There are perfectly good open, royalty-free media options such as mini DVDs that store 1.8 GB.

I will never understand why Sony went with this proprietary medium. They are denying me as a consumer my fair use right to duplicate the media that I buy with my money. They are also denying me the right to burn copies of any disc I want, so that I can evaluate the media beforehand.

In conclusion, I predict that this device will fail miserably. Superior competitors such as the Nokia N-Gage (which uses MultiMediaCards) will emerge victorious.

With the N-Gage, I can buy a MultiMediaCard off the shelf for pennies on the dollar. Then, using secret proprietary software, I can duplicate any game I want.

It's this flexibility that made me buy the PlayStation and PlayStation 2. Why would anyone spend $50 on a game that can be downloaded on IRC for free?!

Nintendo's marketting is really pissing me off. I own a GBSPA and I don't regret it, but their shameless attempts to make you buy extra crap for it is infuriating, because they cheat and make things that have no technical reason to require a Gamecube, or a Gameboy, have them.

I might have bought the Mario games, rehashes that they are, but I'm ticked off that to truly use everything on the cart, I have to shell out for a e-Reader. Why? No technical reason, just that Nintendo wants to sell you an e-Reader.

It backfired; now I'm considering getting a flash ROM for the GB and putting the Nintendo emulator on it instead. To hell with that crap.

So here's another game that sounds like it should be playable with just two Gameboys but requires a Gamecube (probably). I am not impressed here at all.

Not going to stop buying games for my GB but I find myself avoiding Nintendo's first-party games like the plague. I don't have a GameCube, I'm not going to get a GameCube, I don't want a GameCube. (I have a PS2 and if I get a second console it'll be an XBox... or considering the likely timing of that purchase, an XBox 2 if it's reverse-compatible at all.)

Do you have any idea how the GC Four Swords works? Everybody plays on the TV, but if one player ducks into a cave or house or something, that player switches to the GBA while the other 3 remain uninterrupted on the TV. Game Boys and a TV are required elements, so the game has more screen real estate to play with.

And as already noted, the eReader can add in totally new SMB levels. Totally new. Not unlocked or hidden, totally new levels that haven't even been created yet. (Of course, this assumes Nintendo will actually take advantage of this ability...)

I know it hurts you to spend money, but can you see how there are actual gameplay enhancements here?

God, your right! I bet Nintendo has a ploy with tv manufacterors to sell you tvs to play the games, food companies so you'll stay alive. All sorts of shit. You also have to buy another controller if you want more than one player playing. That's some fucked up shit.

Don't forget for some games, you have to finish it all the way to get secret stuff. God damn it, Nintendo. Keeping the good shit from sorry players.

My god you don't have to buy this shit you fucking moron.

CRY CRY WHINE i gotta buy some more shit becuase i'm a fucking idiot and don't know how to not buy it

We've just been emailed Nintendo's Gamecube line-up for 2005 by a top-secret Big N insider. And what a corker it is too. Hold onto your hats, Nintendo fans!

JANUARY

Mario Baseball -- Mario and his friends get ready for some serious baseball fun!

Mario Party 7 -- Mario and his friends get ready for some serious board game action!

FEBRUARY

Mario Basketball -- Mario and his friends get ready for some serious basketball fun!

Mario Party 8 -- Mario and his friends get ready for more serious board game action!

MARCH

Mario Soccer -- Mario and his friends get ready for some serious soccer fun!

Mario Party 9 -- Mario and his friends get ready for more serious board game action!

APRIL

Mario Wrestling -- Mario and his friends get ready for... oh wait this one got cancelled. Why not check out:

Mario Party 10 -- Mario and his friends get ready for more serious board game action!

Its funny that one of the biggest reasons for XBox's failure ( and most likely true ), is one of the biggest reason its my favorite console of this generation... Japanese RPG's.

To this day, I still dont understand the obsession with these games and how they manage to sell consoles. The most lauded console RPG in the last decade has to be FFVII, which I personally couldnt bring myself to finish. I played a handful of other J-RPG's on my PS2, and always came to the same conclussion, its always the same story/characters across different settings with random and mind numbingly boring combat throw into the mix.

Im sorry, maybe its my age coming into play here ( im 30 ), but the dialogue and especially romantic interests in theses games seem to be written to target a 12 year old. Plots from the games I played were well... um.... I suppose unique is a nice way to say it... non-sensical is probrably a more accurate way to put it. Then again, maybe its because I was raised playing mostly PC based RPGs so I have developed a different mindset and expectations then most console RPG gamers. Then again... I found dragon warrior fun on the Nes/SNES... but hey wait... I was what, 12 at the time? Makes sense.

Its funny that one of the biggest reasons for XBox's success( and most likely true ), is one of the biggest reason its my least favorite console of this generation... FPS's.

To this day, I still dont understand the obsession with these games and how they manage to sell consoles. The most lauded console FPS in the last decade has to be Halo, which I personally couldnt bring myself to finish. I played a handful of other FPS's on my PS2, and always came to the same conclussion, its always the same story/characters across different settings with random and mind numbingly boring combat throw into the mix.

Im sorry, maybe its my age coming into play here ( im 30 ), but the dialogue and especially violence in theses games seem to be written to target a 12 year old. Plots from the games I played were well... um.... I suppose unique is a nice way to say it... non-sensical is probrably a more accurate way to put it. Then again, maybe its because I was raised playing mostly PC based FPSs so I have developed a different mindset and expectations then most console RPG gamers. Then again... I found Duke Nukem fun... but hey wait... I was what, 12 at the time? Makes sense.

So, as I said, I avoid the XBox exactly because I prefer games outside the FPS mode. Yet, I know im the minority here.

/Irony

You have honestly no taste in games?

I actually don't particularly care for either genre, RPG or FPS. My point was that any old wanker can show up and pontificate about his or her favorite/least favorite genre using almost exactly the same reasoning.

I agree with Serapth on this entire thread-

I too am very happy that the Xbox was NOT a home for many Japanese RPGs. It made a difference in the culture of the two consoles, and I also think it may have led developers to target a console based on the perceived clientele.

Games like Top Spin, Crimson Skies, Splinter Cell, Rainbow Six...those games interested me. And I think they did well on the Xbox, because of types of games they were, and the type of person who chose Xbox as their primary console.

This thread is absolutely crazy batshit nuts.

First of all, the games Splinter Cell and Rainbow Six were released for every gaming system under the sun, including PC, GBA and fucking cell phones, so they're hardly some kind of high-concept Xbox exclusive that gave people a reason to buy an Xbox above and beyond anything else. Top Spin was also released on PS2 (according to IGN's database) and Crimson Skies originally was a PC title! Are all Xbox owners so blinded to the Xbox's Obvious Brilliance that they don't even know that these games are literally everywhere?

Secondly, this is not a zero-sum system. If the PS2 has more RPGs, that doesn't mean it will have less games of another genre. The PS2 library is massive; there are plenty of games covering all genres. I have never heard anyone (aside from you lot) complain that the PS2 is a success primarily due to Japanese RPGs. The fact that Sony has the largest installed user base and therefore the biggest money pit to dive into is what kept developers making games for it. Nobody shied away from the PS2 because of all the JRPGs. If the Xbox had PS2-level sales, you would have seen a ton more RPGs released for it.

If you want to play Grand Theft Auto- which console do you buy?

All the games have come out on the Xbox...but they are always on the PS2 first. If you want GTA- you buy a PS2.

Now go check your release dates for Splinter Cell and Top Spin on the Xbox and compare them to the PS2...then check the ratings of each game at GameRankings.com. You will see that the dates, and the rankings, aren't even close. Xbox is the superior platform for those games.

Now wait a minute... it's okay to buy a PS2 (inferior version) for GTA because it comes out there first instead of Xbox (superior version). And it's also okay to buy an Xbox (superior version) for Splinter Cell because it comes out there first instead of PS2 (inferior version). So your chief concern really isn't the quality of the game, it's which console gets it first.

And let's look at those release dates. Splinter Cell Xbox: 11/02. PS2: 04/03. GameCube: 04/03. That's pretty close, in my book, around 6 months. (And if I remember correctly, the PS2 version had an exclusive level and the GameCube version had GBA interactivity.) It sounds to me like this is the result of Microsoft's disengenous "exclusivity" marketing. Some people still think of Splinter Cell as an "Xbox game." Splinter Cell was marketed as an Xbox exclusive - and I heard of people who bought an Xbox specifically for SC - even though everyone who reads the press knew that the game was coming to PS2 and GameCube in a few months. Disgustingly, now we have accepted this practice under the label of "timed exclusives," which is probably this generation's most reprehensible addition to the marketing bag of tricks (although faked screenshots is a close second, also an Xbox innovation).

The release gaps for Pandora Tomorrow are similar to SC, and Chaos Theory was released for all three on the same day. And IGN really doesn't show much of a point difference in their review scores... not that they're the most trusted source in games journalism but at least that's one major player who didn't see much disparity across the versions. Rainbow Six is also awfully close among all the various iterations.

Top Spin, yeah, it came out 2 years later on PS2. Yes, that one is not even close. And yeah, same story with Crimson Skies.

But even with a big release gap, that wasn't really the point of the original commentary. The idea put forth was that "those types of games" were typical of Xbox and nothing else, and people who liked "those type of games" preferred Xbox over the others, especially given the JRPGs that typified the PS2 shelf stock (which is a false point anyway). My point was that "those type of games" are available for other systems, along with many other types of games, and that the Xbox really wasn't unique in that regard. Out of the four games quoted, only one is an Xbox exclusive (Crimson Skies) and that wasn't a wholly original IP anyway... nobody has listed any pure Xbox exclusives that truly defined, differentiated and sold the system. That's probably because there isn't that many of them, and most of them start with "Halo."

Wait...do you really want to mention Rainbow Six?

At Gamerankings.com:

Rainbow Six 3 Xbox- 88% (pretty good)
Rainbow Six 3 PS2 - 72.1% (even lower if you take out the PS2 fanzines)

Rainbow Six 3 was another game that was essentially Xbox only (for the consoles).

And another game I liked.

Sure...go buy the PS2 version...it just isn't the same. Here is what Gamespot had to say about the PS2 version:

Unfortunately, the online multiplayer mode is stripped down from the Xbox version. It supports up to six players in a match (down from the Xbox's 16 players) and offers just three modes of play (down from the Xbox's five), all of which are variations on the deathmatch.

You're ignoring my point, yet you still manage to prove it.

Once again, it is the enhanced online play that differentiates the Xbox, not the game's genre.

The only way Nintendo could get me even slightly excited for their new system, is the promise of "new" games. Not remakes, nor sequels. Among their big Gamecube titles, which were not simply another title in a twenty year old series? I like Mario as much as the next gamer, but it wouldn't hurt for them to come up with something new this time around.

Among their big Gamecube titles, which were not simply another title in a twenty year old series?

Why is that your only criteria for judging whether a new game is worth your time? Too many times burned by Sonic, Crash Bandicoot and Tomb Raider? Nintendo sequels are far more likely to maintain quality than other franchises.

But if you're still going to be picky, how about Pikmin, WarioWare*, or Animal Crossing**? All are new concept first-party games that premiered this generation. What about the upcoming Mario light-action sports titles (baseball and soccer), or are they already declared DOA simply because Mario is in them? Have a DS for Nintendogs?

*yes, I know WarioWare has bloody Wario in it, but I'm not calling that reason enough to declare it a remake or sequel.

**yes, I know Animal Crossing was originally a Japanese N64 title.

Pikmin, WarioWare*, or Animal Crossing**

You're one for three. WarioWare debuted on the GBA, and alsomade it to the n64. Animal Crossing also hit the GBA. How WarioWare, which is just a themed no-board Mario Party, which itself is just a new Panic!, is a "new concept" is beyond me. Pikmin you can make the argument for, though I see it as just another automaton game like Lemmings. Mario Baseball started on the NES, and Mario Tennis on the SNES; besides, I'm not sure how you think Baseball and Tennis ratify a point about Nintendo churning out old material. Oh, and Nintendogs is an old, old idea; it was dead for ten years, but was popular again recently as Tamagatchi, Dogz or Creatures, depending on your scale of complexity. That said, the earlier raiser I'm aware of is Little Computer People, by EA back in the late 70s or early 80s, which you now know as the "revolutionary" game The Sims.

Also, to my amusement, all three of the games you named have sequels.

And you're a moron who cowardly waits a week to reply. I suppose you were out of town.

So what if WarioWare debuted on the GBA? The point is you were asking for new IPs, and WarioWare is a very recent creation. And likening it to Mario Party is idiotic. You have clearly played none of the games in either series. And WarioWare was never, ever an N64 game.

Animal Crossing was not a GBA game, you are, again, a moron. The closest Animal Crossing got to the GBA was the connectivity bonus coming out of the GameCube game itself.

And somebody enlighten me about an NES Mario Baseball, because I don't think you have any idea what the fuck you're talking about. And about tennis, I didn't mention it. I quoted soccer, based on the upcoming Super Mario Strikers, which I believe to be the first time Mario has played soccer. Again, somebody let me know. Maybe you're right, but your abundance of other errors leads me to think you're not.

I guess you've played Nintendogs already and have discovered nothing new in it. It's just a Tamagotchi. Sure it is. Is your position really that a new game must contain 100% entirely new EVERYTHING in order for you to consider it? Then I can confidently predict that you will never play anything ever again. Give me an example of ANY new game you like that you can't find some detail that wasn't already done before.

Sequels? Of course there are sequels, they are all good games. Your original complaint was that Nintendo isn't doing enough to introduce new IPs. There's three new IPs that have all been successful to one degree of another, to the point that they earned sequels. (But again you have it wrong. The Animal Crossing sequel isn't out yet, and it's a DS game.)

You are, simply, yet another anti-Nintendo ass who is desperately searching to justify your irrational hatred. Come on now, Pikmin = Lemmings? Yeah, you can namedrop games from 20 years ago, but you're no gamer.

The rest is not directed to you specifically, only the grammar nazi type...
I don't care about spelling and grammar myself. I believe I can get the point of the posters regardless of the errors. I feel bad for people who get hung up on that because something like "thier" and "its" may be spelled or used wrong. If you can not understand or are confused by the sentence "I painted thier car, its now blue" because I did not use it's and had a spelling mistake, you need to take a serious look at your own comprehension level and stop worrying about others grammar skills.
The other option is to admit to the fact that your grammar hangup is one of elitism and not really a comprehension problem for you at all. It is your attempt to stand above the crowd and be noticed.
I associate grammar Nazi types to the not so smart contestant on Jeopardy. You've been through the first round and only have $200. You are a little gun shy because you had $400 but forgot to phrase one of your answers in the form of a question. The guys next to you keep picking the categories of "Apple" , "Google today", and "Washed up sci-fi series that are resurrected for one final season". You want to prove you are one of the crowd but you just can't seem to get to the buzzer on time. The harder you try to collect your thoughts, the harder it is for you to concentrate. You are starting to look like a real fool here, things aren't working out, your geek card is on the line and your low UID is in danger. You only have one shot, you need to snap back to reality. Finally, a break, the dude next to you takes "Off topic and does not matter" for $400. The answer is read, you know the question and whack the buzzer and you speak into the microphone with extreme confidence.. "What is a grammar error and/or spelling mistake". You finally got your chance to shine and you did!

Friend of mine got Super Metroid on the SNES when it first came out. He was a big Metroid fan, having played both the NES and Gameboy versions to death. Anyway, on the SNES version, when you died, Samus' suit disintegrated and Samus herself emerged wearing some kind of underwear getup. Nothing too risque thankfully. There was also a high pitched scream as you died.

My friend's first reaction: "Why is there a girl in Samus Aran's suit?".

The fact that Samus Aran is female has absolutely no bearing on the gameplay of Metroid. Anyone who plays the game for long enough will cease to care. At best, its a marketing novelty factor, like the flashy suit or spaceship. When you really, truely play a game for dozens of hours, superflous things like that fade into obscurity.

My friend wasn't alone. I'll bet there were many fans of Metroid who has let this fact completly escape them. If asked the question: "Are there any female lead characters in some of your favourite games?" I'd wager many, many Metroid fans would be streched to answer "Metroid" quickly. This is because, a true gamer will simply not care, and these facts will slip their minds.

It's like if you were asked to name a game with a black lead character. You might be harded pressed to do it, because you simply didn't care. And no, it's not the game you were thinking of.

If you want to make the characters "ethnicity" part of the game, the only way to do that is to make such things user customisable. A la MMORPGs, Oblivion, etc, . Other than that, the specifics of the characters themselves, outside of their in game abilities, are irrelevant, as any avid gamer will tell you. Who ever picked Blaze because she was a woman? I mean come on?

At best, its a marketing novelty factor, like the flashy suit or spaceship

I dig what you're saying, but how can the original Metroid be faulted for marketing novelty when the fact that Samus is female is only revealed if you were a super-player? Nintendo didn't make a big deal about her gender in early marketing; she looks like a pixellized robot on the box cover. Most players simply had no idea because they never finished the game. Back then we had no internet to ruin things within .5 hours of a game's release.

Samus's reveal was more of a bonus surprise for dedicated players than anything else. And, motivational underwear aside, she still remains an early and inspiring example of a female video game heroic avatar. Which is cool, having diversity of leads in video games (male, female, alien, young, old, heroic, evil etc). I hope you're not arguing against that.

And not too long ago, there was an article about how often male players choose a female character, even in games that are not customizable or online. So, window dressing does matter. Yeah, gameplay is important, but story and characters and immersion are also important. Calling it "irrelevant" is an unfair whitewash.

Of course, turning Samus into an obviously mega-hot Lara Croft / Witchblade / Lady Death style of female "role model" is pure marketing... but that's more of a latter day invention. And I still would say Nintendo hasn't milked that in the way that Tomb Raider or Bloodrayne a hundred other games have.

I'd wager many, many Metroid fans would be streched to answer "Metroid" quickly.

Hey asshole, how about you go buy games that don't have cutscenes. There's enough to go around. I hear Lumines is pretty cool.

Anyone who picked up a Metal Gear game in the last decade and was surprised to find lots of lengthy cutscenes, obviously doesn't know very much about what they're buying.

Why is it that everybody has to sound off about this, when it's really easy to just buy games that are not story-driven.

To review: