Yeah I forgot about Blue Dragon, that game looks lamethetraitor

totally agree. Although the graphics in Blue Dragon look amazing, the gameplay seems older than time (not in a good way). O yea, btw Mass Effect's release date is 09/03/07. yee-ah!

The RPGs usually take a bit longer to kick in at the start of a generation.  Well, the quality RPGs, anyway.  Outside of Oblivion, I can't think of one on any on the three current consoles worth playing, and you're right, none at least until the fall. It's just the way of things, I guess.  Final Fantasy X didn't make it out for the PS2 until after the system had been out for over a year, and the same goes for Fable and Jade Empire for the Xbox and Tales of Symphonia and Paper Mario: TTYD for the GC.fathoms_basic

yea the fact that the majority of high profile RPGs aren't usually released until a year or more after a console's debut is totally sad for RPG aficionados like me. But, it does make one appreciate Oblivion's hastiness in release and abundance in quality.

Also, I think it's pretty interesting how when looking at the posts in this forum a "good RPG" is obviously a subjective term. For example, I consider myself somewhat of a snob in terms of videogame purchases. In my opinion, a "good RPG" is an engrossing adventure which scores, on average, 8.5 out of ten or more. My gut instinct tells me that I should formulate my own opinions (I do!) but it's hard to spend $50 or usually more on a game that you may not like or may not last you very long.

Reviews very much guide my buying decisions so for me to buy an RPG, or any game for that matter, it has to be well critiqued. I'm just bringing this up because I'm seeing people posting about some PS2 RPGs that they consider awesome, but I would probably never buy them. Interesting stuff. Just goes to show that beauty, or value in this case, is truly in the eye of the beholder.

Is it just me, or are there no good next gen RPGs coming out until fall?

First of all, I own an Xbox 360, Wii, and PS3, and PS3 is my favorite. This, though, is not because of the games which are out for it right now. In fact, I only own one PS3 game (VF5) due to the hits my wallet takes from consistently buying games for multiple consoles. Although the PS3 has many promising titles on the horizon, a relatively small amount of people are actually going to be able to play them and put cash in Sony's pocket. The article I posted was meant to outline how Sony may be able to drive PS3 sales now. Not 10 years from now. For all of the posters above who stated something along the lines of "Sony is in it for the long haul", that is somewhat foolish. If Sony does not start realizing that Blu-ray disc and a $600 game console are not going to be universally embraced for at least a few more years, they will most likely just be breaking even financially with PS3 by 2017. That is, of course, if developers have not lost interest in the PS3 by then, as so much more money is to be made by developing for the 360 and Wii, which both have nearly 5 times as many owners as PS3. Sony may know their course of action, but if they expect countless possible buyers to wait a year or two to justify a PS3 purchase, they are doomed, especially when cheaper, arguably equal experiences are offered by their rivals right now. It is the people who blindly support the PS3 that cause Sony to believe they can do no wrong. Well, reality check, shoving a $600 console and a few $60 games into a gamers mouth is definitely not a reputable course of action. In fact, it's a little greedy.

http://www.gamepro.com/sony/ps3/games/features/113928.shtml

 Interesting article.