So here I am, playing Rainbow Six: Vegas online on XBL ranked matches and I see an elite at #3 on kills while a First Sergeant's beating him by almost 10 kills with 2 less deaths. I understand all players have bad days but I see this trend consistently. Why do people still put time sink components into multiplayer games without allowing skill to compensate? If there was a better matchmaking system that prevents players from joining each other's ranked matches (if you want to play with your friends, create a player match) then the TrueSkill ranking system should be one of the factors for assigning experience/rank to your online avatar.

I'm not saying that the game's creators shouldn't reward time sinks. I've played MMO's for a long time, and I truely believe that players should be rewarded for their time committments to the game. However, players should also be capable of attaining those rewards with far less time spent if they have greater skill. For example. if someone with a TrueSkill rating of 3 kills players with a TrueSkill rating of 25+ consistently, his TrueSkill rating would reach 25+ fairly quickly. Now Ubisoft could assign ranks to TrueSkill ratings. A 25 may be a 2nd Lieutenant, and after 10-15 matches, the player would reach the 2nd Lieutenant rank. Alternatively, if the player gains 120,000 match experience, he could also reach 2nd Lieutenant. Now if you've played Rainbow Six Vegas, you'd know that it takes a lot longer than 10-15 matches to reach 2nd Lieutenant, but skill of the first player allows him to reach that rank where as the match experience of the second player allows him to reach that rank.

Ubisoft could combine the two systems, so that time earned points(and ranks) will never diminish, but TrueSkill earned ranks will. This way, a very lucky player may jump some ranks, but sooner or later, he'll get pegged down to his actual rank, eliminating the factor of chance and giving the game far greater sense of competition, as all the players will be vying for the top spot.

In my opinion, combining the two systems is the best choice. Developers should seriously take a hard look at their online gaming component and see if they should allow skill to be the dominant factor in rank/level based games.

I'm pretty jam packed at work today, so I won't post a long article.

I love console games, and the first games I ever played were on the console. I'm also an avid fan of first person shooters, but combining the two has been pretty difficult for me. I'm not a bad gamer by any standard, but I feel like the learning curve of switching from a shooter on the PC to a console is just incredibly high. When I was 15-16 or so, I used to hang with the best of the best on old school Counter-Strike beta, and I distinctly remember killing 5-6 people with one AK-47 clip in a competitive match. Now, in Rainbow Six Vegas on the 360, which is a much slower game than Counter-Strike is, I'll be lucky to kill 2-3 people with a clip. When someone gets in my face, I can empty an entire clip into them and hit nothing but air (just like the Matrix, except it's due to my suckage).

I have to say that going from a top notch player on PC shooters to a mediocre player on console shooters is a hard pill to swallow, and the only way for me to get better is to get endless hours of practice in. I'd like to think that I haven't lost my reflex and edge at the tender age of 22.

Ever heard of the old adage, don't judge a book by it's cover? Well, the game Table Tennis by Rockstar falls into that category perfectly. Table tennis is probably one of those sports that's you can find once every four years on TV, during the Summer Olympics. Most people think of table tennis(ping pong) as a watered down version of tennis for the physically challenged. However, if you've ever played table tennis with your buddies at college, you'll know that it's anything but that.

Rockstar's Table Tennis is truely a gem, and a steal, at $19.99 from Best Buy. On the surface, the game is simple to learn. You have 4 spins and the left stick controls the movement of the player and the direction of the shot. If you're a complete newbie to table tennis, repeatly mashing the A button while moving your character to the ping pong ball will be enough to win you the easy exibitions. However, like most fun sports, the game is simple to learn, and incredibly difficult to master. You have hybrid spins that combines two spins,  soft shots that will instantly change the tempo of the game, and focused shots which carries an enormous amount of speed.

This game is amazingly fun, and incredibly fast paced. Exciting exchanges can happen 2-3 times in one second in the more difficult matches, and your reaction speed will be tested. I haven't been able to play this game for more than 45 minutes at a time due to the intense concentration required to beat the harder matches. If you're looking for an easy pick up game that won't put a dent in your pockets, pick up this gem. Unless you're the type of person that absolutely hates fun and has reflexes of a kaola, this game shouldn't be missed.

I'd like to preface this by saying that I probably drop more money on video games than I should, and since I've gotten the PS3 and Xbox 360, I've amassed a library of 15 games or so. These games have given me a pretty good idea as to how well these two system stacks up against each other, and what weaknesses each system have. I've already extensively discussed the weakness of the Xbox 360, and now that I've had a month and half to tinker with the 360, I can comment on the area it trumps the PS3 on.

First and foremost, the library of games. Now I understand that a large portion of this is outside of Sony's control, but I honestly feel that it's important for a system to have a steady stream of games come out after the release. This allows the gamers to build a strong library of games or just be able to rent the games and stay interested in the system. I haven't bought any PS3 games since Christmas, and that has put a large dent in Sony's pocket. I purchase an average of 2 games a week, if I can find the solid titles, and that's a lot of lost revenue in Sony's pocket. I've largely lost interest in playing my PS3 because of all the great games on the PS3. Rainbow Six Vegas, Gears of War, Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighters, Dead Rising, and Table Tennis(look for a future article from me on this game) are just some of my favorites that's not available on the PS3. PS3 games in their current incarnation simply does not have the depth of their 360 counterparts and even ports are less stellar, both in terms of graphics and control.

I can tell that the PS3 will have some insanely good looking games down the road, just take a look at the graphic improvements in Oblivion. I can't wait to see the crazy graphics of the PS3 in games like MGS4 and Heavenly Sword.

Why is the rumble feature missing? I honestly don't feel that the six-axis control is currently up to par with the Xbox control. The Xbox control feels more solid and ergonomic compared to the PS3 control already, and now it trumps the PS3 control with the rumble feature. Rumble feature is essentially a feedback mechanism that allows game designers to give a more immersive games and better feedback to the gamers. Currently, all incarnations of the movement sensing capabilities of six-asis controller feels terrible in terms of game play. Marvel's suck, and so does Resistance. As fun as it might seem to shake the controller vigorously when you're lit on fire in Resistance, it really isn't, and detracts a lot from the gameplay in multiplayer. The movement sensing function also is terrible in some games simply because of the sensitivity. When you're trying to lean the controller in the right direction, the game may register it as the wrong direction, and cause a lot of frustration. All this headache seriously isn't worth losing the rumble feature. Hopefully Sony will be able to offer a better controller that features both the rumble and motion sensing or simply the motion sensing capabilities later down the road.

Voice-communications. I'm hesitant to buy a FPS game, or any multiplayer game on the PS3 unless they bring voice-comm to it. Communication is a major aspect of any multi-player game, and teams that communicate well have an enormous advantage over games that do not. I saw this first handed in many games, whether it'd be MMO's like World of Warcraft or FPS's like Counter-Strike or more recently, Rainbow Six: Vegas, proper commucation can allow a group of cohesive, but less skilled players to dominate a group of greater skilled gamers who do not communicate with each other. For example, when you're coordinating defense in Vegas, and someone slips past a spot, there's no way you can inform the rest of the team in the breach unless you have voice-comm. Voice-comm is such an important aspect in the future of online gaming that if Sony still wants to be a major player on the online department, I urge it to bring out a voice-comm package out similar to the Xbox's and bundle it with a few of the premier next-gen shooters on the PS3. Headsets are extremely cheap to produce, and I think most gamers would pay 10 bucks extra for a headset. Sony should also start bundling their new PS3 units with headsets to help proliferate their usage.

Xbox Live and Achievement points. This system really helps gamers to know each other better online and form strong friendships. You can tell what games each other likes and when you find someone with your playstyle, you can play different games with them. Not only will this help sell games, it gives a more fluid feel to the entire system. Xbox Live feels like a evolving community of players, while PS3's online network feels like a hodgepodge of random games on a system. I have met friends playing Gears of War that I now regularly play Chromehounds and Rainbow Six: Vegas with. But on my PS3, I won't be able to easily find a buddy that I played Resistance with and then hop on Fight Night Round 3 and slug it out in the ring with him. No buddy system means less immersion and fun online.

Achievement points give another sense of overall competitiveness to Xbox 360. Nerd points, even when they do nothing, are great sell for the system. You're essentially selling games and rentals to people who otherwise wouldn't buy those games because they will earn points simply for accomplishing certain tasks with the game. PS3 really need to revamp their online system to emulate the way Xbox Live has their current online structure set up.

In the end, I must admit that I want the PS3 to succeed and do much better than the Xbox 360. I really like the system and it's capabilities, not to mention it's sleek look and better design. It really was built with integration in mind, and you don't have to drop another $300-400 bucks in order for it to become the entertainment hub of the house. The PS3 offers MUCH more value than the 360, but it's main weaknesses will cost Sony a lot of revenue and give Sony fans a lot of frustration down the road.

So to my surprise, I received an Xbox 360 bundle as an late Christmas gift from a friend a couple of days ago. First thing I picked up is Gears of War. What an amazing game! I love the intuitive cover system and seamless Xbox Live configuration. I sincerely wish Resistance had as much seamless integration with the online portion. I've only managed to play the campaign mode on co-op  and haven't done any pvp yet, but I will get to that tonight. The graphics is very good and the details are amazing, but if this is the best the Xbox 360 has to offer, I sincerely believe the PS3 will have much better looking games out by this time next year. If you own an Xbox 360, pick up Gears of War, you won't be dissappointed. But please, do yourself a favor and play it in HD, it will look like crap in SD.

Now onto my unbiased review of the 360 system itself. XBox live gold is truly a ripoff. That has to be my biggest pet peeve about the Xbox in general. Having to pay $7.99 per month just to be able to play games you own online is bogus. Resistance's multiplayer has a ranking system like the 360's, and SCEA doesn't charge you $8 a month to play it.

The Xbox has poor design, poor quality, and they prefer to charge you out the ass for accessories. Below is a numerical list of my issues with the 360.

2) Fan's too loud. The Xbox 360 makes waaaaaaaaay too much noise. Almost as loud as my desktop computer.

3) Flimsy microphone with poor sound quality. The microphone that comes with the Xbox is terrible. The sound quality absolutely stinks and reminds me of teamspeak on a crappy codec and 56k 4 years ago. The construction is very flimsy and it feels like it's going to break if you put any pressure on it. The headpiece isn't nearly loud enough and it constantly echos. If it's not echoing, then it will pick up the ambient noise of the other players. However, the saving grace would be how it plugs into the controller and is easily mutable even while playing a FPS.

4) Huge powerbrick. Unlike the PS3, the Xbox 360 powerbrick is located outside of the system and is HUGE. I've seen dogs smaller than the Xbox 360 powerbrick.

5) Pay more for wireless. So in order to utilize the Xbox 360 as a wireless hub, you have to purchase an additional antenna, instead of having it built in.

6) Controller operates on batteries. Microsoft must have some Energizer stock. The controller has the RUMBLE FEATURE AND OPERATES ON TWO AA BATTERIES!!!! Microsoft must think everything buys batteries by the truckload, because it won't take very long at all to burn out a set of batteries with rumble enabled. Which brings me to my next point.

7) Want a rechargable controller? Buy the rechargable battery pack, at an additional cost! How much more cost on accessories do you need to add to the Xbox?

8) No HD DVD capability. Want HD DVD? Buy the player for $200.

9) My Xbox 360 died on me. Yep, I got it two days ago and it died yesterday. I don't know what's wrong with it, but it just dropped dead in the middle of Gears of War and I haven't been able to revive it. Thankfully, the gift receipt was included so I'm going to exchange it and get myself either store credits or another one, depending on my mood.

That's not to say the Xbox 360 has no upsides to the PS3, it's just very few and far between. The Xbox 360 controller is MUCH more comfortable to use than the ps3 controller and it has rumble! It feels much more natural in a grown man's hands than the smaller PS3 counterpart. The Xbox 360 HDD is also easier to remove than the PS3 Hard Drive. It comes with component cables, saving you $60-70. Lastly it has a better library of games as of this moment.

In the end, if you were to compare value, I'd say the Sony PS3 comes out way on top. You get a much bigger HD, the ability to play high definition DVD, built in wireless hub function, rechargable controller, sleeker look, quieter operations, HDMI support, an extra USB jack, external memory slots compliant with standard memory cards of today, and just plain better technology built in. Xbox 360 may have a great library of games right now, but once the PS3 grows into itself, it will be a much better gaming system. Don't believe me? Get ready to eat your word when GT5 and MG4 comes out.

I don't plan on getting an XBOX 360 until all of the below criteria are filled.

1) XBOX 360 gets a much larger HD. Lets face it, XBOX 360 has a tiny HD right now compared to the PS3, and it's simply not feasible to use it as a DVR and a gaming system if you can only store such a limited amount of data on the system. You will be micromanaging your HD space if you plan on downloading content from XBOX live while recording TV shows.

2) Built in HD DVD Player. The value of XBOX 360 just isnt there at the moment. If you're paying $400 for the Xbox and another $200 for the HD DVD player, that's a PS3 right there, minus the PS3's HD size and other features, you're looking at LESS value than the PS3 with a bigger footprint in the living room. That is undesirable for many people. 3) Sustainable, stable, high bandwidth, and 99.999% uptime on your internet connection. With a converged solution like IPTV, if your internet goes out, so does everything else. Imagine if you have VOIP and IPTV, if the internet goes out, that's it. No TV, Phone, or Internet. Right now, the Internet in my area is constantly going out, and if I bet my phone and TV services on the connection, I'd be left flapping in the breeze for weeks at a time.

IPTV's bandwidth usage may also present a problem. For IPTV to be competitive, it needs to be able to broadcast very high quality pictures while not jamming up your bandwidth. The provider will need to install a incredibly consistent and efficient QoS system in order to maintain the quality of video and audio output. Lets put it this way, you only have a limited pipeline, and for the hardcore computer users, that means you're probably already maxing out your bandwidth usage fairly often. Now, you have IPTV consuming a large portion of your bandwidth, which will slow your other downloads down, and worse yet, if your maximizing your bandwidth usage and the provider has a poor QoS system, you will lose audio/video on your TV signal. Most early adopters are going to be falling into this heavy computer using category meaning the problems of IPTV will plague them the most.

Many people know how much Vonage sucks with the quality of their calls and what happens if you use the internet while on the phone, IPTV will be MUCH MUCH worse before it gets better.

EDIT: 4) HDMI Output. A nextgen console touting Full HD without HDMI output is simply not going to be competitive. Imagine a computer without a DVD player, or a kitchen without a sink, that's the XBox 360 without an HDMI output.

Once Microsoft puts these things into the Xbox 360, even if they price it at $600, the same as PS3, I will still buy one.

So I burned out my eyes last night playing Fight Night round 3. The game is absolutely amazing. I've never played the previous two incarnations, but the first person view definitely makes the game. The first person view really immerses you in the action. When the opponent throws the big punches, you reflexively throw up your arm to block. The monster KO punches bone crunching sounds and the look in your opponents faces details a sense of devastation when that blow lands. You can almost see jaw breaking when you throw that monster uppercut.

The only dissappointments of Fight Night R3 would be the incredibly long and annoying load times and the choppiness of the slow-mo KO replays. When a boxer goes down, it seems to play the original knock down sequence slower, with the same frames, up close, making it very choppy and irritating to watch.

However, this is a great game with a lot of replay value. I can see myself coming home from a hard day of work and taking out my frustration on Muhammad Ali, or Sugar Ray Leonard.

I must say I'm slightly dissappointed with the PS3 launch titles. There are a few solid choices, but also a ton of rubbish. I bought Marvel: Ultimate Alliance, Resistance, and Fight Night R3. Rest of the games don't even interested me all that much. I find myself buying a lot of old PS2 games that I've skipped out on over the past few years. Some of the old but goodies like San Andreas and Destroy All Humans and the newer ones, like FFXII are great.

Overall, the PS3 packs a whallop as a system, but the weak game library may slow down the momentum Sony has tried so hard to create.