I was thinking of starting up a union with some mature people (not fanboys) to discuss games across a number of platforms. I decided that I wanted to do this after I saw what happened to the Assassins creed forums after it was confirmed for Xbox 360 release. Fanboys from both sides destroyed the forums because of their immature bickering over which version would be better etc.

This I know is not the only place that this happens and I wanted to know if anyone would like to join a union for gamers who would be interested in mature discussion about a number of issues regarding games (and perhaps with other non related threads) as well as news about all the systems.

Basically a community of mature gamers prepared to accept the simple idea of someone preffering something different  to them. I didn't want to start it without support so please leave a comment if you would be interested in joining such a union (I will start it once I have around 20).


Thankyou

---

I'm a big fan of the xbox 360 and not only do I own one but I probably won't be getting any other consoles. I'm also very happy with my 360. However their is one thing that bothers me personally, the dvd player.

Now I hate for this to actually be a problem, but, we are seeing a lot of games nowadays like Oblivion which are filling dvd's yet are not utilizing all of the 360's graphical power. Now I hear a lot of people saying that the game designers will be able to compress games more and more efficiently as they work more with the console and I realize the wisdom in microsofts choice not to choose which format to back just yet (although 100% of indications are towards the HD-DVD). However how far will these game designers be able to go with compressing data on these DVD's and could this mean that we will have either great graphics OR loads of content and not both due to these space limitations. I hope not, and I hope if this is the case that games are made to be on 2 DVD's perhaps with one installing some info onto the hard drive (I would rather this than a reduction in content or graphics). I don't really know the technical aspect but I was hoping someone could tell me the facts on this issue.

I've been reading around a lot about the different next gen systems and it seems to me that there's a lot of hatred going around, people actually fall into insulting each other because of which console they back. Can't people just get the console they personally prefer? Is it really that hard for people to just get the console with the games they like without critisizing someone else's choice?

I mean yeah it's ok to argue about why you preffer the one you do and I'm not talking about that, i'm talking about the so-called fanboys who tear at each other for liking different consoles. I've seen people post on Halo forums, things like "HalO suXors hA HA LoLLLL" why?

I prefer the 360 as I like Xbox Live, the games being released and the power the system offers at a price I personally find reasonable. I dislike the PS3 as I don't take interest in any of the games so far bieng announced for it, the price and the online is untested, as for the Wii I'm not interested in the games their either and the power is a let down where I personally preffer a more powerful machine.

I know lots of people can express their views like that but it just gets at me that some people insult each other over the consoles they own or plan on buying...

The Nintendo Wii is as we all know Nintendo's latest entry into the console world. But really it's more than that, it's a risk, it's a console that will either revolutionize gaming or will be a flop. Technologically it's not on par with the PS3 or Xbox 360, it doesn't support HDTV and it's closer to the graphical power and speed of the Xbox than it is to that of the Xbox 360. But lets take a note of all that. All of those "problems" are related to graphics or speed; basically the power of the console.

For the past decade consoles have been "revolutionizing" gaming by raising the bar on graphical power. But really all we are getting is the same experiences over and over agian, each time graphically better, I'm not saying that's a problem. All I'm saying is that maybe Wii have made the right choice in going for a new change, a change in control.

Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo have long been trying to break through into a casual market for gamers and for a long time they have been failing. It isn't really looking any better for them this generation with Microsoft's Xbox 360 at a reasonably high price and game's that are also expensive and the PS3's high price which even the hardcore gamers are finding hard to swallow. Microsoft are hoping that the integration of their system with pc's etc and their online service as well as their core xbox will have what it takes to push them into the casual market which is where they would make the most sales. Sony are hoping that their blu-ray, household name and propaganda in CG films will get them there (although I doubt it, i think it's more likely that the 360 will get into the homes of the casual gamers).

However the Wii has opted for something new, a low price point, more family oriented games making this affordable for kids as well. And a new way of controling games. The fact is the casual gamer doesn't want the flashiest graphics he/she just wants something fun for an affordable price. However even the hardcore gamers could go for this, the history of games available, the fact that it could be cheap enough for someone to own a 360 or PS3 as well as a Wii could push sales into homes with other consoles as well. Some people who have chosen either 360 or PS3 and want something new, I think are more likely to go for Wii than the other powerful console.

This isn't coming from a Nintendo fanboy, I own a 360 and probably won't get a Wii for a long time. I'm just saying that if you did right of the Wii, think again, if their control system works and people like it they could pull of a win in the next gen console wars...

I've been looking on the forums lately and I've noticed two topics which seem to be taking hold on the Splinter Cell double agent forums. Basically Sam Fisher's baldness seems to be a big issue, from the number of posts about it perhaps on par with the second issue: Splinter Cell's new multiplayer features.

It's not hard to see why people would be discussing this, I myself was a big fan of all the Splinter Cell games especially Chaos Theory. And what kept me coming back was the excellent multiplayer mode, so it's easy to see why that's a big issue for fans awaiting the new Splinter Cell game.

A lot of the posts have been quite negative so far, I think really people are scared of change, but in my opinion things could go either way still, the changes could be for the better or for worse. The three main features which seem to appear a lot are the white outline on the spy, the proxy detector and the regenerating health. So far it has been quite unclear how the white outline works, some people are saying that it is always on when the spy is standing which I think would be a bad point but I found an article that would suggest otherwise:

http://uk.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/splintercell4/news.html?sid=6154772

It says that, "Mercenaries also have technology that gives spies a white outline when spotted, making them easier to pick out. This only works when a spy is in full standing mode, at which point they're extremely visible". If this means that the white outline would only appear after being spotted therefore making an escape more difficult, then I don't see how this is too bad as long as it balances out with some of the other features. eg. regenerating health could allow you to take larger risks when entering an area because you know that if you fail but escape alive, you can come regenerate your health not leaving you handicapped for the rest of the game, however you know that getting caught is a larger risk because of the outline and so you encourage yourself to take the risk without acting like Rambo.

As the "Rambo-cell" was one of the biggest problems in Chaos theory or Pandora Tomorrow, it's easy to see how this could get rid of such actions. It forces players into stealthy play. So does the proxy detector, the spy is now forced to sneak up on his/her enemy or hack the proxy (I have been told this is possible correct me if I am wrong) and then go for the kill.

My point is that I think if they get the balance right they can force stealth into spies and vigilance into Mercs, that can't be a bad thing. If they don't, well, then we might have a problem.

I have played games from both the Splinter cell and Metal Gear series', I enjoyed what I had played from the Metal Gear series: Metal Gear Solid Substance as well as enjoying all three of the games in the Splinter cell series all on my Xbox. I'll be honest here I only played one of the Metal Gear Solid games and I also personally took a preference to Splinter Cell.

However that's not what I want to discuss, not which is better, but rather the fact that they are being compared as two like games by some. Countless times I've seen people say that Splinter Cell is a Metal Gear "Wannabe", or that either series was trying to imitate the other. It doesn't bother me that people would dislike either of the games, obviously it's personal preference, what does annoy me though is that people are suggesting that Splinter Cell or Metal Gear Solid are games that are trying to imitate each other or are tying to and failing. It seems to me that this is just being said because they fit into the same genre, stealth/espionage-action.

Either the people who are saying this are people who are taking allegiance to one of the games and are speaking in ignorance regarding the other game. Or they, in my opinion, have got the wrong end of the stick, gone into one of the games thinking it would be just like the other and leaving disappointed. No surprise there, I think many people would agree that the two series' are dissimilar although they do fit into the same genre. This is like comparing Counter Strike and Halo in my opinion. I mean yeah in a review you could compare the different aspects but it would be unfair to suggest that Halo was aspiring to be Counter Strike and had come out like it had due to its failing in doing so although both are first person shooters.

Anyway, I just wanted to write a first blog entry that would be relevant to some gamers, and I thought I might as well get this off my chest whilst doing so seeing as Splinter cell double agent news has been released lately.

Thanks to anyone who bothered reading!