Geoff

"I'm not going to try and make a video game devoted to teaching organic chemistry"

Just tell that to Will Wright. If Spore doesn't include such lessons, then it's only a matter of time before one of his projects does.

See, I was definitely not going to see this, until I read the review. Now I know just how much it sucks, I may have to attend.

Damn it.

1) He says that GTA rewards players w/ points for wreaking havoc, when there is no point system.

Well... yes and no. There may not have been a strict points system. But the missions did award you cash, which appeared in the corner as a form of points system, so I can see the confusion. Fact is, the GTA games - points or not - rewarded you for inciting chaos. You unlocked new parts of the city, you got money, all the rest. I won't damn them for it - I loved the games.

I think this guy hits the nail more or less on the head, if, as someone suggested earlier, you remember that he isn't talking to (or a member of) the l33t gaming set. His language is slightly out of kilter (the Hot Coffee thing was a hidden unlockable, but only on a technicality), but his points are nonetheless valid. This is also one of the most reasonable arguments I have read concerning the Manhunt fiasco - from either camp.

He points out that Nintendo are trying to branch away from the teenage boy / young adult male market. There will always be a place for such people (I hope), but in order to get into the Arts sect, games need to appeal to everyone.

"I am worried about FF IV for the DS though. I wish they would just remake it like they did with the PSP versions. Nice, 2D, and faithful."

In which case, you may as well buy the Gameboy Advance version of FFIV, which is pretty much a straight port of the original and which works just dandy on the DS. Personally, I'm looking forward to a III-style makeover - I loved the new graphics.

"So, it could potentially only mean introducing 2-3 new villains past The Lizard."

Well, no. Because, last we saw, both Goblins, Venom and Doc Ock died in the films. So, unless he indulges in some serious retro-engineering on the plot, they can't be used.

Of course, part of the problem with 3 was the amount of retro-plotting, so I guess we can't discount the possibility.

@OtakuCODE
"I played a good bit of Fahrenheit and I liked it a lot. In fact, I really ought to go back and finish playing through it."

If you liked Fahrenheit, don't bother finishing it. The ending truly sucks, and makes the intelligent plotting of the first two thirds worthless.

As for the issue at hand... I'm a mature(ish), educated guy. I love games to have emotional depth and grand designs, and even enjoy over-complicated control systems when appropriate to the game.

I also love Lego Star Wars. Why? Because it's simple, quick, easy, pretty. Seriously, don't knock simplicity - very few games deliver such addictive gameplay.

I don't own any Nintendo systems, but I know that a lot of people think of them as 'kiddies' gaming. Yet I know a fair few people round the world a well into their Nintendoes - look at the fact that here - in the UK - the latest Zelda has completely sold out for the GameCube.

"Don't book publishers take back hardback versions that don't sell? And once the paperback version comes out, that's the final price? Why can't game publishers do the same thing?"

I remember working at Penguin Books for a couple of months - they used to take back unsold books. But books have a couple of perks - there are a multitude of discount bookshops to sell at, and books age better than games. And books, ultimately, can be pulped and recycled - unused games simply fill up landfill space.

Ludwig:

Okay, let me - kinda - rephrase.

Every day, games websites and magazines review a tonne of new games. Depending on the reviewer in question, an "average" game will get between 4/10 to 7/10 (which will vary, obviously, depending on the actual method of rating).

Now, I'll admit that calling 80 percent of games crap is probably mistaken, and is decidedly unprofessional. However, look at it from a consumer's point of view. I have £40 in my pocket, and can only afford one new game. So I buy the one that I've heard of, or that I know got the highest scores or the most good press. Being someone who reads a reasonable amount of gaming news, I pretty much ignore a game that scored 7/10 or under, unless I really like the franchise. Because 7/10 in today's game industry is crap.

But marketing comes into this, too. In this instance, "crap" doesn't only necessarily refer to the quality of the game - it refers to the way it was marketed, and the franchise it belongs to. Personally, I don't like WWF Smackdown games, but they sell a lot through the franchise: you want a wrestling game, you buy the one with the real (ahem) wrestlers in it. Alternatively, Okami, or Prince Of Persia SOT, sell badly: good games without enough positive marketing, and without known franchises.

Sure, the store itself has a bit of work to do. They can promote their own products. But it's hard for a site that already has narrow profit margins to drop prices further to promote a game that doesn't promote itself - especially when the store has a hundred other games that look just as exciting.

As I said, "crap" is not a professional word, and I think they could of rephrased. I just think his point is valid.

"choice phrases like "we all know how fast games devalue in prices; this is due to the fact that 80% of the games created are crap," or " it is impossible for us to make money selling video games," sound akin to the thumping fists of a child in the midst of a tantrum."

That's a little harsh. The comments are perfectly reasonable. We all know that 90 percent of games are sub-par. Of course, 90 percent of books published are sub-par too - but they have a larger target market, and so even sub-par stuff will sell eventually. That last copy of Budget Fighter 3D IV is never going to shift, not least because (unlike books, films or music) in two months it'll look and sound dated, and may even become actually unplayable (particularly with PC games).

As for not being able to make a profit - this isn't a tantrum. It's their primary reason to quit. Games are hard to make a profit with. Not just games, either.

Here in the UK, there's a big fuss on at the moment with supermarkets and the competition laws. Companies like Asda (owned by Wal-Mart) and Tesco are forcing local shops to close. Now, as MosquitoControl points out, to the consumer, this is seen as no loss - after all, we all shop at Tesco or Asda, right? Convenience, and all that.

But what happens when only Tesco and Asda are left? There is no competition, and no way into the market. Those who once owned shops are jobless, and those formerly cheap supermarkets are able to determine prices again - this time, they don't have to cut costs.

So it is a pity that these guys have been forced out of business. It's capitalism at work, but it just goes to show that a free market isn't as free as it should be.

@8:

Yeah, I know. It's just that Sony never made a portable... Oh - wait, yes they did. Just no one ever noticed.

I'll get me coat. And a large flame shield, possibly...