Head-To-Head: The Newest Round of The Console Wars

All three next-gen consoles are now on the market. The Wii U, Playstation 4 and Xbox One are all set to have another near-decade of life in the gaming world, but which one should you own? Is there one console that is the definitive gaming machine? Do they all suck eggs? Make the jump and find out!

The console wars and videogame company competition have both been around since the option of home gaming was available back in the 70s. While I wasn’t around back then (80s kid, here), I do remember seeing commercial after commercial and print ad after print ad detailing jabs from Sega at Nintendo. However, I don’t remember Nintendo ever firing any shots back… but there was a reason for that: Nintendo’s products spoke for themselves. From 1985 to around 1996, Nintendo ruled the world and Sega desperately wanted a piece of the pie, trying to convince people that their inferior console was the way to go.

See what I did there? Even I referred to Sega’s products as inferior. Does that make me a Nintendo fanboy?

The simple fact is, I’ve always been able to set fandom aside in favor of a realistic outlook. At the time, Nintendo’s products WERE superior to Sega’s. A simple Google search of the Super NES and Sega Genesis’ technical specs will tell you that. But it hasn’t always been about tech, has it? Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn’t.

In the 32 and 64-bit era of gaming, Nintendo was dethroned by Sony and their PlayStation console (Sega was no longer a threat due to the Saturn’s lack of popularity and the downfall of the Dreamcast would mark their last adventure in the console market). Which one was technically superior? The Nintendo 64. Which had more games, more companies developing for it, and ultimately sold more hardware and software? The PlayStation. Did this have anything to do with those commercials of Crash Bandicoot trashing Nintendo? I highly doubt it. Let’s just say that Sony owes Squaresoft (now SquareEnix) and Final Fantasy VII a humongous favor.

During the 128-bit era, Microsoft entered the fray with the original Xbox. Technically, it was on par with Nintendo’s Gamecube, both of which were more powerful than Sony’s Playstation 2. Which was the more successful console? The Playstation 2. Again, developers had chosen Sony in favor of everything else. I think that here, it had more to do with Sony being the first out of the gate and having a significant head start on their competition.

A similar situation could be seen with the previous generation’s console market. The Xbox 360 was the first console released this time around; therefore most developers went with the “new” tech, just as they had with the Playstation 2. Nintendo’s Wii was, indeed, the highest selling console, but the company chose to market the system as something the whole family could enjoy, rather than something strictly for gamers. This led to a good number of people buying the system so that they could play Wii Sports Bowling, not really caring whether they played the newest The Legend of Zelda or Super Mario title. As a result, software sales suffered and Microsoft continued to rake in the money off of the Xbox 360 software and its $80 million consoles sold.

Sony also saw an initial decline in sales due to trying to push their Blu-Ray format through their Playstation 3 and overcharging for the console. Over time (and a few price drops), however, the PS3 began to reach neck and neck with the Xbox 360.

So here we are in the present. Three new consoles from Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft are on store shelves once again. Fanboys the world over will lock in heated battles filled with hyperbole and idiocy as they try to determine which plastic box is “better.” It remains to be seen how this “console war” will turn out, but I thought it would make for an interesting article to compare the three and see how they measure up with one another by using categories common to all three systems.
Just to let you know, I’m writing this for gamers who only care to own one system per console generation as they try to judge which one they might consider picking up. As I stated with my console reviews, these are MY OPINIONS. I’m not trying to take sides here; I’m just trying to offer an objective viewpoint from the way I personally see things in the console world/videogame industry. Remember, I HAVE NO FAVORITES! I own all three. They didn’t get sent to me for free by Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft for review purposes. I bought them with my own money; therefore it would be foolish to say I spent money on something I knew I was going to hate.
(And yes, I saw the video of that kid who bought a PS4 on launch day just to smash it on the sidewalk, so I know stupid people like that exist. What an idiot. Trust me; I’m not like that guy. I value my dollars.)

1. Power/Graphics

Wii U –
Unfortunately, Nintendo, with its last two consoles, has been one generation behind. The Wii wasn’t up to technical snuff with the Xbox 360 or PS3, and instead was more on par with the company’s previous console, the Gamecube. The Wii U, while more powerful than the original Wii, is on par with the Xbox 360 and PS3, only ever so slightly more powerful. While games look a ton better than they did on the Wii, the Wii U still uses what is now considered “outdated” tech from around 2006/2007-ish.

PS4 –
More powerful than the PS3, the PS4 is the first console that I know of which outputs natively at 1080p (I had thought this about the Wii U at one point, but found out otherwise). As I’ve mentioned before in other articles and reviews, resolution may not be that important to some people, but resolution is also kind of like one of those hidden picture puzzles – once you see it, you can’t “unsee” it. The PS4 also offers graphical capabilities more comparable to visuals which can be found in newer PC hardware. Still not quite on that level, it’s a pretty large step up from the 2006 technology which the PS3 used for 6 years.

Xbox One –
If it wasn’t for the fact that the Xbox One doesn’t output natively at 1080p, there probably wouldn’t be a discernible difference between it and the PS4, since what’s under the two systems’ hoods are nearly identical. Though, I have to wonder: Is it that the Xbox One CAN’T run 1080p properly on certain games, or is it that no games support it right now? If no games support it, I have to ask, “why not?” This is something that really doesn’t make that much sense to me.

The Winner: PS4
Graphics aren’t everything - that’s a given. My favorite consoles of all time have been the Super NES, Gameboy Advance, and the DS/3DS, all three of which weren’t/aren’t capable of the stunning visuals seen on next-gen consoles. But in order to keep with the theme of looking at the console wars realistically, I believe that graphics ARE important nowadays to the success of a console. Games should always be fun; you’ll get no argument from me there, but games that look as good as they play can be a turning point for a lot of people. That being said, at these early stages of these new consoles’ lives, the PS4 seems to have the upper hand in the graphics department.

2. The Controller/How You Play

Wii U –
Rather than focus on graphics aspects and capabilities, Nintendo has chosen to put their efforts into the way we play games. When reading that sentence, you might think, “Well that’s good, right?”
I’m down for experimentation when it comes to game consoles, but Nintendo, in my opinion, hasn’t quite gotten it right yet. The motion controls of the Wii were neat, but that’s all they were – neat. It won over a casual fan-base, but the Wii-mote’s design was a little too off putting for some gamers, myself included.
The Wii U introduces yet another controller design, this time with more traditional features integrated into a tablet. I’m not a huge fan of the tablet for games. Instead, I use my touchscreen Wii U gamepad to navigate menus and my Netflix queue. Having a second screen for something like the DS or 3DS, a handheld system where you only have to shift your eyes to see the second screen is great, but having two visuals going on in my hands AND a television can be quite a bit distracting. I will say, however, that the ability to play some games on just the gamepad is a neat feature, though it neither makes nor breaks the controller or system design.
One problem that I believe Nintendo experiences with these radically different controllers is that developers feel like they need to add controller functionality to their games in order to support it. Apparently, this is why the Tomb Raider reboot never showed up on the console. Rather than develop something with an easily mapped control scheme across all platforms, developers know that they need to do something which will, at least in some way, show off the features of the gamepad. It’s my opinion that developers would rather take the easy route and not develop for the Wii U. Is this the best decision? Probably not, but at the same time, it’s kind of understandable. Why make a port of a game with features that just seem tacked on?

PS4 –
This is the first major redesign of the Playstation controller since the Dual Analog version on the original PS1. Built with comfort in mind, Sony also added a touchpad in the center for menu navigation with the possibility of game integration.
While I’ve never been the biggest fan of the controller’s analog stick placement, I admire Sony for keeping a familiar approach each time it releases a new controller. It’s not the most innovative way to go about things, but it’s also not too much too soon. The Playstation controller has slightly evolved with each new iteration, getting us used to new things rather than putting it all out there at once.

Xbox One –
Microsoft also took a familiar approach this time around, with some improvements made on the Xbox 360 controller. I still think they could have done a better job with things like the d-pad, but features like the rumble triggers are a neat addition. There’s not really that much to praise or curse about this controller.

The Winner: PS4 & Xbox One
How we play our games is, indeed, important. I think Sony and Microsoft get this one simply because they’ve given us something which we’re familiar with.
In the grand scheme of things, the Wii U gamepad is really not that far behind in this category. It does have the ability to play some games without the need of a television, and its button layout is more along the lines of what we think of now as a traditional console controller. I just really don’t see the touchscreen thing ever really taking off when it comes to consoles and it can, at times, become a hindrance in both the gamers who play and the developers who make games for the system.

3. User Interface and Features

Wii U, PS4, Xbox One –
Honestly, I think all three consoles are struggling a bit in this category, the PS4 less so than the Xbox One and Wii U, but not by much at all.
I think that the Xbox 360 had the best UI on a console to date. It was simple to use, I didn’t have any problems finding anything, and could basically pick it up straight out of the box and know where everything was located. When the Wii U came along, I was hoping that Nintendo had taken a page out of Microsoft’s book and created an interface which would at least make getting to your friends and engaging in multiplayer easier. In a way, they made it easier to get to your friends list (doing away with the horrid “friend codes” system), but everything now basically uses an app.
Want to look at your friends list? Open the app. Want to check your messages? Open the app. Then wait entirely too long for it to load. True enough, the time spent waiting for the app to load is only a matter of seconds, but this is, in my opinion, a step backwards from the instantaneous and effortlessness social features of the Xbox 360.
However, Microsoft isn’t innocent in this situation either. The Xbox One now has the same sort of setup, requiring you to open an app for almost everything you do. So does the PS4, only I noticed that it isn’t quite as bad on Sony’s system. It’s still not great, and doesn’t put it enough ahead of the competition to amount to anything, but it’s true nonetheless.
Some of the other features of the PS4 and Xbox One include internet streaming directly from a console to either TwitchTV or Ustream, cable box integration on the X1 and Game DVR (also on X1). These are all neat features, but I’m a gamer. I like to play games. These are all things that I personally have little to no interest in. Game DVR is pretty cool, but I could live without it. Streaming might be neat, but if I wanted to stream, a capture card is relatively inexpensive nowadays.

The Winner: Wii U & PS4
This one is tough to award a winner since all three have problems, but I have to give it to the Wii U and PS4. For some reason, the Xbox One’s interface just seems too cluttered. The entire thing being designed to function predominantly with Kinect is also a negative. It takes longer than what should be needed to figure out where everything is and how everything works, while the Wii U and PS4’s UIs are pretty straightforward, though still not exactly easy to navigate.

4. Games

Wii U –
It’s been no secret that the Wii U has been struggling over the past year in terms of games. I don’t believe that has anything to do with their quality or lack thereof, but instead the problem lies in Nintendo not releasing games from their big franchises on a regular basis. At this point, with a dip in exclusive 3^rd party support, Nintendo is having to rely on 1^st party titles in order to stay afloat – titles that they haven’t released. Don’t get me wrong, there are some interesting games in the pipeline, but by this point, a year after the console’s release, we should have seen some by now. Especially franchises like Zelda, Metroid, or Starfox. So far, we’ve only seen one game that I would consider a “triple-A” exclusive: Super Mario 3D World. All the really interesting games have been coming out on the 3DS. The new Legend of Zelda title being the most recent. And honestly, there’s really no reason that couldn’t have been successful on the Wii U.
Rest assured, there are a lot of people out there who love Nintendo franchises, myself included. The Wii U is the only place you’re going to get them. The question is, “when will Nintendo release them?”

PS4 –
I’ve already talked about what I thought of the launch lineup, so there’s no need to get into that. The only thing we can really do here is speculate on the future. Will there be new games from Naughty Dog on par with The Last of Us? A new Uncharted game has been announced, so I’m sure we’ll see new IPs. What about Quantic Dream? Probably.
I could go on and on about what games are probably coming out for the PS4.

Xbox One –
Microsoft could probably call their console “The Halo Gear Box” and it would be a more fitting title. The Halo and Gears of War franchises are pretty much what the system is known for. There’s no question that these two series will end up on Xbox One at some point. Other than sporadic exclusives, I really don’t see the Xbox One’s game library being any different than the PS4’s. One only needs to look at the PS3 and Xbox 360 for reference.

Winner: PS4 & Xbox One
When it comes to games, you won’t be able to go wrong with these two consoles. It all really boils down to (between those two) if you want your games to look slightly prettier or not.
Nintendo has gotten the reputation of being a “kiddy,” or “family friendly” company, which is probably true. Or at least, it’s more family oriented than the other two big names. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it kind of limits Nintendo in terms of diversity. The Xbox One and PS4 (and by relation, the PS3 & 360) will have a selection of all types of games from adults to younger children, whereas the Wii U’s games are usually centered around “all ages” with a focus on younger kids. The games that will be available for Wii U will be predominantly Nintendo franchises and have a more (for lack of a better term) “child-like” quality about them. There’s nothing wrong with that, but again, I can see where it’s kind of limiting to some degree.

Overview & Final Thoughts –
The only real way to run the gamut on gaming is to own all three consoles (and a PC, to a certain extent), but I understand that’s not always feasible. So after all is said and done, which console should you buy as you move forward into the future of gaming?
(Here’s the part where everyone who was expecting me to award an overall winner groans and gets extremely disappointed.)
I can’t answer that.

Just like this article and the opinions expressed in it, what you choose to play and the types of games you enjoy are for YOU to decide. All I can say is this: If I were going to have just one console of these 3, I would probably go with the PS4, with the Wii U at a close second. The PS4 performs just fine for me and the Wii U is the only place I’ll be able to play the Nintendo franchises I enjoy.
If you like diversity, the PS4 is probably for you.
If you want a console that is built to showcase new titles in classic Nintendo franchises with a more family friendly emphasis, go with the Wii U.
If you enjoy the competitive multiplayer scene and really like shooters, you’ll probably feel right at home on the Xbox One.

Personally, I enjoy all these types of games. So in all honesty, one is really no better than the other when you get right down to it. Games are games, fun is fun, and what we enjoy is what we enjoy. All three systems offer a varying degree of fun, each catering to a certain style. While that may impede or help a console manufacturer’s product sales, it shouldn’t have any bearing whatsoever on the fun that these consoles can bring you.

-Josh
 

 

Next-Gen Console Reviews Coming Soon

Just wanted to let you guys know that the next few weeks will probably see The Inner Dorkdom releasing a good bit of content...
I'll be getting the PS4 this Friday, along with Assassin's Creed IV, Battlefield 4, and Madden 25 (BF4 and Madden, thanks to a great promo deal through Amazon). So along with these 3 games (though there probably won't be a full-blown Madden review), there will be a review of the console itself, just like there was for the Wii U.

Next Friday, I'll be getting my Xbox One with Killer Instinct and the MadCatz KI Fightstick. I'll be doing a review of all three.

Get ready. There's gonna be a lotta readin' soon!

-Josh

The Inner Dorkdom Podcast - Episode 11

Josh and Nic discuss their thoughts on E3 2013 until late into the night. Enjoy!

DOWNLOAD
Runtime: 2 hours, 33 minutes

Josh's Inner Dorkdom Journal - Episode 8 (E3 2013 Impressions)

Time for another episode of the journal. So what have I been digging on lately? To be honest, not much. Since I’m on a break from school, I’ve been working full-time and that’s kind of taken up the majority of my days. There are a few things, however, and I can use this format (as well as an episode of The Inner Dorkdom podcast that we’ll be recording soon) as a way to relay my thoughts on some of the recent E3 news.




I didn’t watch the E3 conference this year, but I read most of the articles ‘round the internet about it. From what I’m reading, Sony clearly “won” this time.
Just how did they win? By completely standing up for the consumer, as opposed to Microsoft which seems to be very “anti” that mentality.

(Note: After writing this article, I went back and watched the archived conferences. Unfortunately, my following opinions and concerns have not changed.)

Let’s give a little backstory:

Back in May, Microsoft revealed the Xbox One, their newest console. This comes as a little delayed from Sony’s earlier reveal of the Playstation 4. As I said in an earlier article, I wasn’t particularly impressed with Sony’s initial conference that showed the world their new console, but I thought it was just “ok.” That being said, myself and many other videogame fans were completely floored (and not in a good way) by the ridiculous restrictions which were being proposed by Microsoft.

Honestly, I don’t know what they were thinking. A console that has to be connected to the internet to function?

Get out of here.

To be fair, Microsoft later stated that the Xbox One would not have to be constantly connected to the internet, but WOULD have to be connected at least once every 24 hours. This, in my opinion, is still quite unacceptable. I live in a quasi-rural area, so my internet connection is neither fast, nor the most stable. Because of that, an Xbox One would be extremely problematic for me. For example: Nearly every time it rains, I lose my internet connection. So if the weather happens to be bad for a couple of days, I just wouldn’t be able to play… At all. Not even single-player games that shouldn’t have to connect to the internet in the first place would be playable for me if the weather was bad.
“Metal Gear Solid V? If it’s raining for a few days, forget about it.” That’s basically what Microsoft is telling me.
That’s just terrible design. There’s no reason that a game console should ever have to be connected to the internet, at any time, to function.

Back to this year’s E3:

None of gamers’ concerns were alleviated at Microsoft’s second showing. All the restrictions and requirements were still in place: Required internet connection, no used games (unless the developer permits it by offering codes for a flat-rate), a really big push (though subliminal) for Windows 8, and an “always on” version of their Kinect technology. All these things were still around and I (and every other gamer) was being told that they were all “good things” and that I just “didn’t know I wanted them yet.”

Not to get too political here, but that sounds a lot like our government and the ridiculous policies they’ve tried to push in recent years.

The Playstation 4, however, has absolutely none of these unwanted features. Even in their E3 presentation, they made it a point to directly fire shots at Microsoft by pointing this out to gamers. Every shot was met with thundering applause, or so I read.
If I were there, I would have been in the crowd applauding right along with everyone else.

It would seem that this “console war” might be won by the following 2 things: Features and exclusives. Unlike previous console generations, hardware capability has been taken completely out of the equation. This time around, both the Xbox One and Playstation 4 have nearly identical specs under their respective hoods, so most games will be the same aesthetically.  Since that’s the case, one has to look at the two console’s features first.

In both systems, the features are, just like the hardware, nearly identical. You have uploadable content like the new video sharing and social media integration. You also have real-time video streaming on both, with Sony using Ustream and Microsoft using Twitch. Then there are the normal features like Netflix, Hulu, HBO-Go, Amazon, web browsing, etc.  With all these features in mind, exclusives have to be more of a factor.

I’ll readily admit, the Xbox One has more, interesting looking, exclusive titles so far than the Playstation 4. D4, Dead Rising 3, Forza 5, Halo 5, Killer Instinct, Quantum Break, and Sunset Drive are all exclusive to Microsoft.

Killer Instinct is kind of an interesting one.

A sequel to a series that’s been dead since the late 90’s, KI has been something that fighting game enthusiasts have waited for a long time. When the new game was announced as an Xbox One exclusive, the fighting game community went absolutely nuts. I saw several forum and Twitter posts saying that they were now sold on the new Microsoft console. Clearly this is an overreaction, since they seemed to forget about the crazy restrictions they had been complaining about only a few hours before the game’s announcement. Finally, the realizations of complicated tournament play (needing to have the console bought and downloaded for every console at every station at the tournament venue and a constant internet connection) began to rear their ugly heads and doubt began to set in. This doubt became even more substantiated when it was announced that Killer Instinct would be a “day-one download” title which would be “free-to-play.” Only one character (Jago) would be available until the player bought the rest of the characters. When gamers went into an uproar, Microsoft and the game’s developers quickly changed their rather poor wording, saying that KI would basically be a “demo” on day-one and the player would buy the full version of the game if they wanted to at a later time.

Why not just call it a “demo” in the first place? Come on, Microsoft. Get yourselves together.

The Playstation 4 doesn’t boast the larger number of exclusives that the Xbox One does. Drive Club, The Order: 1886, Gran Turismo 6, Infamous: Second Son, and Killzone 4, were the only ones that I could find. So does this mean that Sony’s in trouble? I say no. As I told a friend of mine, there’s only ONE company that can sustain a console on its exclusives, and that’s Nintendo, but that’s because their exclusives are mostly first-party titles that have been around since 1984. On the Xbox One, the only two exclusives that are “blockbuster” titles are Forza and Halo. Dead Rising 3 will be a good seller, as will the 2 new IP’s, Quantum Break and Sunset Drive, but these exclusives won’t be the “system sellers” that a game like Final Fantasy VII was for the original Playstation back in 1997.
Is Halo a system seller? In a sense, yes, but the people who are fans of that game were fans back on the original Xbox with Halo and Halo 2. These fans carried over into the 360 era, but very few jumped on board with Halo 3 or 4. I’m not trying to discount the power of the Halo franchise, I’m just trying to point out that like many exclusives, save for Nintendo’s, Halo is a niche title. The same can be said about Uncharted or God of War for the Playstation. It would be much different if something with the general power of a franchise like Final Fantasy, a third-party franchise, were going exclusive to either Playstation 4 or Xbox One, since that series carries much more clout than games that have ALWAYS been exclusive to one platform or the other.

So maybe exclusives WON’T win the war. Then what will?

If it weren’t for Microsoft’s crazy new policies, I would say that the race would be pretty neck-and-neck. Before hearing about the Xbox’s new, weird way of doing things, that’s exactly how I figured it would be. The simple fact is, gamers and everyday people generally don’t like to be told what to do when attempting to enjoy themselves while playing a videogame. This much is abundantly clear given the recent backlash to the Xbox One.

Perhaps the largest critical backlash from both the gaming press and gamers themselves came shortly after the Xbox presentation at E3. Don Mattrick, President of the Interactive Entertainment Business at Microsoft, was interviewed by GameTrailers.com and asked about some of the backlash towards the new console, particularly the constant internet connectivity issue. He was quoted as saying, “Fortunately, we have a product for people who aren’t able to get some form of connectivity; it’s called Xbox 360.”
This quote and arrogant, yet not surprising, attitude from a big-wig at Microsoft sent gamers into a frenzy. People that had recently supported the Xbox One 100% decided to drop their preorders and go the way of the Playstation. They were basically being told that if you couldn’t connect to the internet, you would be stuck with an outdated console which would probably lose support within the next 3 years and that Microsoft wasn’t going to back down from their outrageous requirements for the Xbox One. I, like all those angered gamers, thought that this was terrible marketing and customer relations. Again, it’s not surprising coming from Microsoft, as they’ve had this kind of mentality since they entered the world in 1975. World domination has always been their top priority, but it’s finally catching up to them.

With all that being said, I don’t mean to skip over Nintendo, but the simple fact is that they didn’t really have that much to show. What they did show was awesome, but nothing uber-exciting, or anything we didn’t already know was coming. I honestly think that it’s become the case that Nintendo is just… well…A NINTENDO company. I really don’t think they’re that interested in grabbing gamers of all types, and more focused on making consoles that play Nintendo-franchise games. Really, I’m fine with this. It’s not the greatest marketing attitude to have, but let’s be serious here: Nintendo franchises are powerful. The people who want those games are going to buy whatever console Nintendo builds in order to play them. If that’s what Nintendo is content in doing, then more power to them.  Personally, I would rather see Nintendo embrace all of gaming and build a console which would compete with the likes of Sony and Microsoft, but (to use a cliché that I hardly ever use) it is what it is. I own a Wii U and I’m excited for Super Mario 3D World and the new Legend of Zelda game that’s in the works. Plus, the 3DS is the greatest handheld every created (and currently has some of the best games on any device), so I can’t really complain. I’ve got my Wii U to play Nintendo stuff and I’ll have a PS4 and PC to play everything else.

*Post-E3 and Aftermath Edit*

As mentioned in the note above, I’ve since watched both Sony and Microsoft’s respective E3 presentations. Pretty much everything I read was accurate and was portrayed just as well in a written form as it was while watching the events unfold visually. In other words, my opinions remain the same. Microsoft chose to stay away from such topics as being connected online and outrageous DRM policies. Instead, they decided to infer to gamers that their system was “so good” that these things wouldn’t / shouldn’t matter. However, according to gamers, these things DO matter. 

Since the presentations ended, fans and the independent gaming press have shown their absolute disdain for Microsoft’s poor choices. I point specifically to internet gaming personality, Angry Joe and his recent interview with “Major Nelson” (Larry Hyrb), Microsoft’s Director of Programming for Xbox Live, as a prime example.
In the interview, Joe asks Hyrb some very difficult questions from his fans which put the Microsoft rep into a clearly uncomfortable and quite defensive position. The questions are simple and to-the-point and deal with gamers’ various concerns, such as the required online and DRM.

Joe tries extremely hard (until he’s discouraged by the Microsoft PR lady standing off-camera to move along) to not let Hyrb slide with his dodgy answers, but ultimately has to cut the interview short. This is due in part to the fact that Hyrb is about to partake in a “live event” on the showroom floor and, from what the rest of Joe’s video suggests, the angry PR lady who dislikes his questions.

Joe never comes off as antagonistic or that he’s looking for a debate, but instead as a concerned gamer. The fact that “Major Nelson” didn’t really want to answer his questions and the PR lady didn’t want them asked in the first place, seems like a confirmation of the attitude Microsoft seems to have at this point: “This is the future. Either get with it, or keep playing your Xbox 360 which will probably lose support roughly 3 years into the new generation of consoles. Even though all you gamers out there say you don’t want this stuff, we know what’s best for you.”

My response:
Sorry, Microsoft, I’LL decide what’s best for me. I don’t need you to tell me what I want. Also, stop dodging questions. You know everyone is angry with you over the decisions you’ve made, make moves to correct it instead of trying to shove it down people’s throats.

While playing Injustice online recently (on Xbox 360, mind you), I was talking with a friend of mine, an avid Xbox supporter, about these concerns. As we were talking, I noticed that every time I talk about these things, I may come off as though I’m a “Microsoft hater.” Nothing could be further from the truth. I happen to not like a lot of their business decisions (something which I’ve felt for almost 20 years), but I don’t like to see anyone “fail.” Truthfully, all of my concerns about the Xbox One boil down to one HUGE concern that I think is shared by 90% of gamers, but they don’t know how to voice it without sounding like raging “fanboys:” We don’t want these things to become console standards.

If Microsoft continues to be the same dominant force in the console market as they were with the Xbox 360, then it’s a given that the generation of consoles post-Xbox One and PS4 will be forced to adopt the same policies. The reason there is a severe outcry right now is because we’re all trying to voice the same thing: We don’t want this. From anyone. Ever.

That about wraps it up for this episode of Josh’s Inner Dorkdom Journal. Sorry that it was such a long read, but hopefully you’ll get something useful out of it and take these things into consideration before you purchase your next gaming console later this year. Hopefully, I’ll be back soon with a review of the game I’m currently playing: Naughty Dog’s, The Last of Us!

Trying to be an optimist in an overcrowded and slowly dying videogame world, I am,

-Josh

Josh's PS4 Thoughts

Console hardware is becoming increasingly difficult to discuss. As of right now, the Wii U has already been released and the PS4 was revealed only recently. How do the two compare and how will they stack up to Microsoft’s new Xbox? It’s really hard to say given the fact that no one outside the gaming industry has actually played anything other than the Wii U.

Some of the features revealed to be capable of the PS4 are kind of neat, but will they be enough to make the system sell? It seems as though Sony is going down the same road as Microsoft did last generation with more of a focus on social networking features. Stuff like being able to share gameplay videos across various media outlets such as YouTube and Facebook, or being able to spectate and take over the control of a friend’s game are cool ideas, but how much of that will simply be a novelty that will quickly wear off?

One thing about Sony’s presentation that I noticed was the very odd balance contained within. On the one hand, Sony was taking the Nintendo approach of, “this will change the way you play games,” but on the other, there was a focus on the PS4’s raw power, likening it to higher-end gaming PCs. While for most it would seem as though the presentation contained a good balance of the two, I felt like Sony is finding it hard to market this new console to consumers that have grown accustomed to current-gen hardware. More like, “how do we sell this thing? Is it the features, or the power?”
At least the “used games lockout” rumor proved to be false.

Going off pure features other than those mentioned above, it looks like there won’t be much more to offer than the PS3. The idea of playing games streamed to the Vita is ok, but it is a feature that requires one to actually own a Vita. Sony could possibly move a few more units by implementing this kind of connectivity, but given the Vita’s lackluster library, that’s highly doubtful. The PS4’s lack of backwards compatibility could also be problematic for some gamers. The Wii U succeeds here given the fact that it will play previous generation titles, as opposed to the PS4 which will not play PS3 games. In my opinion, every console should at least be capable of playing games from the previous console. I was disappointed that the Wii U can’t play Gamecube titles, but at least you can still boot up Wii software. In the final days of a console’s life, being able to play previous-gen titles on the new machine can keep the last generation alive for just a bit longer and ease people into the transition of a new box. Odd that Sony opted not to do so.

On power, there’s no question that the PS4 is in the lead so far. True enough, we don’t know what the exact specs on the Wii U are (which I’m getting really tired of saying, by the way), but then again, we probably never will. Nintendo has never been forthcoming with its system specs, something which Sony had no qualms with in their presentation. The PS4 will make a pretty big jump in improvement over PS3 architecture, making it a much easier system to develop for (according to developers, themselves), given its new, “not-cell” processor and various memory improvements.

In the graphics department, who can really say? It’s highly doubtful that the Wii U is capable of the near-PC quality visuals displayed by the PS4 demos, but you never know. As Nic and I talked about on the most recent episode of the podcast, we’ll never truly know until Nintendo develops and releases a game specifically built for the Wii U. But Nintendo’s system’s true power could possibly make itself known even further down the road seeing as how Nintendo has only just started experimenting with shaders and lighting effects.

So how does all this stack up to the new Xbox? There’s really no telling at this point since there has been no official news on anything pertaining to Microsoft’s new console other than a reveal event, similar to Sony’s, which is just around the corner. Judging by the rumors, the new Xbox will have nearly the exact same hardware that’s stuffed inside the PS4. Unfortunately, there are still some terrible rumors such as having to be constantly connected to the internet in order for the console to function and forced Kinect integration.
A lot of people ‘round the internet are already seeing the PS4 as the “one to beat” this generation, but I really think people are underestimating Microsoft. This is a company that has built a gaming empire with its Xbox Live online service. With comparable hardware under the hood and the consistent online features of the Xbox 360, there’s still a lot that remains to be seen. Also, there’s no doubt that Microsoft will take the same extreme measures in securing 3 rd party support as they did last generation. Sony has seemed to take similar measures, which will make the whole thing very interesting to watch.

Overall, I think the PS4 reveal was a good one, I just wasn’t overly impressed. The thing is though; I wasn’t really expecting to be. I remain skeptical that consoles will bring new things to the table that become mainstays of gaming, but I won’t know for sure until they’re hooked up to my television/monitor and the controllers are in my hands.

Sony has been the first to show what next-gen console gaming is capable of, something that Nintendo has yet to do, and Microsoft’s plans are still unknown. That being said, this year’s E3 will probably be one of the most interesting in recent history. E3 will give Nintendo a chance to reveal new games which will start to show the direction they want their console to go and the new systems will have a chance to build hype. I think that once the new Xbox is revealed and there is much more of a chance to compare and contrast all 3 systems, perhaps my excitement level will increase. All that can be said at this point is, “we’ll see….”

In order to wrap up, this brings me to something that people really need to realize: None of what you’ve just read, or what Nic has already written, or even what websites like IGN have written, really matters at this point because of 3 things:

1. The PS4 and Xbox HAVE NOT been released yet. No one has actually played the 2 consoles, aside from the aforementioned gaming industry (developers).
2. We don’t know how popular these features might eventually be. The PS3 was the first console to truly implement integration features (web browsing, streaming video, apps, etc.) and at first, they were services that nobody thought they would use from a videogame system. Now, these features have become the standard across the PS3, Xbox 360, and Wii U. A year down the road, a “share button” could be what turns the tide for consoles. That’s highly doubtful, but entirely possible given consumer’s mindsets these days.
3. All these “impressions” are based off of how well Sony presented their product. Did these features make you want to buy their console? Based solely on a presentation, that’s really hard to determine. Just like point #1 states, we have not actually used the console yet. I remember my initial impressions of the original Xbox as not being that great, but after I actually bought one, I ended up enjoying it. You know what made me want to get a Nintendo 64 initially instead of a Playstation? Playing Mario 64 for hours on end at Wal-Mart. Until one can actually review the console, then these impressions are, for the most part, meaningless.

After E3, when perhaps journalists will be able to spend some hands-on time with the PS4, these impressions will take on a bit more validity. Even then, however, the features that Sony has revealed of the PS4 won’t be known until one buys the console, plugs it in, and starts to play. Remember, “Knowing [about a console] is only half the battle.”
“G.I. Joooooooooooooooooooooooooooooe!”

-Josh

Assassin's Creed III: Liberation - Review (Vita)

Let’s be serious here - The Vita is a struggling handheld. In my opinion, there are only 2 games worth having (3, if you count Gravity Rush, which I hear is good): Mortal Kombat and Assassin’s Creed: Liberation. Personally, I think that the Vita is a great system, but the fact that Sony priced it so high crippled it as soon as it was released. That being said, Liberation is THE reason you should own a Vita.

Let’s get into it.

Story: 9/10
As with ACIII, the story takes center stage in Liberation. It follows the first female protagonist of the series, Aveline de Grandpre, one of the last members of the Louisiana sect of the assassin order, as she liberates African slaves from captivity during the same time period featured in ACIII. Some have complained about the story’s simplicity, but I rather enjoyed the tight, compact story offered in Liberation. It was a good change of pace from the regular, politically-fused, complicated plotlines of the console games. Also, Aveline is more of an interesting character than Connor – so much so that I find myself torn between who should take the leading role in a sequel. Perhaps both could share center stage? There are rumors…

Visuals: 8/10
For a handheld title, Liberation has the best graphics seen yet. Colonial-Era New Orleans is captured beautifully here, but the ambition of bringing a true Assassin’s Creed game to a portable is its own downfall. Because of the size and scope of the playing area, the framerate can get pretty chuggy at times. Contrary to what a lot of other reviews and players say, it is by no means unplayable and is otherwise quite pretty.

Sound: 9/10
While the sound design is nowhere near its console big brother, Liberation’s music is its shining achievement. Winifred Phillips, new to the series, perfectly captures the “bayou” feel of the game, all the while bringing in the epic flourishes AC is known for . In no way does Phillips ever copy or “rip off,” but she seems to draw several influences from classic videogame soundtracks to create something quite unique by mixing traditional game scoring techniques and flairs of the cinematic. Like the console game, the soundtrack is available for download at www.amazon.com and is mandatory for folks like myself that love videogame music.

Gameplay: 8/10
Thankfully, all the changes to ACIII’s gameplay (the annoying “mini-games”) have been replaced by a system which allows the main character, Aveline, to switch between 3 different personas: The Lady, The Slave, and The Assassin. Switching between these personas limits her abilities as far as combat and free running, but grants her options for certain situations. By switching to the slave persona, she can infiltrate areas such as plantations without detection. If in the Lady persona, Aveline can charm her way past guards. The Assassin persona is exactly what you think it is: Aveline dons here brotherhood gear and gains the normal assassin abilities seen throughout the series, but also gains a considerable amount of notoriety and has a higher rate of detection. While this system is an excellent concept, it is unfortunately under-utilized except when the story dictates that you change personas.
There are a few things which use the features of the Vita’s touch screen and pad, but nothing which either detracts, or adds to the experience.

Controls: 5/10
Remember in the ACIII review where I talked about my ‘B’ button having problems? I have the same problem with the Vita’s equivalent (circle button), only here it’s 10x worse. I very seldom was able to land a counter and was forced to rapidly tap ‘circle’ in order to deflect enemy attacks. This made the combat in the game extremely frustrating throughout and is why the score is so low. Other than that, the control scheme and overall gameplay is exactly the same as its console counterpart, save for the new persona system.

Is Assassin’s Creed: Liberation worth the full price? Yes. Not only is it worth full price, it’s also worth owning a Vita for, as this is the best game for the system. A top-notch story, great graphics for a portable, and amazing music easily outweigh the gameplay and control issues. Also, it might be a good idea to pick this up if you’re an Assassin’s Creed fan – if nothing else but to see where the series is about to go now that Desmond’s story has come to a close.

Final Score: 8/10

-Josh

I can't take credit for these screenshots. These were taken from Google Images because of the difficulty in taking screenshots of the Vita.

My Videogame Life Pt. 3 (The Conclusion!)

-The Present & The Future-

So after reading the first 2 parts of this whole thing, we’re finally up to the present day of gaming, but let’s backtrack just a touch. I haven’t really covered handheld consoles, so let’s do that real quick…

I was never a handheld gamer until around the time of the Gameboy Advance. I had played an original Gameboy along the way, but the Advance was what really sold me on how awesome handhelds could be. Essentially, the GBA was a mini-SNES. Need I say more? How could you not love the fact that Nintendo was allowing ports of old 16-bit titles along with brand new IPs on a relatively cheap console? We were able to get Final Fantasy IV, V and VI (all with their correct Japanese numbering), new Metroid(s), Castlevania and a slew of other games which effectively ushered in “retro” gaming. The GBA allowed new gamers the opportunity to experience something that they may have missed out on (or not been alive for) the first time around. The GBA sported 2 different models: The original and a smaller, flip-top version with a MUCH brighter screen. There was also a ridiculously awesome attachment for the Gamecube called the Gameboy Advance Player that allowed GBA games to be played on a television through the GC itself.

Nintendo continued through to the Nintendo DS which introduced, in retrospect, a kind of useless second screen. It was a touch screen, so that was kind of cool, but other than being able to display stuff like maps and miscellaneous things like that, it was just a, “hey, that’s neat,” kind of thing. The important thing about the DS was the games for it. Phenomenal titles all around. Since the DS was significantly more powerful than the GBA, the system was capable of 3D graphics which lent themselves well to Square’s complete 3D remake of Final Fantasy IV. The only problem I had with the system was the amount of versions that were released over its lifespan. There were a total of 4 versions of the DS released over 6 years. The second version, the DSLite, was a smaller, lighter version of the handheld with brighter screens. The third, the DSi, was similar to the Lite, but dropped the GBA backwards compatibility in favor of features like a camera and several small applications. The fourth and final version, the DSi XL, was exactly the same as its previous version, only twice as large. I can understand maybe 2 versions of a system (upgrades and such), but 4?! Surely Nintendo could have cut out the middle 2 versions. What was the point in releasing the DSi and then a year and a half later releasing the DSi XL? Why not just wait for the larger, better one? But the DS, over its 6 years of existence, made a killing, so what do I know? I owned the original DS and the DSi, while Nic owned 3 of the 4 models.

It was at this time that Sony tried their hand at the handheld market, a market that Nintendo had completely dominated since the days of the original Gameboy. The result was the PlayStation Portable (PSP), a sleek black handheld that’s looks and interface definitely embodied Sony’s current gen system, the PlayStation 3. Was the PSP a good system? Did it topple Nintendo’s king-like reign in the handheld market? Kinda and no. Yes, the PSP was a good system, being nearly as powerful as the PS2, but no, it didn’t really effect Nintendo’s business at all and they still remain on the throne to this day. The whole UMD thing was kinda silly, as well.

So that brings us to the current generation. Right now, there are 3 consoles and 2 handhelds on the market: The Nintendo Wii and 3DS, Microsoft’s Xbox360 and Sony’s PlayStation 3 and Vita. I own them all except for the 3DS, so I’ll give my thoughts on ‘em.

The Wii and 3DS –Quite honestly, this is my least favorite of the consoles I own. And I don’t just mean from this generation. I have a total of 6 games for the system. Thing is, those 6 games are all that have interested me from what the system has to offer. I have my own thoughts on Nintendo’s business decisions as of late, but I won’t go into them in very much detail so as not to sound like a hater. I will state this here so that it will be on the record for all time: I do not hate Nintendo. I think Nintendo, over the most recent years, has made some extremely poor choices that could have been easily remedied, but I’m not their business manager, so I can’t complain too heavily. The Wii is, in my personal opinion, the worst business decision they have made thus far.

Let me explain: Releasing a system to cater to non-gamers is not the way to sell a console. Not when you’re up against more recent heavy hitters such as Microsoft and Sony. Well, let me rephrase that –It’s not the way to sell software for your console. Nintendo currently holds the top spot as far as systems sold in this console generation. This is a good statistic, but if you look at their software sales, they aren’t nearly as high as Sony or Microsoft’s. One needs to look no further than a top-selling game like Call Of Duty. Which console do you think had more software sales for, say, Modern Warfare 3, a game that was available on all 3 major consoles? It wasn’t Nintendo, I can tell you that.
Xbox360 –Microsoft did absolutely no wrong this console generation… Except for that whole “red-ring-o-death” thing. Seriously, why not fix that? It took until about a year or so ago when Microsoft released a remodeled version of the console to finally fix a problem that completely breaks the thing. As far as software goes, this was the place to get your fill when it came to new and exciting titles. While most games were released for the big 2, the Xbox version usually outperformed the technically more powerful PS3.

PS3 and Vita –
For me, the PS3 is smack dab in the middle of the console war. While it’s more powerful than its competition, it is, by in large, not a videogame console. It’s a “do-all.” A “home entertainment system,” if you will. The PS3 plays nearly any kind of disc known to man except for HD-DVD (an unfortunately dead format. I think it was better than Blu-Ray). All the way from Compact Disc to Blu-Ray, the thing would play it all, including being backwards compatible with the previous 2 Sony systems. I heard at one point several years ago that the system was extremely hard to program for, which made developers a little apprehensive about making games exclusively for it. The system did have a few things going for it, though: Like the Wii, it had free online as opposed to Microsoft’s payment plans (although you get what you pay for. If you don’t pay, you run the risk of that big Sony hacking fiasco last year). It had some decent exclusives (God of War, Heavy Rain, Metal Gear Solid 4), and most importantly to me: It kept the exact same controller since the Dual Shock was released back in 1997.

The controller has obviously always been important in videogames. Each new console has released with a new controller that usually ends up adding something to the next generation’s design. Every single console owes its controller’s design to the original NES because they’ve all grown from there. The SNES added 4 face buttons and shoulder buttons on the top, the N64 added an analogue stick, all of which have been incorporated into all console’s controllers over the years. Sony just happened to find a design that works perfectly for all games and stuck with it. Not to sound like I’m trying to beat a dead horse here, but the Wii’s controls are something I just don’t see ever becoming the norm. At least not for a looooooooooong while. I like to relax while I play games, not wave a stick around like an idiot.

The Vita, on the other hand, needs to step it up quite a bit. I own one, but I own it for one simple reason: Mortal Kombat. Currently, it is the only handheld that has MK and for someone that likes to keep his MK chops up, the Vita version is where it’s at. The Vita needs stronger titles and hopefully it will get them once bigger titles like the portable Assassin’s Creed III spin-off are made available.
So what about the future? 2013’s E3 should be the big reveal for both Microsoft’s “Xbox720” and Sony’s PlayStation 4. Nintendo’s Wii successor, the Wii-U, was revealed at last year’s E3, effectively winning the conference. The 3DS is out there doing pretty decently, although it had a fairly rocky start from what I understand. Very little is known about the Wii-U and even less is known about the other two consoles. Nintendo has a lot to make up for with 3 rd party support on their new system, but with games like Ninja Gaiden, Batman: Arkham City and Assassin’s Creed III, it looks as though they’re making a step in the right direction. Microsoft only needs to keep doing what they’ve been doing and Sony needs to actually create a game console rather than a home entertainment system. 2013 should be an interesting year to say the least.

I hope this 3 part article has been at least somewhat interesting to you. I know that it became more of a “history of videogames” than about my personal experiences, but maybe it was interesting nonetheless. Through the new website, I hope to be able to update you guys on the progress that the videogame world continues to make with both reviews and opinions which might shape where you want to go when it comes to your games.

-Josh

THE END *Doubleback by ZZ-Top should probably play right about now*

My Videogame Life Pt. 2

-The 32/64 and 128 Bit Era-

By the time the PlayStation was released in North America,the SNES was still going strong. Really,I (and nobody else,for that matter) had absolutely no interest in the thing until around 1996 when it was announced that the newest Final Fantasy title would be released exclusively for the console.

At this time,I owned a Nintendo 64. The N64 was,in my opinion,a great system. It was the first to introduce analogue sticks, which are something that are kind of the standard today. Plus,the graphics were phenomenal for its time. By this point,I was still getting Nintendo Power in my mailboxevery month,so I,like many others,saw an article before the N64’s release that displayed screenshots from a tech demo from Square. The tech demo showed characters from Final Fantasy III (VI in Japan) fighting a humongous knight. Supposedly,this was going to be the tech that Square would use to develop for the N64,but alas,Square dropped the added graphical horsepower in favor of storage space.

Upon Final Fantasy VII’s announcement, sales of the original PlayStation skyrocketed while I was left thinking,“what in the world just happened?” Why was it that a company that wouldn’t have been nearly as successful without Nintendo,suddenly leaving and making games for another company? It was like Square was cheating on their wife or something! And that’s exactly how I felt when I bought a PlayStation in 1998.

Up until this point,I had been a Nintendo fan through and through. Thing is,that’s all there was. At least,that’s where all the great games were. Now it looked like all the larger franchises and interesting games were being moved to the PlayStation.

I remember the first time I ever played one was shortly after Final Fantasy VII had been released. Down at our local video store,you could rent a PlayStation for around $20 plus the price of the game. Naturally,I rented FFVII. I thought it sucked how you had to turn the thing upside down for it to work. I believe it was something to do with the disc drive going bad. Of course,the rented console didn’t come with a memory card,so in order to keep playing you had to 1) Not die. 2) Leave the system on if you had to walk away.

Was the original PlayStation all that great? Looking back on it,not really,no. The graphics were horrible,the load times were ridiculously long,and gameplay on most games was fairly stiff. It should be noted that this was a transitional period in gaming. Most games played on a 2D playing field before this time and we were now suddenly thrust into 3D. I had always been a PC gamer as well,so the transition wasn’t all that shocking to me,but people who had only owned consoles at this point were in a completely new world. That being said,there were good concepts in those horrible looking,horrible playing 3D games that would be the building blocks for some of today’s most popular franchises. Metal Gear Solid,Resident Evil… The list of potential new franchises was as long as your arm. The N64 still did well because of its first party franchises such as Mario and Zelda, but when it came to 3 rd party games,it just couldn’t hold up to the competition. Suddenly,“Nintendo” had been replaced by “PlayStation” as the household name when it came to games.

You can always see what system is the most popular simply by watching television. As a child of the ‘80s,I was raised on sitcoms. I watched everything from Andy Griffith,all the way to more recent shows like How I Met Your Mother. The movie, The Wizard showed us that the original NES was king and references in such shows as Full House made us realize that the SNES was where it was at in the early ‘90s,all the making us believe that those Olsen chicks were one person. In the late ‘90s,however, the PlayStation was the most featured console in television,letting us know that Sony had one that particular console war.

Sony would continue their dominance throughout the late ‘90s and early 2000s with the release of the first 128 bit system, the rather simply titled,PlayStation 2. The first game I ever played for the PS2 was the demo for Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty. The demo came packed in with my friend Danny’s copy of Konami’s Zone Of the Enders. I was taken aback with just how much the graphics and gameplay had improved from the first Metal Gear Solid.

While console wars had usually been comprised of just 2 companies duking it out for marketplace dominance (Nintendo/Sega,Nintendo/Sony),this time there would be 4 consoles in the war. Sony had the PS2,Nintendo had the Gamecube,Sega had the Dreamcast and newcomer Microsoft had the Xbox. Sega’s Dreamcast would quickly die off and fade into obscurity,leaving Sega to enter the 3 rd party software market,while the big 3 struggled to fight the battle.

The PS2 reigned supreme throughout its lifespan based on their head start and carryover of 3 rd party support from their previous system. Nintendo would,with the Gamecube,have to suffer the “sins of the father” (N64) and struggle to find its footing while lacking very much 3 rd party support at all. It’s a shame because,other than it’s media choice (mini-dvd),the Gamecube was technically more powerful than the PS2 and had more in common with the Xbox. Developers at this time had kind of blackballed Nintendo as the company they didn’t want to make games for. Was it because of the lack of 3 rd party support on their previous system? Was it because the storage capacity was smaller on the Gamecube? I have no idea. Nintendo put out some triple-A 1 st party titles around this time,just as they did with the N64,and have continued that trend here in the present.

Microsoft,new to the console world,would be the wildcard throughout this section of the console war. The Xboxwas easily the most powerful of the three systems,but it didn’t quite have the 3 rd party support of the PS2. Don’t get me wrong,there were a lot of games ported from the PS2 to Xbox, but there weren’t that many new franchises being debuted on the console… Except Halo.

Ugh… Halo.

I’m just not a huge fan of Halo. It’s ok,but I just don’t see what’s so special about it. Truthfully,I had already played Halo several years before it came out… when it was called Doom. That’s right,I said Doom! Sure,Doom wasn’t as pretty as Halo,but it was basically the same thing,only Doom was darker,you fought demons from Hell that you THOUGHT were aliens,and much cooler music than that choir chant stuff that everybody just loves to pieces. Heck, Master Chief even LOOKS like the Doom Guy!

Anyway,rant over. I just don’t care about Halo. Sorry.

My decision to buy an Xboxcame fairly early on. Dead Or Alive 3 had been a launch title for the system and I already had some experience with the fighting game franchise from Tecmo. I knew that one of the playable characters was none other than Ryu Hayabusa from the Ninja Gaiden series. I remember telling my friend Danny that if Tecmo ever announced a Ninja Gaiden game for Xbox,I’d go buy the system that very day. One day I get a call from Danny saying he got his new Game Informer magazine in the mail. He started out by telling me about some upcoming games within the mag until he finally got to one in which he said, “Dude,you’re gonna have to buy your Xbox today.” There,in a 2-page spread in Game Informer was a preview for Ninja Gaiden on Xbox. I went to Danny’s house,picked him up and we set off to buy an Xboxand Dead Or Alive 3 on the very day he told me about Ninja Gaiden.

As the 128-bit era of the console war ended,it was very clear that Sony had won yet again and Sega had lost so bad they had to get out of the business. Nintendo and Microsoft had sort of hung in the middle of things. Looking back on it,it seems as though Microsoft was using the original Xboxas a testing ground for a much larger weapon…

To Be Concluded…
*BTTF fanfare once again!*
-Josh

I, Sad

So I had a 3 page article written about what I hoped to see at E3... so far I haven't seen any of it. Absolutely none. This E3 has been crap, in my opinion. Maybe I'll post the article at some point. More later.