Alright, I gotta ask, aside from the whole "single-handedly brought down the Atari 2600" and the story of the landfill in the desert, I don't really get why there's so much hate for the E.T. game. I knew E.T. was going to be number one before reading the list, because that's just the hip, acceptable thing to do. Sure, the game was an abysmal commerical failure, but it's hardly the worst game ever.
And after reading the article, this dude didn't even finish the E.T. ga...
The game was innovative for its animation, I guess, but the game itself sucked. It's more fun to watch than to play.
Why do you think no one ever picked to play it on Starcade?
BRING IT ON.
But if/when Sony does drop the price of the console, Activision will give themselves a nice pat on the back and say to the world: "See? Sony listened to our arguments and realized we were right all along."
Major douche-bag move, if you ask me.
Even though it was a Gears/RE4 clone, I really liked Dark Sector, especially the use of color in the game. Lots of blues and reds.
Except I wonder how many people would bother to go back and play those old games (I mean, I would, but that's just me). I would think they would want to pimp the Natal with newer games.
EDIT: Though I guess it's the same thinking as backward compatibility.
They sure are better-looking than those ugly Todd McFarlane ones.
Hatchimatchi, you just said the magic word: FUN. It's one thing to have a stuffed shirt up on stage telling you about how the next new game is going to knock you off your feet, it's another when you have some average-looking dudes, laughing and giggling and having a good time with some fun new toy they get to play with.
I agree that this segment was lengthy, but I was pretty entertained (for awhile, at least) by the two guys showing it off. Yeah, it was a little rough and seemed unrehearsed, but the guys were pretty charming. They came off like a couple of guys at show and tell. Perhaps E3 isn't the most appropriate venue for show and tell, but showing it in real time demonstrated how it could really be utilized in the future.
Or agree or disagree with me if it really doesn't matter to you who "won".
"No you didn't. WE won."
"No way, it was us."
"Nuh-uh!! We totally won."
"I don't think so. We clearly won."
AARRRRRGGGHHHHH!!!!
@Syronicus: "I will have games to play in the future and that is all that matters to me."
No truer words have ever been spoken, good sir. People need to chill out and enjoy the fact that there's a whole whack of great new games coming out for the console of their preference.
^^ Haha!
How can this be seen as a huge selling point? This certainly isn't something one should be bragging about. The guys over at Scratch should counter by saying "We're not going to have Day 1 DLC, because all our sh*t's going to be on the disc when it ships."
I'll pick this game up for the single player but I seriously doubt I'll even try out the multiplayer. I tend to really only require a few MP games to fill my online need (and really good ones at that, like COD).
As long as the single player for AC2 is satisfying, if they want to tack on MP, they can go right ahead, but I probably won't be playing it.
I think there's still room for creativity and innovation within existing IPs, but I would think it would make it tougher when you have to play by your own rules. On the other hand, already having a fully-realized universe would allow more room to play around.
Man, I am gonna get CREAMED when I play this online...
Huh. I kinda thought they might change it up a bit, maybe make it an over-the-shoulder type deal.
Yeah, and there's a narrator who constantly explains what you're seeing whenever the game freezes! I mean, WTF?
Woah, spoiler warning there, dude.
This level is dark. It looks like Coruscant.
I just ignore them, just like I've been doing.