One of the major issues both Microsoft and Sony have been facing is the problem of uniqueness. While many of the hardware or online features both offer are unique, their software libraries aren't. Beyond titles such as LittleBigPlanet and Dead Rising, most everything on both systems either has been ported outright or has a near equivalent counterpart.
So, having played our game and found both systems wanting, what does one do? We're left with online experiences that are difficult to experience before actually purchasing a console, price tag differences, and the question of Blu-Ray. The price tag is the only thing that isn't abstract of difficult to understand (at least for most people, I can't tell you the number of college-aged people I've met who didn't understand there was a difference between Blu-Ray and HD-DVD).
The end result is that both the 360 and the PS3 are limping along, faster in some places and slower in others. Neither is going to go anywhere until one gives a truly compelling and obvious reason for claiming supiriority.
To be fair those are great games, but the problem is they are either on the other platforms, remakes of old games for predecessors of the other platforms or have nearly analogous counterparts there.
What is really being sought aren't just good games, but good games whose experiences can not be duplicated by competitors to any close degree.
I could keep going back, but I think the point has been made. None of these news articles have any hint of aggression, dislike, or malevolence from Zonk. Some of the news was later soiled by slip-ups by Sony, but I don't think we can credit Zonk with being able to see the future.
The fact of the matter is that text on the internet is hard to read properly. The intentions of the author are difficult to make out and understand, and it is exceptionally easy to read things the wrong way. I had enough problems on IM with my girlfriend because the body language and tone of voice that would have been enlightening as to my intent with a sentence were lost. Zonk is a victim of people reading into his words a grudge against Sony, and nothing more.
Zonk would be a very petty man indeed if he got worked up over that list.
It's the video game bestseller list of the North American portion of an online retailer who does not specialize in video games. It is not a statistically sound sample for how any console is doing overall.
If/when the NPD or an analogous operation overseas puts the PS3 on top, laud it and rejoice. This list, however, does not deserve the special attention you continually call to it.
I'm almost inclined to believe you're a very carefully disguised advertiser for Amazon.
Technically, neither the 360 or the PS3 are doing well if you factor in that the Wii is outselling either one by a ratio of 3 to 1.
Hence, were we to assume (erroneously) that each PS2 bought had a unique owner, would only buy one console and that the entire market was PS2s, the end result this generation would be (given the current trends) 68.2 Wiis, 29.4 360s and 23.4 PS3s.
Of course in reality trends change, people buy new consoles to replace old ones, the market isn't zero sum or static, and the world could always end first.
That said, until the Wii slows, stops or is overtaken the price difference between the 360 and the PS3 is largely a sideshow. Unless either company does something to catch or stop Nintendo they're conceding the Risk board while squabbling over Asia.
Agreed, hype has zero influence on whether a game is good or not. All it influences is sales. Unless you can only enjoy games other people don't buy, it shouldn't matter how hyped the game is.
That's an interesting assertion, potentially backed up by a sibling post, but I'd still like to see some numbers. It also doesn't change that the PS3 was not outselling the 360 "monthly". One month, especially one that only just finished, does not count as "monthly".
Now, it would be interesting if the PS3 did start consistantly outselling the Xbox 360. I'd like to see some shakeup in the current norms because the pencil-straight sales rates of the three consoles are positively boring. I can only be excited about console X beating console Y by Z margin for so long before hearing the exact same news every day/week/month is "meh". It would be nice to see Microsoft or Nintendo put on the ropes for a while, because that's what brings customers the best products.
What you say is true, but the post I replied to specifically said "monthly". It's hardly monthly if it's only happened for one month, especially one that finished not three days ago.
If Sony sales have risen as described and the 360 sales have not risen significantly then for July the PS3 will have outsold the 360. However, until the PS3 outsells the 360 in August "monthly" is a misleading term.
Anyway, I'm looking forward to July's NPD. If the price cut did boost PS3 sales and give them momentum, things might finally get interesting.
You know, some people would be thankful that they're actually getting value for money - that one game lasted them for longer than a month. Sure there is a subscription, but it's less than the price of a console game every month:)
It depends on what one counts as value, and how money constrained one is. As I'm working a salaried job that more than pays my bills by a fair amount (including paying more than the minimum on loans and leases), I can well afford the difference if I believe it provides more value to me.
I believe that playing the game is more fun than finishing the game, I'd rather have something that keeps me engrossed for a year than something I finish in a few weeks and never pick up again. I do play WoW, and I'm in a casual but skilled raiding group (Gruul, Kara, Maggy on farm, we're in TK now), and never did we actually run out of content.
Technically, you can't finish the game, there's always more to do. Like you said, there's always more content. It's how MMORPGs are. I'm the nut who always goes for 100% in every console game I play anyway, exploring content is something I do.
There is more than just level 60, err, 70, err, 80. Some of the nicest content is at the lowest levels (Uldaman is still my favourite instance). If what you want is to do big raids and get epixx, then yes, you will need to be the top level, and that takes a while. But enjoy the ride, don't just power through it, it's fun.
I've been playing WoW for over 2 years now. I didn't have a level 60 before TBC came out, and I only hit level 70 a couple of months ago.
The problem is not that I don't enjoy questing and Azeroth, it's that I enjoy playing with people more, and playing with my friends even more than that. If there were lots of people playing between levels 20 and 58, I'd be a lot more inclined to take the sweet time I used to take leveling (see 2 years of playing the game before I even hit level 60). However, Azeroth is largely a dead place following STV. I've run around Feralas, Un'goro, WPL and other zones without seeing or hearing another soul, and when I do see people they're more often of the other faction.
The reason I may seem eager to reach Outland is because that is where the people are. It is where my friends and guildies are, and everyone else I want to play with. I honestly could care less about raiding and epix, BGs and World PvP, or farming of any kind. The only reason I do any of that is because it's fun to do it with other people.
What I'm complaining about is that there is a large and formidable barrier to this which only serves to be increased by another 10 levels. If I were to get some real life friends of mine into WoW today, they probably could not catch up to my 70 and guild by the time the new expansion comes out. If I want to reroll a class to help my guild fill a hole, by the time I've finished the guild needs are likely to have changed.
The majority of the playerbase will always be at or near max level, and however nice the old content is it will always be far hard to find people to experience it with.
Have you even played TBC?:)
Yes, and ironically BC is part of the problem.
The difference in quest exp from Azeroth to Outland is ridiculous. I've seen a fair amount of people simply stop question around level 52 because the effort is not worth the reward. The quests are largely designed to prepare and lead into content few people do anymore. It's more time efficient and even more fun to simply grind out 6-10 levels in order to reach outland where you can get 10k exp for quests as simple as those from Newbie areas.
I'm not asking for Outland to have vastly increased quest exp, I'm asking for Azeroth to get a boost. Quests seemed one of the better ways to do it, but overall there's a significant exp difference on all counts between Azeroth and Outland. I think the disparity between the two is something that can and should be fixed, and will help the issue I'm pointing out.
However, we aren't talking about the original Manhunt, we're talking about Manhunt 2. Unless you are N'gai Croal or a contemporary of his who have actually played the game, I'm not sure your (or I) are qualified to classify this game as "art" or "not-art".
I'd agree that the original manhunt wasn't particularly artful. However, it is entirely possible (considering what I've read by journalists who have played the game) that Manhunt 2 might be artistic in a demented, horrific fashion.
1. Pants. 2. Exploding Dentures. 3. Xbox 359.4s. 4. Incomplete Roller Coasters. 5. Xbox 360.6s. 6. PS4.
Obviously my list is gospel truth, and we can infer from it that Mr. T will win the 2008 Presidential elections.
More seriously, the amazon bestseller linking is getting rather tiresome. It's one retailer in relation to one continent whose focus isn't even video games. We've got the NPD to give us numbers to cite, if the PS3 is really trouncing the 360 it will be reflected there. Speaking of which...
Alone, the PS3 is not outselling the 360 in North America. If you're lumping the PS2 and the PS3 together, then combined they are outselling the 360. However, that was not the implication your sentence gave.
The anonymous poster had mod points on his full account, and laid a careful trap for intelligent discoursers. Anyone who disagrees/says anything he doesn't like gets modded down./tinfoilhat
It's counter-intuitive, but you actually level faster killing green mobs for several reasons.
1) They are lower level than you, which means: -a) You are harder to hit and damage. -b) They are easier to hit and damage. -c) They do less damage as a rule. -d) They have less health.
2) Orange mobs are higher level than you, which indicates the exact opposite of the above and also adds the additional possibility of sustaining Crushing Blows. Going after orange mobs is especially difficult for caster classes.
Basically, fighting higher level mobs will get you more exp per kill, but at the high cost of time spent killing and subsequent downtime. The difference between a level 31 and a level 37 mob isn't a whole lot in terms of exp (10-20% at the absolute most), but the difference in ease of killing is substancial.
Anything that reduces downtime is key to increasing exp/hour. Bandages over using mana to heal yourself, and food/drink are imperitive. When my Warlock was level 57 with full rest I averaged around 7 bars per hour constantly killing undead in WPL. That's 35% of a level in half the time you described more than 30 levels later.
WoW is a grind, though perhaps less of one compared to other games. But if you're going to grind and not quest, you should be able to do better than you were especially at your level.
I work a standard 40 hour work week, and also enjoy such things as eating and sleeping. Assuming I get a decent 8 hours of sleep a night, spend 1.5 hours on food and hygene and 1 hour commuting; 5 out of 7 days of the week I have a total of 5.5 hours of free time.
Assuming 15 days/played, that's more than 60 weekdays worth (or 12 weeks) of devoting every hour of free time to WoW to go from 1-70. However, that doesn't cover running the instances to get the required gear/rep to begin raiding, nor does it cover that if the character in question being leveled is an alt it is entirely possible that one will be continually interrupted by guildies needing another person to tank/dps some instance.
Conversely, the typical console game completion time is 40 hours, or 80 hours if it's an unlockfest. In the time it takes to level (not gear) an alt, one could potentially complete 4-7 console games.
The problem will only become worse as the level cap increases. There are a large number of group quests in Outland that will be difficult to complete for alts due to the lack of contemporaries, most having moved on to newer pastures save for the occaisional raid. If Blizzard intends on further increasing the level cap it will become prohibitive for new players or alts to successfully catch up to other players.
I'm not asking for the option to instantly spawn characters at high levels. Leveling is an excellent way to allow players to understand and master a class. However, the amount of time required to do so is too much.
I personally recommend increasing the exp received from quests by a substancial amount. This can be lessened in earlier areas where the quests are already enough to carry a player from zone to zone, but should begin to take significant effect by level 25. Multi-zoning shouldn't be a necessary measure in order to level.
I'd appreciate it if this expansion included easier leveling up to 70/80. The amount of time and effort it takes to level and properly gear an alt is increasingly prohibitive.
The releases of the PS3 and the Wii have neither increased nor decreased the rate of sales for the 360 in either region by any significant amount. In terms of absolute market share rather than relative percentages, the PS3s impact on the 360 appears to be non-existant.
I didn't really care about the prospect of playing games on Live, but if I'm able to run through the campaign with my old college buddies across the country I'm sold.
I guess that means I'll have to subscribe to Live.
I believe you're confused with nexgenwars.com, which extrapolates based on previous trends and tends to have varying levels of accuracy in its numbers. Otherwise I'm not sure where you're coming from.
Additionally, if you could link sources/articles relating to you statement that the 360 is dead in two regions it would be appreciated. I'm aware that it is doing very poorly in Japan, but haven't seen sales numbers for elsewhere that indicate a pronouncement of "dead".
As for the "waggle", we will have to see. Using your assumption that it is purely hype, it is entirely possible that Nintendo can stretch it for another decade or so (see: pokemon) to great success.
#1: I have no problem with Blizzard bringing lawsuits again third party servers so long as they are currently maintaining their own. The legal precident set by that case is bad, but "suing third party servers" as a reason to dislike their games doesn't cut it for me, especially when the servers better allow cheats/pirated games. If Blizzard does the same thing if Battle.net is shut down, then I'd be annoyed.
#2: It's a free service, and they aren't oblidged to keep information you're not using. You haven't played your game in 3 months, and they're spending money for those 3 months for your characters to be there. To keep the service free, deleting inactive characters and accounts is something they need to do. All you have to do is play each character/account 1 hour in every 90*24 and you're golden. Alternatively, if you don't play the game that often you can always play single player. Blizzard doesn't delete characters off your computer, and you can mod the game to suit you if you don't like going it alone (or play with friends on Open Battle.net).
#3: I don't agree with this, especially as a reason to avoid Blizzard games. Imagine if in Counter-Strike you could see exactly where every player is all the time. That would completely destroy much of what makes the game strategic, fun, and exciting. If you want to play games without Fog of War, you can make custom maps to do so just as people do for BGH style maps. You won't get ranked for it, but you have the option to "embrace change".
Map Hacking isn't incorporated into ranked play for the very reason that it is a substitute for skill. StarCraft and WarCraft III were designed so that intelligence gathering is an important aspect. Eliminating that can be a fun diversion, but seriously hinders competitive play.
Are you saying the 20 or so scarabs simultaneously colliding with the Overmind's flesh weren't dramatic as they were incidentally lit by psy-storms and hallucinated Zeratuls? Barbaric!
Slashdot Mirror
It's a game that needs to be played.
One of the major issues both Microsoft and Sony have been facing is the problem of uniqueness. While many of the hardware or online features both offer are unique, their software libraries aren't. Beyond titles such as LittleBigPlanet and Dead Rising, most everything on both systems either has been ported outright or has a near equivalent counterpart.
So, having played our game and found both systems wanting, what does one do? We're left with online experiences that are difficult to experience before actually purchasing a console, price tag differences, and the question of Blu-Ray. The price tag is the only thing that isn't abstract of difficult to understand (at least for most people, I can't tell you the number of college-aged people I've met who didn't understand there was a difference between Blu-Ray and HD-DVD).
The end result is that both the 360 and the PS3 are limping along, faster in some places and slower in others. Neither is going to go anywhere until one gives a truly compelling and obvious reason for claiming supiriority.
To be fair those are great games, but the problem is they are either on the other platforms, remakes of old games for predecessors of the other platforms or have nearly analogous counterparts there.
What is really being sought aren't just good games, but good games whose experiences can not be duplicated by competitors to any close degree.
I think that kind of power abuse might be why you don't get modpoints.
This is blatantly false. Here are stories Zonk has posted that are positive.
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/24
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/23
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/11
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/09
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/23
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/08
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/26
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/25
I could keep going back, but I think the point has been made. None of these news articles have any hint of aggression, dislike, or malevolence from Zonk. Some of the news was later soiled by slip-ups by Sony, but I don't think we can credit Zonk with being able to see the future.
The fact of the matter is that text on the internet is hard to read properly. The intentions of the author are difficult to make out and understand, and it is exceptionally easy to read things the wrong way. I had enough problems on IM with my girlfriend because the body language and tone of voice that would have been enlightening as to my intent with a sentence were lost. Zonk is a victim of people reading into his words a grudge against Sony, and nothing more.
Zonk would be a very petty man indeed if he got worked up over that list.
It's the video game bestseller list of the North American portion of an online retailer who does not specialize in video games. It is not a statistically sound sample for how any console is doing overall.
If/when the NPD or an analogous operation overseas puts the PS3 on top, laud it and rejoice. This list, however, does not deserve the special attention you continually call to it.
I'm almost inclined to believe you're a very carefully disguised advertiser for Amazon.
Technically, neither the 360 or the PS3 are doing well if you factor in that the Wii is outselling either one by a ratio of 3 to 1.
Hence, were we to assume (erroneously) that each PS2 bought had a unique owner, would only buy one console and that the entire market was PS2s, the end result this generation would be (given the current trends) 68.2 Wiis, 29.4 360s and 23.4 PS3s.
Of course in reality trends change, people buy new consoles to replace old ones, the market isn't zero sum or static, and the world could always end first.
That said, until the Wii slows, stops or is overtaken the price difference between the 360 and the PS3 is largely a sideshow. Unless either company does something to catch or stop Nintendo they're conceding the Risk board while squabbling over Asia.
Agreed, hype has zero influence on whether a game is good or not. All it influences is sales. Unless you can only enjoy games other people don't buy, it shouldn't matter how hyped the game is.
I was talking purely within WoW itself (Chance of Blizzard removing levels: None) but I'd agree that MMORPGs could use a breath of fresh air.
It'll be interesting when we finally see a fantasy MMORPG that doesn't use some derivative of the d20 system.
That's an interesting assertion, potentially backed up by a sibling post, but I'd still like to see some numbers. It also doesn't change that the PS3 was not outselling the 360 "monthly". One month, especially one that only just finished, does not count as "monthly".
Now, it would be interesting if the PS3 did start consistantly outselling the Xbox 360. I'd like to see some shakeup in the current norms because the pencil-straight sales rates of the three consoles are positively boring. I can only be excited about console X beating console Y by Z margin for so long before hearing the exact same news every day/week/month is "meh". It would be nice to see Microsoft or Nintendo put on the ropes for a while, because that's what brings customers the best products.
What you say is true, but the post I replied to specifically said "monthly". It's hardly monthly if it's only happened for one month, especially one that finished not three days ago.
If Sony sales have risen as described and the 360 sales have not risen significantly then for July the PS3 will have outsold the 360. However, until the PS3 outsells the 360 in August "monthly" is a misleading term.
Anyway, I'm looking forward to July's NPD. If the price cut did boost PS3 sales and give them momentum, things might finally get interesting.
It depends on what one counts as value, and how money constrained one is. As I'm working a salaried job that more than pays my bills by a fair amount (including paying more than the minimum on loans and leases), I can well afford the difference if I believe it provides more value to me.
Technically, you can't finish the game, there's always more to do. Like you said, there's always more content. It's how MMORPGs are. I'm the nut who always goes for 100% in every console game I play anyway, exploring content is something I do.
I've been playing WoW for over 2 years now. I didn't have a level 60 before TBC came out, and I only hit level 70 a couple of months ago.
The problem is not that I don't enjoy questing and Azeroth, it's that I enjoy playing with people more, and playing with my friends even more than that. If there were lots of people playing between levels 20 and 58, I'd be a lot more inclined to take the sweet time I used to take leveling (see 2 years of playing the game before I even hit level 60). However, Azeroth is largely a dead place following STV. I've run around Feralas, Un'goro, WPL and other zones without seeing or hearing another soul, and when I do see people they're more often of the other faction.
The reason I may seem eager to reach Outland is because that is where the people are. It is where my friends and guildies are, and everyone else I want to play with. I honestly could care less about raiding and epix, BGs and World PvP, or farming of any kind. The only reason I do any of that is because it's fun to do it with other people.
What I'm complaining about is that there is a large and formidable barrier to this which only serves to be increased by another 10 levels. If I were to get some real life friends of mine into WoW today, they probably could not catch up to my 70 and guild by the time the new expansion comes out. If I want to reroll a class to help my guild fill a hole, by the time I've finished the guild needs are likely to have changed.
The majority of the playerbase will always be at or near max level, and however nice the old content is it will always be far hard to find people to experience it with.
Yes, and ironically BC is part of the problem.
The difference in quest exp from Azeroth to Outland is ridiculous. I've seen a fair amount of people simply stop question around level 52 because the effort is not worth the reward. The quests are largely designed to prepare and lead into content few people do anymore. It's more time efficient and even more fun to simply grind out 6-10 levels in order to reach outland where you can get 10k exp for quests as simple as those from Newbie areas.
I'm not asking for Outland to have vastly increased quest exp, I'm asking for Azeroth to get a boost. Quests seemed one of the better ways to do it, but overall there's a significant exp difference on all counts between Azeroth and Outland. I think the disparity between the two is something that can and should be fixed, and will help the issue I'm pointing out.
However, we aren't talking about the original Manhunt, we're talking about Manhunt 2. Unless you are N'gai Croal or a contemporary of his who have actually played the game, I'm not sure your (or I) are qualified to classify this game as "art" or "not-art".
I'd agree that the original manhunt wasn't particularly artful. However, it is entirely possible (considering what I've read by journalists who have played the game) that Manhunt 2 might be artistic in a demented, horrific fashion.
My best seller list.
1. Pants.
2. Exploding Dentures.
3. Xbox 359.4s.
4. Incomplete Roller Coasters.
5. Xbox 360.6s.
6. PS4.
Obviously my list is gospel truth, and we can infer from it that Mr. T will win the 2008 Presidential elections.
More seriously, the amazon bestseller linking is getting rather tiresome. It's one retailer in relation to one continent whose focus isn't even video games. We've got the NPD to give us numbers to cite, if the PS3 is really trouncing the 360 it will be reflected there. Speaking of which...
April:
360 - 174,000
PS3 - 82,000
May:
360 - 155,000
PS3 - 82,000
June:
360 - 198,400
PS3 - 98,500
Alone, the PS3 is not outselling the 360 in North America. If you're lumping the PS2 and the PS3 together, then combined they are outselling the 360. However, that was not the implication your sentence gave.
The anonymous poster had mod points on his full account, and laid a careful trap for intelligent discoursers. Anyone who disagrees/says anything he doesn't like gets modded down. /tinfoilhat
Marathon > All.
Frog Blast the Vent Core!
I'm wondering what the arguments are going to be. Any bets on more Ebert-esque debates on the status of video games as art?
Killing orange mobs is your problem.
It's counter-intuitive, but you actually level faster killing green mobs for several reasons.
1) They are lower level than you, which means:
-a) You are harder to hit and damage.
-b) They are easier to hit and damage.
-c) They do less damage as a rule.
-d) They have less health.
2) Orange mobs are higher level than you, which indicates the exact opposite of the above and also adds the additional possibility of sustaining Crushing Blows. Going after orange mobs is especially difficult for caster classes.
Basically, fighting higher level mobs will get you more exp per kill, but at the high cost of time spent killing and subsequent downtime. The difference between a level 31 and a level 37 mob isn't a whole lot in terms of exp (10-20% at the absolute most), but the difference in ease of killing is substancial.
Anything that reduces downtime is key to increasing exp/hour. Bandages over using mana to heal yourself, and food/drink are imperitive. When my Warlock was level 57 with full rest I averaged around 7 bars per hour constantly killing undead in WPL. That's 35% of a level in half the time you described more than 30 levels later.
WoW is a grind, though perhaps less of one compared to other games. But if you're going to grind and not quest, you should be able to do better than you were especially at your level.
Don't be so surprised.
/played, that's more than 60 weekdays worth (or 12 weeks) of devoting every hour of free time to WoW to go from 1-70. However, that doesn't cover running the instances to get the required gear/rep to begin raiding, nor does it cover that if the character in question being leveled is an alt it is entirely possible that one will be continually interrupted by guildies needing another person to tank/dps some instance.
I work a standard 40 hour work week, and also enjoy such things as eating and sleeping. Assuming I get a decent 8 hours of sleep a night, spend 1.5 hours on food and hygene and 1 hour commuting; 5 out of 7 days of the week I have a total of 5.5 hours of free time.
Assuming 15 days
Conversely, the typical console game completion time is 40 hours, or 80 hours if it's an unlockfest. In the time it takes to level (not gear) an alt, one could potentially complete 4-7 console games.
The problem will only become worse as the level cap increases. There are a large number of group quests in Outland that will be difficult to complete for alts due to the lack of contemporaries, most having moved on to newer pastures save for the occaisional raid. If Blizzard intends on further increasing the level cap it will become prohibitive for new players or alts to successfully catch up to other players.
I'm not asking for the option to instantly spawn characters at high levels. Leveling is an excellent way to allow players to understand and master a class. However, the amount of time required to do so is too much.
I personally recommend increasing the exp received from quests by a substancial amount. This can be lessened in earlier areas where the quests are already enough to carry a player from zone to zone, but should begin to take significant effect by level 25. Multi-zoning shouldn't be a necessary measure in order to level.
Not enough minerals.
I'd appreciate it if this expansion included easier leveling up to 70/80. The amount of time and effort it takes to level and properly gear an alt is increasingly prohibitive.
I'm fairly certain that at this point the PS3 isn't having much effect on the Xbox 360's sales. Look, for example, at the following charts.
North American Console Sales
Japanese Console Sales
The releases of the PS3 and the Wii have neither increased nor decreased the rate of sales for the 360 in either region by any significant amount. In terms of absolute market share rather than relative percentages, the PS3s impact on the 360 appears to be non-existant.
I didn't really care about the prospect of playing games on Live, but if I'm able to run through the campaign with my old college buddies across the country I'm sold.
I guess that means I'll have to subscribe to Live.
I believe you're confused with nexgenwars.com, which extrapolates based on previous trends and tends to have varying levels of accuracy in its numbers. Otherwise I'm not sure where you're coming from.
Additionally, if you could link sources/articles relating to you statement that the 360 is dead in two regions it would be appreciated. I'm aware that it is doing very poorly in Japan, but haven't seen sales numbers for elsewhere that indicate a pronouncement of "dead".
As for the "waggle", we will have to see. Using your assumption that it is purely hype, it is entirely possible that Nintendo can stretch it for another decade or so (see: pokemon) to great success.
#1: I have no problem with Blizzard bringing lawsuits again third party servers so long as they are currently maintaining their own. The legal precident set by that case is bad, but "suing third party servers" as a reason to dislike their games doesn't cut it for me, especially when the servers better allow cheats/pirated games. If Blizzard does the same thing if Battle.net is shut down, then I'd be annoyed.
#2: It's a free service, and they aren't oblidged to keep information you're not using. You haven't played your game in 3 months, and they're spending money for those 3 months for your characters to be there. To keep the service free, deleting inactive characters and accounts is something they need to do. All you have to do is play each character/account 1 hour in every 90*24 and you're golden. Alternatively, if you don't play the game that often you can always play single player. Blizzard doesn't delete characters off your computer, and you can mod the game to suit you if you don't like going it alone (or play with friends on Open Battle.net).
#3: I don't agree with this, especially as a reason to avoid Blizzard games. Imagine if in Counter-Strike you could see exactly where every player is all the time. That would completely destroy much of what makes the game strategic, fun, and exciting. If you want to play games without Fog of War, you can make custom maps to do so just as people do for BGH style maps. You won't get ranked for it, but you have the option to "embrace change".
Map Hacking isn't incorporated into ranked play for the very reason that it is a substitute for skill. StarCraft and WarCraft III were designed so that intelligence gathering is an important aspect. Eliminating that can be a fun diversion, but seriously hinders competitive play.
Are you saying the 20 or so scarabs simultaneously colliding with the Overmind's flesh weren't dramatic as they were incidentally lit by psy-storms and hallucinated Zeratuls? Barbaric!