dotun.o

On a rather general note, and primarily but not exclusively about America now:

Patriotism is love for and loyalty to your Fatherland, not blind loyalty to he who rules your fatherland when his decisions are obviously questionable. Part of patriotism is challenging he who rules your country wrongly.
It's amazing that we read through history and say, "How could the Germans have been so gullible? How did they not see the sinister aims of the Nazis? How could the Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, etc. have been so loyal to the despots that would eventually plunge their own people to ruin?" And yet, strangely, no one stops to think that the same must be happening today? Why do you think it would suddenly be different today if people - rulers and citizens - still act the same way?

Those who do not learn from history...

In the end, this will be an everything game - platform, puzzle, adventure, fighting, simulation, etc. all rolled into one mega-release.

This is a compliment, btw. looks like a game to be replayed for a while.

Heh, did anyone else catch that oxymoron: "Slowing down fast"?

@ Gavin,
If you're looking for classic "hardcore" gaming, then yes, I see your point. But this is what you don't see: the DS (and by that extension, perhaps the Wii too) is growing out of just gaming and into something larger; it is actually becoming an interactive electronic device. Sure, it will feature games you may not enjoy, games that are not even games in the traditional sense, games meant for a certain niche, but don't forget the hardcore niche is not the only niche. Nintendo certainly realizes this; they've made a system that opens its doors to the imagination of developers and the markets they wish to capture. If you recall, something similar was the main reason behind PS1's success: a system open to all developers, big and small. It was relatively easy and cheap to develop games on it (and yes, there were tons of forgettable games). It wasn't about the specs; Sony itself seems to have forgotten this, though.

Talented animator; has really good prospects for success in the fireld.

As far as the Master Chief vs. Samus debate, does it really make sense to compare them, or rather the technology they have at their disposal?

In the first place, they're both enhanced humans - MC part of a super-soldier program, Samus fused with Chozo DNA (and later X-Parasite and Metroid DNA).

Secondly, they both use a heavily advanced arsenal, in many cases alien technology for that matter (Power Beam, Super Bomb, Energy Sword, Needler, etc.). Neither fights on their innate ability alone; it's really a question of who has access to metal-shearing weapons and can sneak up on the other first. Head-to-head, they'd probably just blow the place up and each other along.

@15, eLegant,
I take it you're... 8 or thereabaout? Or perhaps a boor? Either childish or ill-mannered; your language underscores this.

First off, get your facts straight. I never said Rugby was more brutal than A-Football. Show a little patience and re-read my post,

"By your argument, I could call[...]"

and later,

"I doubt anyone would call American football players weaklings[...]"

Ruggers are less padded but compared to A-Footballers, show more restraint in tackles; A-Footballers are more protected and subsequently less-restarined. I can't really say either one is easier than the other - less protection, more restraint; more protection, less restraint. Complimentary, really.

Also, pay attention to my description of contact - incidental in football, mandatory in rugby/ A-Football. No one's speaking against all contact, just deliberate, aggressive attacks. Surely you would agree with me that it takes more SKILL to avoid opponents while keeping pace with the ball rolling on the ground or disposses opponents of the ball without drawing the ref's ire, than pile-driving your opponent to the ground. But from your comments it appears like you think "manly" is only if you bellow like a bull and charge like a troglodyte. The fact that you don't get "style, finesse, and fluidity" just proves my point. Watch and/or play football. Observe players fluidly beat one opponent after another while keeping pace with a ball they can't hold, watch an incredible number of passes strung together, finished off with a blistering shot into goal, observe goalkeeping reflexes at point-blank range, experience relentless running for 90 minutes or more, then tell me it is emasculating.

I do more than gaming - infact, it is a small portion of all I do and has been reducing even more recently. I'm an artist-in-training, bookworm, technogeek AND I love sports (yes, it's possible lol). I played football. I know how much endurance it requires, I know what it feels like to be tackled to the ground on ashphalt, I know what a shot to the head feels like, I know what it is to jostle for the ball on sun-beaten abandoned plots because you can't always wait till you get the opportunity to play "regulation" to enjoy the game you love. Football is hands-down among the most endurance-driven sports. I'd like to see anyone play a 90-minute match and walk away saying, "Pathetic".

Sadly, I've barely played since living in America. It's just tough fitting the time in my schedule to have designated meetings with a local team or the like, and part of the joy was whipping out the ball impromptu when friends came over. America's not really the place where an empty parking lot immediately becomes a football pitch, ashphalt, barefoot and all. Playing until the cars return later in the day, or play around them if you can. Scatter if you shoot against a windshield; don't forget to grab the ball first! Ah, the memories.

@ comment 11, krizoitz

By your argument, I could call American Football players the bigger pansies: "They can't even take it like ruggers, they need to wear helmets and shoulder pads!"
True, injury faking is a sad issue in Football, and it's being combated. But on the other end of the spectrum, there's the grim reality of bodily damage players live through. How about calling Henrik Larsson a pansy after his horrific double fracture right in the middle of his leg in'99?
I doubt anyone would call American football players weaklings; on the contrary, the game is needlessly brutal - a sport where bashing right into your opponent is not an option but a necessity. Call it opinion, but nothing in the sport shows style, finesse or fluidity; rather, sheer, brute force (I'll say the same of Rugby). Generally, I don't enjoy sports where physical contact is a necessity - A-Football, Wrestling, Boxing, etc. There is contact in Football but it's optional/incidental, not required (one of the more respectable moments in Football is a keen dispossession of your opponent without the slightest physical contact).
I may not speak for everyone, but my problems with A-Football are the (aforementioned) coarseness, the intermittent progress of the game (pass, bash, whistle, regroup, rinse and repeat; continuous play does not extend beyond seconds) and the ill-advised name.

Let's not bicker over terms. Yes, football is the appropriate designation (easy to see just watching the sport), but "soccer" itself is not wrong. Soccer is short for "Association Football", the full official name of the sport (greatest sport ever, BTW). And yes, "American Football" is a misguided name for a sport where you only rarely put your foot to the ball but hold it and throw it WITH HANDS over 90% of the time.

"The Wii is taking a beating this week at GDC by American developers."

Exactly; AMERICAN developers. And that is why in the end, most of the greatest games one generation after another come from Japan. The typical American "bigger is better" mentality comes to play here. The American developers care more about the highest technology; the Japanese about the highest they can get out of the existing technology. Don't get me wrong, graphics and technology must improve, but I agree with Nintendo: we've reached a point where graphics will only improve games MARGINALLY. Once again, photography never killed painting.
Should the Wii have been more powerful? Yes, it would have been great. But to then escalate its price by hundreds of dollars? No thanks, it's only videogames afterall; my life does not revolve around it. Now a computer, though, that could make sense. You see, a computer you actually WORK with, a utility device, an investment that brings returns.

And why does Rein think the gaming world revolves around UE anyway?

The way I see it, it MAY stand a chance of being well-executed in the hands of Bruckheimer. I would write it off as a failure if it were in the hands of Disney alone. Disney has been bereft of original ideas and proper execution for years now. Look at their successful franchises in recent years - The Incredibles, Cars, Pirates of The Carribean, Kingdom Hearts, The Chronicles of Narnia: Pixar, Bruckheimer, Square-Enix, book adaptations and IMO an obvious attempt to cash in on LOtR/ Harry Potter craze. By themselves, Disney has not been great for a while now, with wave after wave of unnecessary sequels and "special edition" re-releases. Yes, they have quite a history that is still popular and profitable (like Nintendo - Mario, Metroid, Zelda), but how about augmenting them with new ideas too (like Nintendo - Pikmin, Nintendogs, DS and Wii)?