Petterz

Perfect Dark Zero isn't a horrible game, and it doesn't deserve to be on that list. However, as a follow-up to the first Perfect Dark game, it definitely wasn't great. Graphics were a lot better, since the original was on the N64. But it sure didn't live up to the hype. Bad sequel (err prequel) syndrome.

Can somebody please tell me where he got his background music? I would like to download it.

Of course CNN thinks the Wii is "a heck of a lot of fun." They're the ones behind the Wii's news channel. And Time... well, Time also thinks that Wii Sports might be the greatest videogame ever made. At least they've already got the attention of their non-gamer crowd.

As far as which system I'm getting this week... it's the Wii. Sure, the graphic capabilities suck compared to the PS3 and Xbox 360. All the people I know that have a PSP... hate it. It was funny how they shoved it in my face to taunt me about its graphic capability over my DS' N64-like power. And now they ask to play with my DS. Why? Because it's fun. They hardly touch their PSPs.
Even though I'd like the Wii games to look as great as Gears of War, I like the innovative gameplay that Wii has to offer.
I'd eventually buy an Xbox360 next year, though. Or at least after they fix that damn heat issue and quiet it down. I heard that the PS3 does that very well.

oh, I forgot to note that my previous post was half towards BoZs13's comment

Is that Veronica Belmont from Cnet.com? Her voice sounds familiar. I listen to the Buzz Out Loud podcasts regularly.

I agree, Memento, with the N64 and Blu-ray comments (others, as well, but I'm only commenting on these two). What PS1 had over N64 was "graphics." Yes, the PS1's graphics actually sucked compared to the N64's. But what I was talking about was FMV "graphics." Because PS1's disc format was able to hold more, including video, they became more popular because people thought that the cinematics looked pretty. I agree, the cinematics were pretty. And they really do make a game cooler. At the time, people mistook beautifully rendered CGI scenes as the machine's graphical capability, and failed to notice that the actual real-time graphics of the machine were not up to par. Even today, I know a few people who see clips of FF XII FMV scenes and say, "Wow, that game has AWESOME graphics." Don't get me wrong, I think the actual real-time graphics of the game are actually pretty nice, too. But my point is that people confuse cinematics with real-time graphics, and also (in this country, anyway) put visuals as a priority over gameplay. But if the N64 was so bad, why is The Legend of Zelda: The Ocarina of Time hailed as the greatest game of all time? Of course, PS fanboys wouldn't know this, as they were playing on their spectacular PS1s.

And Blu-ray... Sony has yet to make a media format that will make it. The annoying Memory Stick (and all its versions) is only staying alive because Sony pushes it with its products. But even the PS3 has a multi-card reader. I guess the Memory Stick format isn't as popular as they wanted it to be... I agree that Sony is using the PS3 to help them give it the push they need during the HD video disc format war with HD-DVD. I find it funny that Sony also struggles at getting its own Blu-ray player out into the market. How many times has it been delayed?
I do admit that the format does have more movie studios, including Sony's own, backing it up compared to HD-DVD. So they have an advantage there. But HD-DVD has got the less complicated infrastructure and the price. After all, it doesn't matter if you have a bottomless pit of money. A handful of rich people isn't gonna make Blu-ray the winner. Wal-Mart is the country's biggest DVD retailer. I think last time I heard, Wal-Mart has taken a nice 40% chunk out of the DVD selling market. Like memento stated, "cost is always a factor." You can make a higher profit out of a nation full of low and middle class families than you can with a handful of the wealthy. And the fact that they're using Talladega Nights as a pack-in to show off the Blu-ray prowess is just sad.

Go ahead, call me a Nintendo fanboy. But that's also because I'm a fanboy of quality over quantity and substance over style.

Wii will lose the console war because its motion controller is all just a gimmick. For instance, the Nintendo DS' touch screen display is really gimmicky, and beyond that gimmick, it has crappy graphics. The PSP is much more powerful, and it has superb graphics. There is no way that Nintendo's "innovation" will sell over Sony's brilliant visuals. Just check out these October sales results here:

http://blog.wired.com/games/2006/11/nintendo_ds_kic.html

Nintendo sold 320,000 DS units and Sony sold a... whopping... 130,000... PSPs... Hmm. Wait a minute, this just doesn't make sense. Even 169,000 Game Boy Advances were pushed out there?

So... better graphics doesn't necessarily mean a better system?

Hmm, sorry, guys. But this might actually be true.
No matter who does it, graphics are always gonna get better. But graphics don't make games fun. Yes, the analogy I used is comparing portable gaming to console gaming, which are two completely different types of things, but I think Nintendo is doing something really smart. They're making gaming fun. They're making gaming different. They're making it new and exciting. What is Sony doing? They're making things look prettier, yet keeping almost everything else about their gaming the same. The SIXAXIS controller is ten times more the gimmick than Nintendo's Wii remote. It's more like an afterthought. It's like, "Oh, crap. We forgot to do that, too. Let's try and throw that in." Sony has always tried to take something from Nintendo but just dress it up a bit more (rumble feature, analog sticks, motion control, etc.).

Sony is not about innovation. Their stores are called Sony Style, not Sony Substance. Their digital cameras, computers, storage formats, and portable gaming system are mediocre. Though, I heard their laptop batteries are pretty hot. =)
Sony is all about looking good. Besides, their fanboys need something to tout other than their low-hanging guts and potato chip crumb embossed t-shirts. Though... while the graphics look great, I must say that the hardware is hideous. In a world where thinner flat panel TV technology is in higher demand, why pair it with a huge black box? Maybe Sony isn't ALL about style after all...

Yes, the Wii probably is nothing more than a Gamecube with a tiny bit more power. But it's fun. And the Gamecube wasn't that bad with graphics, anyway. It just wasn't popular, because the Playstation swam and the Nintendo 64 sank. By the time Gamecube came, nobody had faith in Nintendo. But Resident Evil 4, originally a Gamecube exclusive, was brought to Playstation 2 because of its popularity. It turned out to be one of the best looking games ever. Plus, in a couple side by side comparisons, it was said that the Gamecube version was still superior to the Playstation 2 version. Not by much, but that's still something (of course, the PS2 version had extra bonuses added to it, and only used one disc).

I play video games to pass the time when I am bored. That means I want my games to be fun. If I wanted to be dazzled by realistic images, I'd watch a movie that could show me that. Better yet, I'd go out and experience real life.

I was waiting for the release of this combo, and I bought it from Fry's Electronics on the day it was released. The AgIon feature isn't exactly hidden. It was (and still is) listed on its product page at Logitech's website. There is also a label, though small, on the front of the package stating that it uses the AgIon technology. True, however, that they don't seem to be marketing this feature as one of the main pros to this product.

So... having this keyboard and mouse combo for the past few weeks, I must say that it still feels pretty clean. I don't know if it's because it's still just a few weeks old, or if the AgIon technology really is working the way they said it does. Gimme a few more months.