Scooby Doo

Sorry, meant GH: Rock the 80's

All I gotta say is... When I picked up GH II for the first time I ran into a strange 'bug'. I finished 3 songs of the first tier and even played the encore, but the game wouldn't open up the second set list. There was one song still left unplayed by a certain girl band in the 80's.

Practically crying the whole time, I played that horrible piece of fluff that I never wanted to hear again just to try and get past the bug. I did, but I still have some post traumatic stress disorder from the ordeal.

All I'm saying is, if GH II can shove We Got The Beat down my throat, having a MCR pack isn't the worst thing in the world. At least you get to choose whether or not you play it. I wish there was some way I could permanently delete that song from my GH II game. Besides, it could have been worse...it could have been Nelson Pack. :-)

I don't know if this is a good thing or a bad thing just yet. It will kind of depend on what EA would do in a buy-out. If they were going to keep Ubisoft in-tact and merely replace some key executive officers, this probably won't have a huge impact. I would hope if anything, EA would be able to leverage Ubisoft's Wii experience in their own development for titles on the system.

However if EA will be practically taking over their studios, that's kind of sad. I remember reading the story of how Ubisoft came into being, it's an interesting read. They are quite an extraordinary company considering their beginnings, even if I thought that Red Steel kind of sucked.

I thought about that as well. You could probably tilt or slightly shake the unit, but I couldn't use it like the Wii remote and be able to tell what's going on in the game. Then it hit me, perhaps they are planning on using this device to interface WITH the Wii.

It's pure conjecture, but once I started thinking outside the box as they say, I could easily see this being used with the unit. I read the patent though and I don't see any mention of Blue-Tooth or infrared sensors, however perhaps that isn't important for their patent application at this time.

I've seen a few commenters question on why there is a 'Gaygamer.net' site and I've heard a couple of good responses, but I thought I'd expand a little bit. In particular, imagine if the roles were reversed and this was a gay-slanted gaming world. I know for some of you that's hard to even stomach, but this is a hypothetical situation. Just play along with me for a few minutes.

Imagine that almost every game has a gay slant. Mario isn't rescuing the Princess Peach, but Prince Piccolo. And it's not just Mario it's just about every game you've ever played. There's only three games that even LET you explore a straight relationship: The Sims, Bully and Fable. Most of the male protagonists run around in very revealing, tight fitting clothes, all the women seemed to be dress in Full Battle Plate and they don't even bother to round it around the chest. But wait, it gets worse...

Now compound that with a media and community that's gay-slanted. What's the latest review of DOA? Awesome! Especially after you unlock all the male Speedo outfits. They make the men bounce in all the right places.

Putting out a comment on a Website like Joystiq with a pro-straight message or even worse, identifying yourself as a straight man may be retaliated with personal attacks on yourself or your character.

And lastly, the word straight is now synonymous with lame, dumb or stupid. Whether you're on XBL or just reading Blog comments, you are always reminded of what people think of you and that many people hate you, are afraid of you, or both.

Just try once to put yourself in that situation and think about what you'd do about it. How long can you fight the good fight? How long do you think you can desensitize yourself to the situation? At some point, you'd want a website called Straightgamer.net if nothing than to be around others who think and act like you do.

Do special interest sites/communities/organizations single themselves out for attack? As a gay man I can honestly say yes. But you have to ask yourself a question: Did they truly single themselves out, or did society at large do that first?

Ouch. I really wonder what EA is thinking at this stage of the game. I read the statement on their website and my only problem is that they are not giving their customers any options.

I'd hope most of us know that servers cost money, not just to build, but also just to run and keep maintained. It's part of the reason why Micrsoft charges for a Gold Membership. I can understand why EA needs to pull these; their earnings were horrible and they are already in the standard cost-cutting phase that comes after.

However, why couldn't they provide a service similar to Live for their own games. Perhaps these servers are not being used a whole lot, but it seems like a complete throwaway of potential revenue. Plus, it sends a bad message to the consumer. EA has enough problems being the 800-pound development gorilla. They're arrogance reminds me of Sony. Bad, bad move IMO.

Come on Patrick...no need to bash Sony on this one. Apparently my half-hearted attempt at moderation didn't work.

I'm assuming that about the time Sony runs out of the 60GB model, they will drop the 80GB model to the 60GB price. Professionally, I think it would be the equivalent of retail suicide for them not to. (Of course this IS Sony we're talking about.) You are assuming the opposite, but neither of us really knows what their plans are. I'm just willing to give them the benefit of the doubt until I hear otherwise.

I would bet that after Sony's huge jump in sales with the $100 price drop, (please no clearance comments), Microsoft might be reconsidering their strategy.

I'm not one that believes Halo 3 will push system sales the same way that Halo did. Given the fact that Microsoft missed their fiscal target of units shipped, it wouldn't be surprising to see a drop as I believe they wouldn't take a lead loss with the new price.

Of course, right now it's all conjecture, but the writings on the wall based on prior executive comments that the price point isn't in the 'sweet spot' just yet.

So let me get this straight... You had a problem connecting a Wii to your current Wi-Fi setup. You called them and they actually helped you to get it working even though they know little to nothing about your network configuration (and apparently neither do you), but somehow it represents a major flaw in their network connectivity?

My point would be you can't even tell us if the problem was with your router's configuration or a specific design flaw on Nintendo's part. Is there really a large-scale network configuration flaw in the design of Wii Connect, or are your anecdotal references a symptom of users not understanding their network configuration? Unless you can give us an example of the former, that's why there's no story on the problem; it's not Nintendo's fault in this instance.

Dsub,

I wouldn't necessarily place that fault on Nintendo. Can you tell us WHY it wasn't working?

I've found both the DS and Wii to work fine with every Wi-Fi setup I've tried them on. The only thing I find lacking...and perhaps someone who's familiar with the 360 network setup can comment on if they have this feature on that system...is that I couldn't find any proxy settings. It makes it much more of a pain because you have to specially configure your router to handle this. As for firewalls, it's your job to make sure you have the right ports open.