn't support all the effects the PC version of the game had. Did that mean the game should have never been ported to the XBox? I mean, if only perfect ports will do then none of those PC games should have shown up on the XBox. Besides that, almost no one owned a PC powerful enough to run Doom 3 at full speed with all effects on when it came out anyway. If you can't run the game at full speed with all effects on you're just playing a watered down version. You're not getting the full effect. You shouldn't be allowed to play it. Or at least that's what everyone seemed to be telling me.

This is why I don't like the power argument. The Wii is more than capable of running RE5, with some effects turned off and the assets scaled down to standard def. There are probably a number of caveats between the 360 and PS3 versions of the game as it is. Effects that one system supports but the other doesn't. Believe it or not, neither version is going to be an exact replica of the other. So again, why is it okay for other systems to receive ports when it seems that unless Nintendo's hardware is capable of absolutely perfect emulation it's simply not possible?

And I highly doubt that porting the game to Wii would be difficult at all. RE5 is obviously built off of the RE4 engine, which was specifically designed for the GC. Yet Capcom still managed to get that same engine running on the vastly inferior PS2. A superset of the engine should more than easily run on Wii. The only real excuse would be having to convert all the hi def assets into standard def but that's not really all that hard either, now is it. As it is, most developers start with assets that are far too powerful for the system to run and then whittle them down until it can.

Why couldn't that be done for Wii?

[Mashiro]

21

General Gaming / Re: Resident Evil 5 is the greatest thing ever.

« on: August 05, 2007, 06:07:09 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Mashiro

Quote
Originally posted by: Gamebasher
It will come out on Wii. RE4 did, and CAPCOM should see that it is a success with the gamers. So why not release the sequel too?

Well it's easier to port a game like RE4 to Wii than it would be to downscale and rework a game like RE5 to run on Wii.

The issue is, does Capcom want to spend the time and money doing such a thing?

Only time will tell.

They did it to get RE4 on the PS2. If Wii continues to sell like it has I don't see why they wouldn't want to put the effort in for what will essentially be free money.

22

NWR Feedback / RE: Forbidden words message

« on: August 04, 2007, 06:56:05 AM »

Umm... I think someone is going overboard with the forbidden word filter. I got a warning for the word k i d d y. Would someone like to explain to me why that's a forbidden word?

23

General Gaming / RE: Shenmue 3 to be on 360: Multi-platform Release Possible

« on: August 04, 2007, 06:44:27 AM »

That list is so much crap. Samba De Amigo on PSP? Sonic RPG only on PS3/360? A Space Channel 5 spin-off for the Wii that's also coming to the DS and PSP while PS3/360 get the real sequal? And it seems that only games that have been officially annouced for Wii and DS are slated to actually come out on Wii and DS, minus the mostly kids fare. Almost everything that hasn't already been announced is slated for PS3, 360 and PSP. I thought Sega said that they were shifting resources to Nintendo platforms. This list says otherwise.

This is so much fanboy hope it's not even funny. They basically thew together a list of what they wanted to happen. Besides, I just cannot see Sega working on all those games at one time and having any of them turn out to be anything in the way of good when they haven't released anything of worth in years.

24

TalkBack / RE: Big Rooster's Tim Gerritsen Speaks Highly of Wii

« on: July 29, 2007, 06:59:32 AM »

None of you understand what I said? Or is it that I just didn't understand what Enner said...

Hmm...

Anyway, I assume he was saying that it wouldn't be good for the developer to drop their current game in order to work on a Wii title. LIES! ALL LIES! In fact, it would turn out to be incredibly beneficial to them. Sure they'd loose money in the short run but come on, Wii is the system to beat and it's going to make them a ton of money overall. Way more than the PS3 or 360. Quite possibly even combined. Besides, dumping support for one system in favor of another has never hurt developers before. I've seen it first hand over and over and over again. All those great N64 titles that never materialized. All those GameCube games canceled. Did any of that hurt any of the developers that did it? HELL NO!

Besides, the guy's an ass. He talks up the system but then says he hasn't seen anything to back up it's promise. Well then, where's his shining example of a game? If he thinks the system is capable of much greater things then where's his game to show that? He needs to put his support where his mouth is or else he's just another poser who may be taking a subtle jab at the Wii while trying to make it look like a compliment.

[Enner]

25

TalkBack / RE:Big Rooster's Tim Gerritsen Speaks Highly of Wii

« on: July 28, 2007, 07:18:16 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Enner

Quote
Originally posted by: denjet78
Big words from a company that's, as of right now, only working on a PS3/360 game. I'd be more willing to take anything these people say seriously if they were actually announcing games to back up their words.

And I don't just mean this guy, I mean everyone out there who's heaping the praise on Wii but still not supporting it as well as they should be.

Well, maybe they are in the middle of developement. It wouldn't be good to back out from what they were doing to jump ship.

...

You don't know the video games industry very well, do you.