I can see where they're coming from but I'm pretty sure Konami already mentioned how this game takes place between MGS2 and MGS4 and that it covers Raiden's story.
@ Cold 2000 above ^^^^^
He also said that a year ago. Then again, I'd hope MG:R will look better than a game that will be 3 (or more) years old.
I want to play games. Natal has yet to prove itself as a hardcore gamer's device. I could care less about waving my hands and uttering voice commands to play my games. That sounds less precise and dumbed-down to me.
The first game was incredibly good but very underrated and ignored (like many of the PS3's amazing games). I hope the media will swallow its pride for once and give the second game a chance.
These shots look good, but history has shown that bullshots are far more common than real screenshots when it comes to many games this gen (Gears, Forza, etc)
It's expensive, yes, but technology is always expensive at the start. The PS3 launched at a $600 price point, remember? And now it's half the price just a few years later.
I will probably jump into 3D when the cost of glasses is $30-$40 per person
I wouldn't be surprised. Those small screens can have great resolution. Watch a movie on the PSP and it looks pretty dang good.
An HD 3DS would be cool. I'd buy.
It will make the media do a double take....
...in a good way or a bad way?
$50 says "in a bad way". SE is a joke.
3D Sonic has been crap for a long while.
However, the "traditional" Sonic games on the DS (I thing they're called Sonic Rush) have been pretty dang good. I mean it.
I loved Killzone, and I really loved Killzone 2. It's just sad that some sectors of the media had to turn the game into a fanboy war instead of giving it the credit it deserved.
It begins.
I'll take 3D instead of Move or Natal any day of the week.
Why?
Because I can actually play hardcore gamers...
Microsoft has Natal (motion capture)
Sony has Eye (motion capture), Move (motion capture/motion controls), and 3D (a new way of viewing your games).
Which system will you pick?
It's an industry catchphrase that people rarely challenge because they don't think for themselves.
I've spent plenty of quality time on PC, 360, and PS3's online setups over the years, and the only major difference is that I had to pay a yearly fee for one of them.
We play games in order to rally behind our favorite company, argue about sales and attach rates, and bash the competition.
According to N4G...
Well, let's look at the facts of this year's E3:
Microsoft has Natal (motion capture).
Sony has Eye (motion capture), Move (motion controls), and 3D (a new way of viewing your games).
*Cue articles claiming Sonic Natal will be best game evarrrr
Profits count? Gee, and all these years I thought the actual games I was playing on the system were what mattered. I guess I'm not a true gamer...
Yep.
This is yet another example of Microsoft getting up-in-arms at ANY bad press. They're used to manipulating the press, and so when the press doesn't go their way, they get really nervous.
*see the last 20+ years of Microsoft's history for reference
Microsoft is pulling the wool over everyone's eyes. Natal will not rock the industry for many, many reasons. Name me a peripheral released nearly 5 years into a console's life that was successful. The only one I can think of was the plastic guitar in Guitar Hero for the PS2, and maaaaaybe DDR pads.
The thing that really bothers me is how the industry - gamers, journalists, and Microsoft itself - are hyping up the dumbest aspects of Natal. No, I don't want to play...
Lots of games disappoint me nowadays. I find myself enjoying handheld games (DS, PSP) and indie PC games far more than 95% of the console games out there.
It's because I'm not 15. It's because my first console wasn't the Xbox or the PS2. It's because the industry isn't all that innovative anymore, despite what the media will tell you.
I can't wait to see what sort of multiplatform awesomeness Bungie can do once they're free of the Halo series.