Wii Zapper

[Wolf, the Joker]

LMAO!!!

[Xia Tianku]

I believe this expresses my point of view on this subject.

[Tormaigh MacRagallach]

Hey, shooting stuff is awesome. I think the good captain looks more like he's saying "Please, please, let me try?!?!?"

[Xia Tianku]

Not when it's designed for the Wii-aboo. This may be considered biased by a few of you, but I believe the PS3 will ultimately claim victory in the "console war."

[Tormaigh MacRagallach]

I'm sure we could start a console flaming war here with no trouble, but perhaps it's an issue best left untouched for the sake of general goodwill. Personally, I've been disappointed in SONY's products since after the original PS, which was awesome, and their continuing lack of originality and high price tags continue to keep me at a distance from their more recent marketing endeavors.

[Xia Tianku]

Well, your opinion is one that I can respect, as part of it is somewhat true. Sony has dropped the ball recently, they no longer seem to be adhering to the high standards they once set for themselves.

But, don't think for a second that Nintendo hasn't been doing the same thing, because all they've done is do it in a much more subtle way. By releasing rehashes of certain games over and over again, they're raking in money on name recognition alone, take Mario for example; how many Mario titles has Nintendo released over the years? A bunch right? Now ask yourself the question, "How many of these titles share two or more similarities, consistently throughout the series?" Answer honestly, please. And then you might ask yourself, "How many of those titles are truly derserving to be a full-fledged game in their own right?" Don't physically answer those though, as they are rhetorical questions (not trying to insult your intelligence or anything, but I'd rather not get into too serious of a debate over this).

I've noticed this trend has been recurring lately in not only Nintendo's games, but the consoles they release themselves.

In closing, I'll ask you this (and I would like to see your answer), was it really necessary to release as many systems and strikingly similar titles as they did over the years? Was it truly necessary to take their fan-base for idiotic "chump" consumers, and milk them for all they're worth?

[Tormaigh MacRagallach]

All right so we're both hypocrites. "Lets not start console flaming, it's a bad scene. By the way, I think..." It's rather hilarious. HOW CAN YOU SAY "IN CLOSING" IN THE SAME BREATH AS CONTINUING THE ARGUMENT!? Especially when done so poorly and offensively? You just called me an idiotic chump consumer, and you're the one who's going to pay $500+ for...well...As they say in the Fantastic 4, FLAME ON!

When you ask questions "rhetorically," or say "please dont literally answer this," it gives the impression you're afraid there's a response and says that you are basically just closed-minded to hearing it, so try not to do that; it sounds childish.

If they're releasing games with similar characters and logos and perhaps similar items, that is an entirely separate issue from originality. It seems to me that you might have never played any of the series which you seem so critical of. There were NO repeat Zeldas, for example. If you are upset that Link and his arsenal are in most of them and call that a lack of creativity, then you clearly have not played more than one or two titles. I, for one am unsure as to how long Playstation can survive by merely rereleasing GTA in a different city, or adding a few characters to Mortal Combat and rereleasing that. I cannot say that there were no, say, repetitive Marios, but at least half of them would have survived fine as standalone titles, and that's a pretty good record for a series with as simple a basic concept as that. FF, now THAT was a series, and it was exclusively PS based, right? Some constants, like moogles and chocobos, etc, but they were always new experiences. Oh wait, what? Square works with Nintendo instead of SONY now? [sarcasm]I wonder why, I mean, it's not like SONY isn't doing any innovation or anything...[/sarcasm]

At least one company in question has a little innovative spirit, while the other binds itself to the status quo of releasing another rectangular black box that does nothing extraordinary except squeeze out a few more pixels of detail and a few more hundred dollars from any given consumer's pocket. You did not respond to the issue of pricing, either. I don't know if the price concerns you much, maybe your mommy buys your games for you, but it does me, and dammit, if I'm going to dedicate a significant fraction of my income to any one product, it better be something truly new.

Allow me to offer an analogy. For me, my SONY gaming experience has been like shopping for Lucky Charms cereal. The first box i ever had was great! I had never experienced anything quite like it! So I buy a second box once I'm done with the first, and it's all right, the packaging is shinier, and all the marshmallows are bigger! Now imagine that the very next day, there's a new box of them available with a special new marshmallow shape. Here's the clincher: You don't go to the store and buy lucky charms and then go again the very next day to buy the ones with the new packaging and the new marshmallow shape, because that would be stupid and a waste. I mean sure, you may not have the coolest marshmallows in your box, but the other stuff tasts the same. Exactly the same!

Then imagine that this 3rd box costs you 3 times what the 2nd one did. Ouch...