Slashdot Mirror

two options:

1. don't buy games
2. go to http://www.gamerankings.com/ and don't buy anything that gets lower than 90%.

this isn't rocket science, come on.

What do you think about http://www.gamerankings.com/? It seems to work pretty good if you are looking for multiple review scores for one game and it puts them all together in a handy location. Then you can just follow the link to read the actual review. I use it when I am really serious about wanting a game but I want to check with multiple review sites to see if they all gave it the same general rating.

Just a few.

Oh my god! A 5-year lifecycle! It's not like Nintendo has ever had a lifecycle that short.

You misread. November 15th, 2001 was the XBOX released. November 29th, 2005 the XBOX360 is released. That is 4 years from launch to launch; previous "successful" systems (NES, SNES, GB, GBC, GBA, PSX, PS2, even the N64) had 5+ year spans usually with an additional 3-5 years after that. The PSX was launched in 1994. You can still buy them new today, 11 years later. That was Sony's first console. The NES launched in 1983, and the Super Famicom wasn't even released until 1991; the NES was still going strong in 1993. That was Nintendo's first console.

Microsoft's first console has lasted barely 4 years.

As for the library, XBOX had a number of notable exclusives, and with Rare onboard it appears that the 360 will have a number of notable exclusives as well.

Like... Halo? And what? Fable? What has Rare done since 2002 for the XBOX? Let's see: Grabbed by the Ghoulies, and Conker: Live and Reloaded. Yeah. I bet the 360's going to have lots of Rare games. Nintendo sold their stake for a reason.

Don't believe Sony's crapola. Most developers have said that the XBOX 360 is roughly equal to the PS3 in terms of graphical muscle. The ATI GPU in the 360 is no pushover, no matter what Sony would have you believe.

"Most developers"? Which developers are these? Microsoft developers? They don't count, you know. Being "roughly equal" is not a good position for a console whose predecessor sold almost exclusively on technical superiority.

And I wouldn't call over 200 games "meager" in terms of backwards compatibility.

Compared to 1500 PS2 titles and 1400 PS1 titles, it's pretty meager.

And there are interesting games now. Lots of Rare fans like myself have been waiting for another Perfect Dark, there's PGR3, DOA4, and, of course, all the 3rd party sports and racing games.

Keep waiting. Racing and sports are nice; some of us like a little more variety.

As for DVD, who gives a crap? DVD-9 holds more than 9 gigabytes of data - it's certainly enough for any PC game out there, and I fail to realize why it's a serious issue for the 360.

Your failure, Microsoft's failure, not anyone else's. 9 gigs isn't much anymore. High-res textures, geometry, and video eat up lots of space really quick.

There are multi-DVD PS2 games; next-gen consoles will support far larger textures and geometries. Space is a must.

You're assuming that Blue-Ray is the format of the future. And that backwards-compatibility is going to be 100% - hell, even newer PS2 revs are having trouble maintaining full backwards-compatibility.

The PS2 isn't 100% backward-compatible with the PS1... but it's really damn good, and doesn't require downloading binaries or developer interaction. Most people are fine with that.

The Revolution isn't even competitive in this area. Nintendo has segmented themselves into a different market segment through the odd controller, late launch, different pricepoint, and different hardware specs.

...then you say:

Oh, and I don't see you crapping on Nintendo for choosing DVD-9 for Revolution.

Go back and read the previous paragraph you wrote for why. Nintendo is on an entirely different playing field of their own making.

You don't get it, do you? The 360 isn't about improved hardware, it's about improved software. Downloadable demos & movies. Independant games. Intelligent matchmaking. Integrated VoIP. Connectivity with XP Media ce

Ignoring the fact that you can't pick a winner from "both sets of reviews" when it's only included in one of them...

The "games have to get nine out of ten to be worth playing" mentality bothers me. A lot. Scores are inflated to the point where they're almost meaningless anyway; even though Black and White was a good game, do you really think it would have been consistently rated at the 90% level if it wasn't so anticipated and so hyped? The 10/10 on PGR3 means jack except for it's the obligatory launch title that everyone is expected to buy with the console. What console hasn't launched with at least one game in the 9/10 or above range?

Personally, I know I'd have more fun with Kameo than I would PGR3. I've got racing games, and plenty of them. I'd much rather have an experience that's new instead of something that we see modified and released anew every six months in some form.

It's also a letdown to see how the scores are determined. Kameo was scored lower because it's only going to last "weeks, not months?" Give me a fucking break - weeks of entertainment for $50 is still pretty darn good, all things considered, and Kameo also seems to be one of the few 360 launch titles that has a plot of some kind. Apparently, that's become a bad thing.

The first thing to note is that even when the console game is running side by side with a top of the range PC version, outputting in as high-resolution as it can muster, the 360 version has the edge visually. Perhaps this will change as graphics cards evolve, but for now, the console game runs more smoothly, has far quicker load times, and looks generally better than its poor home computer cousin.

The original argument was "why fill the 360 launch lineup with sports clones?" the counter-argument was "they sell well", your counter-counter-argument is "just because they sell well doesn't mean they're good". My conuter-counter-counter-argument is "I think they suck too, but the games sell well, which means they'll also help sell 360s, and that is what the argument was about."

But now for the real reason I posted:

"Just because a game sells good doesn't mean it's a good game."

Meanwhile, Guitar Hero gets a 9+ from every damn site, has amazing mainstream music and a controller based on a real guitar (travel-size), and just in general has "I want to play this game" written all over it when someone sees it in action, and half the stores don't even carry it.

It's got to be priced damn near dirt by now, but it's worth picking up at any price.

BULLSHIT

Gamespot 8.2 "Great"

RPG Vault Final Fantasy XI is a well-made , evolutionary online world that doesn't present a lot in the way of innovation, but does present an extensive list of adapted and enhanced features that combine to offer deep, solid play. Perhaps the single most noteworthy element is storytelling, something for which Square Enix is renowned.

AVault Final Fantasy XI succeeds on so many levels.

GameSpy 4/5 Stars

MMORPG.com Tied for 5th highest rated MMORPG with a user score of 8.0. The highest rated score is only 8.4.

Both games were done by the same developer (radical), but yes, you're right, this one isn't a movie tie-in.

movie based, came out last year i think?

and

comic based.

Both games were done by the same developer (radical), but yes, you're right, this one isn't a movie tie-in.

movie based, came out last year i think?

and

comic based.

Does anyone even make adventure games like Sam and Max anymore? The latest console games might be really good, but they're likely not going to appeal to a Monkey Island fan.

Sadly, nobody makes adventure games like Sam and Max any more. However, that's not to say that nobody makes adventure games anymore, or nobody makes games like Sam and Max. For the latter, you should certainly pick up Psychonauts for your favorite platform. It's not an adventure game, but it has some adventure elements to go along with its action.

For adventure games, there are still plenty (though sadly none in the style of LucasArts like S&M, MI, GF, MM, etc):

• Still Life
• Syberia and Syberia II
• The Longest Journey, which is supposed to have a sequel soon.
• Indigo Prophecy hasn't shipped yet, but it looks promising (played the demo on the latest Official Xbox Magazine)
• All of the CSI and Law and Order games, if you're into those.
• All of the Myst games

Does anyone even make adventure games like Sam and Max anymore? The latest console games might be really good, but they're likely not going to appeal to a Monkey Island fan.

Sadly, nobody makes adventure games like Sam and Max any more. However, that's not to say that nobody makes adventure games anymore, or nobody makes games like Sam and Max. For the latter, you should certainly pick up Psychonauts for your favorite platform. It's not an adventure game, but it has some adventure elements to go along with its action.

For adventure games, there are still plenty (though sadly none in the style of LucasArts like S&M, MI, GF, MM, etc):

• Still Life
• Syberia and Syberia II
• The Longest Journey, which is supposed to have a sequel soon.
• Indigo Prophecy hasn't shipped yet, but it looks promising (played the demo on the latest Official Xbox Magazine)
• All of the CSI and Law and Order games, if you're into those.
• All of the Myst games

Does anyone even make adventure games like Sam and Max anymore? The latest console games might be really good, but they're likely not going to appeal to a Monkey Island fan.

Sadly, nobody makes adventure games like Sam and Max any more. However, that's not to say that nobody makes adventure games anymore, or nobody makes games like Sam and Max. For the latter, you should certainly pick up Psychonauts for your favorite platform. It's not an adventure game, but it has some adventure elements to go along with its action.

For adventure games, there are still plenty (though sadly none in the style of LucasArts like S&M, MI, GF, MM, etc):

• Still Life
• Syberia and Syberia II
• The Longest Journey, which is supposed to have a sequel soon.
• Indigo Prophecy hasn't shipped yet, but it looks promising (played the demo on the latest Official Xbox Magazine)
• All of the CSI and Law and Order games, if you're into those.
• All of the Myst games

Does anyone even make adventure games like Sam and Max anymore? The latest console games might be really good, but they're likely not going to appeal to a Monkey Island fan.

Sadly, nobody makes adventure games like Sam and Max any more. However, that's not to say that nobody makes adventure games anymore, or nobody makes games like Sam and Max. For the latter, you should certainly pick up Psychonauts for your favorite platform. It's not an adventure game, but it has some adventure elements to go along with its action.

For adventure games, there are still plenty (though sadly none in the style of LucasArts like S&M, MI, GF, MM, etc):

• Still Life
• Syberia and Syberia II
• The Longest Journey, which is supposed to have a sequel soon.
• Indigo Prophecy hasn't shipped yet, but it looks promising (played the demo on the latest Official Xbox Magazine)
• All of the CSI and Law and Order games, if you're into those.
• All of the Myst games

Does anyone even make adventure games like Sam and Max anymore? The latest console games might be really good, but they're likely not going to appeal to a Monkey Island fan.

Sadly, nobody makes adventure games like Sam and Max any more. However, that's not to say that nobody makes adventure games anymore, or nobody makes games like Sam and Max. For the latter, you should certainly pick up Psychonauts for your favorite platform. It's not an adventure game, but it has some adventure elements to go along with its action.

For adventure games, there are still plenty (though sadly none in the style of LucasArts like S&M, MI, GF, MM, etc):

• Still Life
• Syberia and Syberia II
• The Longest Journey, which is supposed to have a sequel soon.
• Indigo Prophecy hasn't shipped yet, but it looks promising (played the demo on the latest Official Xbox Magazine)
• All of the CSI and Law and Order games, if you're into those.
• All of the Myst games

Does anyone even make adventure games like Sam and Max anymore? The latest console games might be really good, but they're likely not going to appeal to a Monkey Island fan.

Sadly, nobody makes adventure games like Sam and Max any more. However, that's not to say that nobody makes adventure games anymore, or nobody makes games like Sam and Max. For the latter, you should certainly pick up Psychonauts for your favorite platform. It's not an adventure game, but it has some adventure elements to go along with its action.

For adventure games, there are still plenty (though sadly none in the style of LucasArts like S&M, MI, GF, MM, etc):

• Still Life
• Syberia and Syberia II
• The Longest Journey, which is supposed to have a sequel soon.
• Indigo Prophecy hasn't shipped yet, but it looks promising (played the demo on the latest Official Xbox Magazine)
• All of the CSI and Law and Order games, if you're into those.
• All of the Myst games

Check out GameRankings.com It's RottenTomatoes for video games. Here is the Dungeon Siege II Review

Check out GameRankings.com It's RottenTomatoes for video games. Here is the Dungeon Siege II Review

I feel the same way. The only game that's actually felt "fresh" to me in a long time has been Psychonauts.

Reviews are great. Definitely check it out.

Besides a slew of other games that fit parts of the description, Sanitarum seems to hit most of the points, exactly. It was released in 1998.

The Sega CD attempted realistic graphics, but failed because the result was unattractive and grainy.

Other games that made the Playstation a must-have console for mature gamers were Resident Evil and Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain. Both games were highly violent, but played with a depth that was previously unimagined in the age of side-scrollers.

Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain

Hmm, what does that remind me of? Oh yes, Sword of Vermillion or any of a dozen other RPGs from the age of sidescrollers:

Sword of Vermillion

Perhaps he's referring to the cheesy cut scenes?

But the Playstation made heavy use of polygons and its 3D capabilities, resulting in fighting, racing, and sports games that moved realistically and appealed to its new audience. A decrease in bubbly, colorful sprite graphics also meant the decline of what was once the lifeblood of a system: the videogame mascot.

Battle Arena Toshinden

Yes that was so much better and more mature than say, Eternal Champions or Street Fighter II.

I'm going to ignore his comments that cute, furry mascot characters are better when given a gritty edge and guns. (I exempt Conker, but because Conker was supposed to be a joke against the hypercute furry animal games. If they are all like that, then it isn't a joke anymore... or maybe it is, but a joke on the industry.)

Oh, but I remember why I didn't get the 3D version of Earthworm Jim the sadly departed Conker of the 16 Bit era. It was because they tried to change it into a "3D" game and the result sucked!

I still haven't seen any games and it's like 2 months from launch.

Then you haven't been looking very hard. Try GameRanking's list with links to media coverage for each game.

Speedball 2 is one of my favourite sports games ever, although I don't think a modern graphics engine would actually make it any more fun.

I never played Speedball 2, but I did enjoy the original Speedball back in the day. If you want to try the spiritual successor to that game, go try to find a copy of Deathrow[1] (pronounced "Death Throw", not "Death Row") for Xbox. Sadly, the game was released just a bit too soon to have Live support (launched 10/2002, Live launched 11/2002), and it didn't sell well enough to justify a sequel. That said, it's still one of the best "fantasy" sports games I've ever played. A definite sleeper, and it's a shame few people ever played it. Good luck finding a copy, though, as it never even made the "Platinum Hits" series. It looks like there are a few available on ebay, and you could try your local used game store.

[1] Warning: Strong language and graphic violence. This game deserves its M rating (no, there's no hidden Hot Coffee mod). This is definitely not something you want your kids playing.

I'm a bit befuddled as to why the story submitter considers Madden 2006's response to be "lukewarm".

Firstly, as mentioned by other posters, the rankings he linked to were for the PC version, the PS2 version got an 88% rating and the Xbox version an 87% rating, both respectable scores and hardly 'mediocre' (I would also argue that 79% is quite respectable).

I also am unsure of why the submitter is referring to Madden 2006 Xbox/PS2/PC as a "next-generation title"...

And as to the "what are players to do?" comment, it appears that they are running out in droves to buy this game. After all, they did sell 1.7 million copies in the first week alone...

I'm a bit befuddled as to why the story submitter considers Madden 2006's response to be "lukewarm".

Firstly, as mentioned by other posters, the rankings he linked to were for the PC version, the PS2 version got an 88% rating and the Xbox version an 87% rating, both respectable scores and hardly 'mediocre' (I would also argue that 79% is quite respectable).

I also am unsure of why the submitter is referring to Madden 2006 Xbox/PS2/PC as a "next-generation title"...

And as to the "what are players to do?" comment, it appears that they are running out in droves to buy this game. After all, they did sell 1.7 million copies in the first week alone...

It's getting pretty good reviews, too. If it was only online, it sounds like the game would be the holy grail of the Advance Wars series.

It has an average rating of 93%. Maybe you personally didn't like it, but with a rating that high you can't deny it's one of the best games this console generation.

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/589719.asp? q=price%20of%20persia%20sands%20of%20time

Otherwise, HL2 is little more than Yet Another Generic Shooter. It's completely linear, almost as bad as those early rail shooters. "Go this way, now this way. Oh look, a scripted event trigger."

The story is fine, but gameplay-wise it's just boring. For godsakes, it has ubiquitous exploding barrels and crates with ammo! It's a dull, cliche shooter.

Credit to the GROWTH of the industry? I, and a lot of people, would argue that it's indicative of the downfall of the industry.

And here I just thought Zonk was trying to be a pretentious yap. "Look at me! I'm reviewing a game, and unlike all of those other reviewers, I'll tell you that it's fun!"

Think about it. Would you want to read a review that consisted of two words? "It's fun." The end. Woo! I'm going to go buy it now! Reviews are one resource used to decide whether or not you're going to buy a game. I want a review that tells me what's good about the game ("It's fun" is a start, but I want to know why the reviewer thinks it's fun -- I may have a different perspective than the reviewer, so if I know where the reviewer is coming from I can judge better). More than that, I want to know what's bad about the game. When I'm spending $30-60 on a game, I want to know what I'm getting into. I'll read reviews and talk to friends. Applying those to my own preferences (eg, I like racing games and shooters, not so much RTS or puzzles), I will end up in one of three states: "Will buy it", "won't buy it", and "need to rent it or borrow from a friend to make up my mind". If reviewers only spouted off "It's fun", I'd end up in the third case way too often for my liking. (Note that I'm not saying I base my buying decisions solely on reviews. I use them as a source of information, nothing more, and generally will gather reviews from multiple sources by using a site like GameRankings.com to get an aggregated score and multiple review perspectives.)

There's a reason why reviewers don't boil down a review to "It's fun" or "It's not fun" -- they'd be out of a job, because nobody would bother reading their reviews. You can attack the reviewing industry for taking payola, or for giving generous scores (how many times have you seen a review where the text of the review makes it sound like the game should've actually scored 2-3 points lower than it did?), but attacking it because they don't summarize with, "It's fun"? That's just silly.

The Wind Waker is the first, and likely only, 3D Zelda I will ever appreciate... yet it's the least boring of the bunch thus far

Let me get this straight: you're calling Ocarina of Time boring, even though you've never played it? You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but that comes across as a pretty shallow statment, especially for a game a lot of people would agree was the best game ever made.

2D or 3D is presentation. The kinds of exploration, rewards, and psychology that guide and encourage your actions are the game. But if you really are hung up on the 2D Zelda on a modern console thing, you're in luck. Nintendo actually did that: it's called Zelda 4 Swords Adventure. (Or get a GameBoy.)

It also received the fourth perfect score ever from respected Japanese mag Famitsu. For all it's faults, it was still a darn good game. When a game's predecessor was the the top-rated game of all time, it will be placed under far greater scrutiny than most games.

I think it speaks for the game's quality when most critics can only name two or three noticeable flaws. In retrospect, I could easily list a few problems with Halo 2, Counter-Strike, GTA: San Andreas, World of Warcraft, Metroid Prime 2, or any other big game, but that doesn't detract from their quality. The fact remains that Wind Waker was overall the top-rated game of 2003, and that's pretty impressive in its own right.

Personally, the fact that Aonuma and Miyamoto have noticed the few flaws of the game and are taking steps to correct them gives me a lot more confidence in the sequel.

From what I remember, and have read, the sequel to Syndicate was very disappointing. Very mixed rankings here...

What I don't understand, how is this such a big deal if games such as The Guy Game and Playboy: The Mansion, which both BLATENTLY peddle sex, get an M rating?

Manhunt received generally good reviews (75% on Metacritic, 77% on GameRankings) and was widely considered to be a solid, well-executed stealth-action game. If anything, the over-the-top gore worked against it terms of reviews and sales, though it boosted its rental performance.

Personally, I enjoyed Manhunt quite a bit.

"Ooh, look, another Resident Evil title...wonder if I kill zombies in THIS ONE TOO! It was eye candy, face it."

Which is why the American press named it the fourth best game in recent years, above such American classics as Half-Life 2 and the Halo series. Because it was eye candy. Right.
And I'm sure the American press was also holding their noses when Paper Mario 2 was consistently rated one of the top RPGs of the year, and when Pikmin 2, Metal Gear Solid 3, Zelda: Minish Cap, and Viewtiful Joe all recieved excellent ratings.

Not only that, but three of the titles you mentioned (Ratchet and Clank, Sly Cooper, and GTA) were all made by Western developers. I think you're geography is a little off, unless you consider Europe "the far east".

And no. Atari wouldn't have taken back the market. The public was reluctant to buy the NES because they had been burned so badly by the Western crap that had been shoveled into their Ataris. Nintendo had to market the NES as a toy robot with a game console "peripheral" for American stores to even stock the system. That's how bad Atari screwed things up.

You say Lumines, I say METEOS

And this game cannot be made for any other gaming system, since it is necessary to use the stylus with it. It's worth the price of the system IMHO.

I don't know who you are, LKM, but you need to post these useful nuggets of gaming goodness more often.

The only other recently released adventure game which comes to mind is Broken Sword: The Shadow of the Templars which was released for the PC and consoles, among them the GBA.

However, there are rumors that Cinq and Nintendo are already working on a sequel to Another Code, which hopefully will be a bit longer :-)

And given the success of Another Code, it's quite possible that we'll see more adventures on the DS.

This is what "gamespotting" is? Who gives a damn about any single game review site? I get nearly all of my game information from http://gamerankings.com/ and http://gamefaqs.com/. If it isn't there, it's on Google.

GameRankings has a statistics page that list game sites and their average review score (see column on the far left)

Sites that give highest average rating:
Videogame Informer (average rating = 89.5%)
VGN Daily (average rating = 88.4%%)
Telefragged (average rating = 87.8%)
N-Wired (average rating = 87.6%)
Xeo Gaming (average rating = 87.4%)

thought you might be interested...

http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/stats.asp

The above says the Xbox has roughly twice as many games as the GC, probably mostly due to lacking third party support. There's no way to filter the list for exclusives only.

Your DS needs Kirby: Canvas Curse, BTW.

I think one of the problems of sex in video games is the uncanny valley. The beach volley games like DOA look kinda spooky in my opinion, and not really sexy. Feel the Magic XX/XY worked around this problem successfully by having a very stylized female. Basically, they leave it to your imagination, and it works. Opening her top actually is kinda sexy.

Still, I think in many games, sex simply has no place. Mario and Peach would be very uncomfortable, and having the Halo guy get it on would really pull you out of the game.

Either way, sex can't really be used to sell games (BMX XXX anyone?), because you don't have to play games to see nude people. You get that on the Internet for free, without having to play a crappy game. The game needs to be good in the first place to make you play it. Sex can possibly enhance a good game, but it can't make a good game.

I actually have to agree with the idea that Microsoft is going to have a lot of work to do. Like you said, the fact that the Xbox was powerful pushed a lot of consoles.

I do disagree with a few things you said, though. First, I don't think Microsoft's market rests on those numbers alone. They had decent lineup of exclusive games, themselves. Halo, PGR, Ninja Gaiden, Splinter Cell (originally exlusive; similar to GTA), Morrowind, KoTOR, Jade Empire, Forza, Doom 3, Half-Life 2, etc. That's not to say the PS2 or NGC couldn't counter those examples, but the fact remains that those games do exist.

Also, I find it hard to believe that you think Halo 3 would not be looked at as much of a killer app. I think the reviews speak for themselves. Halo 2's campaign was a disappointment, but it's clear it was designed as a multiplayer game to begin with, and it was very successful as one.

You also can't just dismiss Live. Sure, 2 million users really isn't that much in the grand scheme of things, but having an established technology and community is nothing to blow off--especially with some of the upgrades Microsoft is planning.

Lastly, I definitely disagree that the GameCube is superior in quality, much less 'extremely' superior. Being as sports, FPS, and '3rd person action' (think Ninja Gaiden) are my preferred console genres, I found the GameCube to be extremely lacking (if for no other reason than that the controller was not suited for them). Of course, I've also played and loved every one of the games I listed earlier on my box, with the exception of HL2 (own it for PC and it's great. who act like it's not major that it's exclusive for Xbox?). While yes, GameCube does have its own line of exclusive games, I prefer those listed to Zelda (the new one looks hot as shit, but the last one just wasn't my style), Mario, etc.

It really all comes down to a matter of personal preference, and in the current generation I prefer the Xbox. I honestly feel unconfortable playing with a GameCube controller. It feels too small for me--I actually prefer the original Xbox controller to the controller s, and I realize that puts me in the minority. Like I said, it's a matter of preference. I think the Xbox is a great console, from the power to the inclusion of ethernet and a hard drive. From everything I'm seeing, though, it looks like the PS3 will likely be my choice for the next generation. I only hope that controller feels better than it looks like it does..

You do have to hand it to Nintendo...Of the current generation of consoles, they and Sega are the only ones that managed to get more than one exclusive title on Game Rankings' top ten list. Not only that, but they've managed to do that two generations in a row...And, like Sega, they did it with exclusive titles no less. Though that will probably change sometime in the future when Capcom ports Resident Evil 4 to some other console whenever their contract with Nintendo is up.

They did. "Advance Guardian Heroes" came out last fall for the GBA, but was met with mediocre reviews. It's now pretty cheap; I actually got it a week ago and my experience thus far is that while the game has potential, it's held back by its bad translation and a b0rked save system, both of which magnify the issues it already has with a messed-up learning curve and sub-standard in-game training/tutorials.

Advance Guardian Heroes release last fall was over-shadowed by the similarly-timed North American release of another Treasure GBA brawler, Astro Boy: Omega Factor, which is frankly a far better game (that is to say, it is a very good game, and close enough in overall style and gameplay to act somewhat as a substitute). Knowledge of Astro Boy's various stories in animation and comics over the years may improve your appreciation of the game, but I can tell you from experience that it is not needed to enjoy it; the game stands on its own. (Although, for those who are curious about how the game's story relates to existing material, the game actually includes something of a small, gradually-unlocked encyclopedia on Astro Boy and related works also by the late Astro Boy creator Osamu Tezuka.)

Yep. That's right. We all just pine for the days when we could play super mario brother 2 and blaster master. That's all we do all day. Yup, that's how we think: that was the only era in which games were good.

Oh... wait... is it me, or are five of the top 10 games on gamerankings nintendo games? Oh, and none of those 5 are NES, SNES or gameboy. Your cliche "Nintendo is T3H Kiddie!" rant is so old. Why don't you whine about "Micro$oft" or make an "In Soviet Russia" or "Beowulf Cluster" joke while you're at it.

Plus, the ratings have been low. The reviews basically say that the game doesn't bring much of anything new to the genre.

For the non-gamers/non-historians in the crowd, the Starfleet Academy idea has been kicked around for quite a while now, not the least of which was rumors about it before Enterprise launched. The primary motivating factor for the idea however has been the series of games Interplay published in the 90's under the Starfleet Academy title, the first of which was a SNES title and the second a whopping 6 CD full-motion-video/space-sim game for the PC. Like most of Interplay's Star Trek games, they were poorly received, but the PC game amounted to an interesting prototype in how a Starfleet Academy series might pan out, and why it's a plausible idea in the first place.

Except that Soul Calibur is six places ahead of Halo on GameRankings and usually considered reason enough to own a Dreamcast. Soul Calibur 2 didn't climb as high because most reviews subtracted points for it not being as large a step ahead as SC1.

i do believe you forgot to mention Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution, which is easily (imho) the greatest fighting game of all time...

93.5% rating on Gamerankings.com as seen here.

Soul Calibur 1 and 2 are definitely great games but not games I enjoy a great deal; Tekken and DOA are nice to look at but fail to have balance and depth, at least compared to VF4evo's near perfection.