So last night I got an XBox :)

[kevinswatch]

I disagree. If FF9 was rubbish, then FF10 was worse than rubbish.

Four words. Tidus is Meg Ryan.

-jay

[Cagliostro]

I do think though that this might be the last FF game.

Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahaahaahaahahahahaha!

Jinkies, folks, they'll be making Final Fantasies for as long as they can milk it, and something tells me that they can milk it for a long time. If they stop the numbered games, they will keep cranking out the FFVII games or expanding on the other numbered games like they have been with VII. Or more crappy Crystal Chronicles, which I've never played, but understand they are crappy.

With that said, Wii does suck a bit, but mainly to me because I want more RPG games with all the movement games. I'm really digging the games that get me off the floor, but I would like a regular dungeon crawl that isn't so damn cutesy and "Nintendo"-y, if you catch my drift. I doubt I'll ever get one, but then again, I knew that before I dropped the money for it.

[kevinswatch]

Yeah, I agree with Cagliostro. If it's one thing that Square knows how to do, it's milk the FF series to death.-jay

[Queeaqueg]

I disagree. If FF9 was rubbish, then FF10 was worse than rubbish.

Four words. Tidus is Meg Ryan.

Final Fantasy 10 as not rubbish! It was awesome... came close to being as good as FF6 and FF7(though not that good).

Yeah, I agree with Cagliostro. If it's one thing that Square knows how to do, it's milk the FF series to death

Maybe, Makers of Mario and Zelda have milked that series to death so there is no reason for Final Fantasy to stop but it would be nice for the creators to know when enough is enough.

[Kil Tyme]

I've been putting off an XBox until they glue a blueray on it, which won't be until 09, I understand. I'm more of a PC gamer anyway, but am getting itchy on the xbox purchase.

[Worm of Despite]

I disagree. If FF9 was rubbish, then FF10 was worse than rubbish.

Four words. Tidus is Meg Ryan.

Final Fantasy 10 as not rubbish! It was awesome... came close to being as good as FF6 and FF7(though not that good).

I liked X, though I'm not prepared to compare it with VI. Maybe VII (which I still think is overrated and sprawling). The rest of the FFs don't hold well to memory.

All in all, I think PS3's line-up is a bunch of weak third-party titles, ports, and a few promises that continue to loom but don't come (aside from MGS4). I can think of several stellar titles already on the Wii (all of them Nintendo creations).

[kevinswatch]

SSBB >>>>>>>>>> PS3

-jay

[Rigel]

So, nobody else posting their gamertags?

[The Dreaming]

And some of us prefer to buy video gaming consoles that have at least one decent game in their library.

-jay

QFT. And they port every decent Xbox game to pc anyway. (even when they say they wont.) Hence, Mass Effect and KOTOR for PC.

[CovenantJr]

KOTOR 3 is the only thing that could sell me on a 360 at the moment. And it doesn't seem in imminent danger of arriving.

[Nav]

I've been putting off an XBox until they glue a blueray on it, which won't be until 09, I understand. I'm more of a PC gamer anyway, but am getting itchy on the xbox purchase.

Despite reports to the contrary, I'm not convinced we'll see BluRay in the Xbox 360. There are issues regarding the read-speed of BluRay, which would basically make it very difficult for a BluRay drive to handle the 360's current DVD-DL games. Basically DVD has a variable read speed, near the spindle it's 6mb/s but near the outer edge it's close to 16mb/s, which allows the developers to optimise the disc by putting large and frequently used files near the edge to improve loading times. BluRay is a standard 8mb/s across the entire disc, so each and every game relying on that 16mb/s speed will need a software patch in order to run well. This is the reason that PS3 games install a big chunk of data on the console's hard drive, even though the load times aren't any different to the Xbox; the cache of files just makes the comparable.

I think we will see BluRay in an Xbox, but it'll be the next gen one, whatever that's called.

So, nobody else posting their gamertags?

Mine is Kenny Carwash.

[Rigel]

Personally, I don't think we'll see Blue Ray in the 360 anyway. It came out in, what, 05? Or was it 06? Anyway, I know the PS3 was supposed to have a 10-15 year life, but the 360 is supposed to be replaced before then. Which means sometime around 11-13.

[Worm of Despite]

Well, I've done something totally compulsive: I pre-ordered the PS3/Metal Gear Sold 4 bundle, which includes the system (80 GB/best version) and MGS4. Was only 500$ on Amazon! Heckuva deal, and it sold out in a few minutes.

I might cancel the pre-order, though, as my Wii does keep me satisfied, and it's not the smartest thing.

[Queeaqueg]

All in all, I think PS3's line-up is a bunch of weak third-party titles, ports, and a few promises that continue to loom but don't come (aside from MGS4). I can think of several stellar titles already on the Wii (all of them Nintendo creations).

I haven't really seen any truely big games on either Xbox or PlayStation... so far I have disappointed and have stuck with PC games at the moment. Though UT3 has been good.

Well, I've done something totally compulsive: I pre-ordered the PS3/Metal Gear Sold 4 bundle, which includes the system (80 GB/best version) and MGS4. Was only 500$ on Amazon! Heckuva deal, and it sold out in a few minutes.

It looks good. I get my game reviews from a Game TV Programme and they have got hold of MGS4. They are not giving an official review until Sunday but they said it is as good as it is expected. Hopefully not counting chickens but I really do this game is good because it is the final game of a wonderful series* and it would be nice to give a good send off.

*Is it the final game of the series or final game featuring Solid Snake?

[Worm of Despite]

Probably the final game featuring Snake. It's a big-selling franchise, and I doubt Konami will let it go. Our kids will probably play Metal Gear Solid 7 on PlayStation 9, with a character very similar to Snake ("clones" is the keyword in Metal Gear).

[Nav]

I haven't really seen any truely big games on either Xbox or PlayStation... so far I have disappointed and have stuck with PC games at the moment. Though UT3 has been good.

Seriously? Games don't come any bigger than Halo 3 and GTA IV. Then there's Bioshock (PS3 fans have stopped picking holes in it now it's getting a port ), Call of Duty 4, Forza Motorsport (pretender to Gran Turismo's throne), Gears etc. I see PC gaming becoming more and more marginalised in the future as consoles continue to encroach into their territory (and are more piracy-resistant while they're at it.

Personally, I don't think we'll see Blue Ray in the 360 anyway. It came out in, what, 05? Or was it 06? Anyway, I know the PS3 was supposed to have a 10-15 year life, but the 360 is supposed to be replaced before then. Which means sometime around 11-13.

The Xbox 360 was designed around a five year lifespan, which we are now precisely halfway through. I think the PS3 was intended to run for something like 7-9 years, so it should be in its prime when the next Xbox comes out (currently I think it'll be around a year before the PS3's library can stand shoulder to shoulder with the Xbox's). I think we'll see the next gen Xbox unveiled in late 2009, early 2010.

It's worth noting though, that in everything Microsoft does in gaming, it does so with the view that the Xbox is not the product. Live is the product, the Xbox is just the vehicle. It's a good philosophy too, because I know more people than I'd care to count who are sick to death of their Xboxs breaking, but won't switch to PS3 because they don't want to lose Live. Home will be going up against a fearsome opponent when it's finally rolled out.

[JazFusion]

My gamertag is JazFusion.

[Queeaqueg]

Seriously? Games don't come any bigger than Halo 3 and GTA IV. Then there's Bioshock (PS3 fans have stopped picking holes in it now it's getting a port ), Call of Duty 4, Forza Motorsport (pretender to Gran Turismo's throne), Gears etc. I see PC gaming becoming more and more marginalised in the future as consoles continue to encroach into their territory (and are more piracy-resistant while they're at it.

Halo 3, I felt, was seriously overrated. Halo 3 takes itself far too seriously and the story was not particularly brilliant and gripping. Halo 3's multiplayer is the only thing that keep Halo 3 up, taht saying if it appeared on PS3(no bloodt likely) or PC(likely) I would get it. GTA IV... meh is all I can really say, not botered either. I have played GTA IV and it is good but it feels like all the others far too much. Call of Duty 4 is good but mainly for multiplayer. Bioshock lacks something that makes it a great game, Assassin's Creed is also missing it.

See there is a problem with the game industry and that is the loom of online play... that without good online play the game won't sell, that and good graphics. Now game designers are now sacrifice story(big time), game length and game play in order to keep improving graphics and online play. Only really really big projects such as GTA IV and MGS4 will focus on everything but risk delaying the game(such as Res Evil 5 n others are going). I have played many great games which did not have online play or good graphics but had a gripping story and long life which me played on.
Half-Life 2 is good example, graphics are not the best and there graphics engine is aging but it is the sheer game play and story which keep you playing.

[Rigel]

Half-Life 2 is good example, graphics are not the best and there graphics engine is aging but it is the sheer game play and story which keep you playing.

Half life 2 is an excellent example, as the game was quite delayed so they could perfect their (at the time) cutting edge graphics engine

And I would disagree about the gameplay. Sure, it has a great story, in fact it's the best attempt at an interactive movie yet. But that's just it - there is no game, there is only the story. The game itself is quite derivative and (after the first play through) dull.

[Nav]

The introduce a lot of interesting game concepts in Half Life 2, but I agree that the game is really a vehicle for the story. I found that the levels tend to start out really interesting, but it's more of the same until you get to the next level. Bioshock is similar in a lot of ways, with the stunning setting and great story, but there is more variation in the enemies and of course you can tailor your character's plasmids to your play style. The clever use of the camera to 'research' the enemies is a clever touch too. The only thing you could really add is multiplayer, but I don't think it would add anything to the experience, just like I don't think it's added to the GTA experience or will add to the MGS experience (I think adding multiplayer is a major mistake, in fact). Bioshock still sold plenty without multiplayer and scores 96 on Metacritic, the same as Half-Life 2 (and three points higher than MGS4).

It's fair to say that COD4's multiplayer is it's greatest strength, but the single player campaign is also absolutely outstanding and would be far and away the best I've played were it not relatively short, Assassin's Creed is an enjoyable but kinda shoddy game that isn't really in the same league as the others.

The jury's still out on GTA IV for me, my initial impressions were overwhelmingly positive and I stand by them because the game is an incredible achievement. However, I find that as an experience it doesn't build the kind of momentum that all my favourite games do. I'll get to a difficult bit in the story (or fail right at the end of a chain of missions that I can't save in the middle of) and I won't fancy playing for a while. I pick it up again and once I'm through to the next bit it's great, but it doesn't have me racing through the story and spending days and days cruising round the city, looking for hidden jumps and packages, completing side missions and going on rampages like the GTAs of old.

Halo 3 is a rule unto itself really, I wouldn't say it's overrated necessarily as beneath it all it is a very good game that does a lot of things well, and is packed with innovative features to boot. You could say it was overhyped, but then the level of hype was absolutely unprecedented for a game so it couldn't be anything but. I actually thought the campaign was the best of the trilogy; Halo:CE's gameplay got very repetitive towards the end, Halo 2 didn't even have an ending, and the story was excellent, with the fight taken to earth, humanity down to its last few million survivors, Cortana's struggle with the Gravemind and some notably un-Hollywood endings for certain characters. For multiplayer, I'm torn. I enjoyed it originally and I still play the odd evening every now and then for fun, but it feels to me like Bungie were lacking focus when they made the game. Forge and Theater modes are great, but I get the impression some of the developers were trying to recreate Halo 2 while others wanted to go back to the feel and mechanics of Halo:CE. The result is a bit of a mish-mash, with Halo's original micro-battles restored but way too many power weapons and camping spots, although Major League Gaming have, in my opinion, 'fixed' Halo 3 with their variant maps (I wish Bungie would make them the default, but that's not going to happen).