On the April 10th 2007 edition of the "Hotspot", Jeff Gerstmann was explaining how the GBA section of Gamespot's web site days are numbered. Therefore, I was just what wondering what everyone thought of the system at this point in its history.

In my opinion, and I realize that I may be alone on this, the Gameboy Advance is definitely one of the best game systems of all time, and the greatest portable gaming system of all time. I consider the GBA library to be leaps and bounds better than that of the NES, SNES, Master System, Genesis, TG-16 and previous iterations of the Gameboy. Let's take a more detailed look at that argument.

- Ports: we cannot deny that the GBA was a great place for remakes and ports of older software. Just about all of the biggest titles from the NES, SNES and Genesis have been ported over or remade on the GBA in one form or another. The entire Super Mario series, entire pre-Sony Final Fantasy series, pre-Sony Breath of Fire series, Cl*ssic NES series, Capcom Mini Mix, Sega's Smash Pack, Phantasy Star Collection, entire Donkey Kong Country series, Lunar, Zelda: A link to the Past, Shining Force, Comix Zone, Earthworm Jim, Rock and Roll Racing, Double Dragon Advanced, Final Fight One, Super Ghouls and Ghosts Advanced...these a just a few examples of a collection that rivals what is available and going to be available on the Wii's Virtual Console. With a robust collection of Arcade Game Collections as well, there actually is more retro gaming available for the GBA than any other system.

- Great sequels: the GBA was a great place to resurrect alot of dormant franchises that had been forgotten since the beginning of the 3D era. Many of these franchises were continuations of existing series from other consoles, evolved to a form that seemed beyond the scope of a portable game system. The Castlevania Series, the Fire Emblem series, the Advance Wars series, Metriod Fusion, Sword of Mana, Final Fantasy Tactics, Zelda: The Minish Cap, MarioKart, F-Zero, Super Gunstar Heroes, the Pokemon games, the MegaMan Zero and Battle Network series...these are just a few examples of previously existing series on other platforms that really came into bloom on the GBA. Some of the best entries of these series are exclusive to the GBA.

- Original software: with all of the great ports and sequels making their way to the GBA it's easy to overlook the vast majority of original titles for the GBA. Great titles like Racing Gears Advance, Warioware, the Golden Sun series, the Boktia series, Car Battler Joe, Tron 2.0, Drill Dozer, the Iridion series, Mech Platoon, Ninja Five-O, the Super Robot Taisen series, Yggdra Union, Riviera: The Promised Land, Astroboy: The Omega Factor, Top Gear Rally, Scourge: The Hive...these are a fraction of the quality original games in the GBA library.

While at this time, the DS and PSP have captured the imaginations of current gamers, I believe that history will show that the GBA was a legendary system, that will stay in the hearts and minds of those who played it for years to come.. I'll be playing GBA games for many years to come. How about you?

The title of this blog originally appeared on the cover of "Next Generation" magazine back in January 1997 in the form of "There is something wrong with the N64". In this article, it talked about how the cartridge format along with the alienation of third-party publishers was creating a fairly dismal future for the Nintendo 64, especially compared the success that the SNES had enjoyed. Back then, Nintendo 64's were still flying off store shelves with people flocking to play Super Mario 64. There wasn't much else to play back then...Wave race 64, Shadows of the Empire...triple A titles were definitely few and far between. Goldeneye was six months away and Ocarina of Time, Banjo-Kazooie and Perfect Dark were years away. I thought the article was presumptuous and fairly offense at the time. This is Nintendo. They make the best games, period. Too bad that the article predicted the future with fairly remarkable accuracy.

Fast forward to eleven years later and we have the Nintendo Wii, and somewhat of a Nintendo Renaissance. Wii systems are selling well and people seem to be enjoying Wii Sports as something new and refreshing. Twilight Princess was an incredible game. Warioware is an incredibly good time. Yet something rings a little too familiar with the situation in which I've described above.

I am aware that Super Monkey Ball, Trauma Centre, Rayman Raving Rabbids and Madden are all decent third party games. The recent ports of Godfather and Call of Duty 3 are fairly decent. Still, there is something wrong in the province of third parties in Nintendo country. Games are still lacking online features. Third party developers are shoe-horning the Wii's control scheme into existing franchises with mixed results. There are not of original exclusive properties on the horizon from third parties, and certainly nothing new compared the types of games we've seen on the Wii thus far. In fact, many of the same games being released for the Xbox360 and PS3, if they do come to the Wii, are stripped down versions with the Wiimote controls shoehorned in. The amount of children's third party licensed titles already amounts the amount that was released on the Nintendo Gamecube.

I know that it too early to condemn the Nintendo Wii to the same fate as the N64 and Gamecube suffered, but already some of the same symptoms are already arising. While the software that Nintendo has released thus far has been fairly faithful to the Wii's promise of new experiences and innovation, Nintendo is still giving hardcore gamers the "Nintendo Difference" that it gave them in the Nintendo 64 and Gamecube era. While the advantages of that are too numerous to list here, the disadvantages warrant our attention. It seems petty that I should say that the disadvantages warrant more attention than the advantages at this point, please keep in mind that many of the disadvantages are over 11 years old! All Nintendo players that have chosen a Nintendo system as their main system in the last 11 years have endured the following:

Lack of online play in games - I'm aware that Pokemon and Metriod Prime 3 will have feature heavy online components, but considering online play in console gaming has been the norm ever since the Dreamcast came online in 2000, there is simply no excuse for this lack of online software. Especially when it comes to third party software. Why weren't Madden and Tiger Woods released with a full set of online game play features? Considering those games were using the template of the previous Xbox/PS2/Gamecube versions in every aspect other than the control scheme, implementing online game play wouldn't have been difficult. While it's easy to blame EA for this oversight, something tells me that Nintendo doesn't have a support system for online play for third party developers in place yet. Looking to third party offerings in the future, there doesn't seem to be anything online on the horizon, and not much more than what the DS enjoys as far as franchises go from Nintendo. It is ridiculous that this problem still plagues them in 2007....even the most hardcore Nintendo fanboy must admit that.

Third party titles being "lesser" experiences on Nintendo's systems than on competing consoles - During the days of the N64 it was the lack of quality textures, music and FMV. For the Gamecube, it was the lack of online and glitch-ridden PS2 ports. Something always kept the purchasers of third party software from overlooking Nintendo's version. I fear the same thing will happen on the Wii, especially when HD becomes standard, few companies will develop anything less. If this is coupled with the current drought of online games and lack of original Wii games from third parties, the Wii may again be only a platform for game players to experience Nintendo's first party software. Considering the quality of that software, it isn't necessarily a doomed platform, but its life cycle will be considerably shortened because of it.

Dependence on existing franchises and the danger of the Virtual Console - even though Nintendo is far, far better than most companies in this respect, it has still reached a point where it's almost killed the appeal of so many timeless franchises. While Mario has always appeared in more games than bear his name, Link, Samus, Pikachu, Fox and almost everything in the Mario universe is in danger of the backlash of overexposure. The Virtual Console, arguably the Wii's best feature at this point, is reaching a point of no return with Nintendo's classic games. Will you really want to play through the NES version of Super Mario Bros. 2 when you've already cleared Super Mario World and Super Mario 64 on your VC? You probably already own a better version for your GBA or SNES. Fifty percent of the biggest games in Nintendo's history are already available on the VC, and we're just getting into the sixth month of the console's lifecycle. By this time next year, almost every game you wanted to play and many that you didn't, will be available on the VC. That is a great thing...if the Wii's software release schedule has improved enough to take the main focus of appeal for the system off of the virtual console. If the VC is basically done in the next two years, what remains? Original properties? Nintendo seems to have enough trouble keeping pace with Wii software releases, let alone original VC releases on top of that. Why aren't we seeing more games announced in the vein of Disaster: Day of Crisis and Project Hammer? Nintendo needs to fill the gaps of genres that seem to pass the system over, with intellectual properties it already owns. Fire Emblem: Goddess of Dawn and Super Paper Mario are a good start but the Wii's library needs more. An epic Golden Sun RPG? A new survival horror adventure in the world of Eternal Darkness? A God of War like romp through ancient Greece as Pit? A serious racing simulator in the vein of Gran Turismo/Project Gothem? A sandbox game, not ripping off GTA's theme, but in an original and intuitive setting? Perhaps these ideas should take precedence over a sixth iteration of MarioKart, or a ninth iteration of Mario Party or even another Mario Sports title. Considering the perfect backwards compatibility with the Gamecube (another stellar feature) new entries into these franchises seem even less necessary.

Improved use of Miis beyond anything we've seen thus far - Nintendo has a runaway hit with the Mii feature on the Nintendo Wii. Timing is of the essence, and Miis need to be implemented in more of the Wii's features before users simply lose interest. Miis are such a success, that they should be integrated into almost every aspect of the Wii, where they would seem a natural fit. Online games are a no brainer, but the Miis could be used in all kinds of interaction, not just with other players, but with all kinds Wii feature specific activities. Nintendo sometimes has a bad habit of bringing too little, too late when it comes to the untested and innovative. E-reader? Gameboy Camera? Transfer Pack? Connectivity? Let's hope the Mii doesn't fade into the obscurity that these products did. There is great potential.

There is great potential for Wii. More than any Nintendo system before it, in my humble opinion. Nintendo can't drop the ball this time though...the have to make these disadvantages non-issues. While their survival may not depend on it, their achieving greatness absolutely does. Nintendo only has this advantage for this generation, surely the Playstation and Xbox brands will include everything the Wii offers in their next iteration of consoles five years down the line. Nintendo's time is now, and I would hate to see them squander it due to problems that they've been aware of for years. Not before we can use the Wiimote as a light saber. Come on, I know all of us are waiting for that.

My apologies for splitting this blog into two sections, the result of poor planning on my part. Thank you for reading! :D

Downloadable games are a major part of this generation's strategy. Xbox Live Arcade has done an excellent job in providing exactly that...arcade games. Coupled with achievements and online modes, these arcade games have taken on new life. The Virtual Console has done an excellent job at offering a wide range of console games; even from former competitors. With the Xbox providing arcade games and the Wii providing console games, Sony has somewhat been left out in the cold. Sony has been scrambling for arcade leftovers such as Mortal Kombat II, or drawing from their PS1 library, in which the games are only playable on the PSP. The only chance Sony really has to be unique in this category is: if they make their original PS1 downloadable library playable on the PSP, or if the release original content. Neither of these options is particularly feasible, since PS1 games have a much longer download time than Xbox Live Arcade or Virtual console games and original content has a longer development cycle then upgrading existing software, making releases fewer and farther between. However Sony spins it, at this point they have nothing unique or compelling as far as downloadable content goes.

The "Cell" processor has made the Playstation 3’s power and architecture unique in this generation. All of the properties of the "Cell" processor should differentiate the Playstation 3 from the competition, in theory. The reality of it is though, is that the "Cell" processor by design has shackled the first generation of Playstation 3 software to be unspectacular when compared to the same software on the Xbox360. In many cases, the visuals of these ports are actually lesser than the Xbox360 equivalents, with too few exceptions. Developers are complaining about the Playstation 3’s difficult architecture, along with the cost of developing exclusive software titles. In order to guarantee profitable returns for their products, developers are forced to release software on multiple platforms, often electing to use the Xbox 360’s more familiar development tools and porting the software to the Playstation 3 afterwards. This has created a serious problem with the quality of Playstation 3 games in comparison to the Xbox 360’s games. It has also alienated developers from making exclusive software for the Playstation 3, causing a strange lack of exclusive third party support.

While it is constantly debated whether or not this particular feature has any long lasting importance, the recent announcement of Sony’s remodeling of the Playstation 3 without the "emotion engine" chip has had an extremely negative impact. Backwards Compatibility was one of the Playstation 2’s strong points, and it has been long expected that the Playstation 3 would continue that legacy without flaw. Even before the announcement of the removal of the "emotion engine", the backwards compatibility of the Playstation 3 was fundamentally flawed. Without the use of peripherals such as specialized controllers or memory cards, it had become clear that most serious gamers would have to keep their old Playstation 2 hooked up right beside their Playstation 3. It’s hard to say if this feature will become a deciding factor when gamers make the decision to buy the Playstation 3 or not, but at this point, it is clear that Sony has absolutely no advantage over the competition in this respect.

It is also worth mentioning that there is absolutely nothing intuitive about Playstation 3 to PSP connectivity so far, or in the foreseeable future. It painfully mimics the Gamecube to Gameboy Advance connectivity model, to the point where it comes off just as gimmicky. Whether or not Sony decides to truly make something interesting with the feature, it’s not worth buying both systems at this point, for this reason, if you didn’t have them both already.

All of these minor problems add up to one major problem for the PS3: a lack of differentiation. By desperately trying to provide everything, they really do in fact provide almost nothing. We have now entered a time where gamers are used to the fact that they will probably have to buy at least two consoles to enjoy all of the mainstream games of the generation. One of the ways in which gamers can justify these purchases to themselves is by the fact that one console provides unique features that another console cannot. Unfortunately for the Playstation 3, the unique features it boasts are not yet visible to anyone other than hardcore videophiles and the extremely wealthy. This will hamper the system for the first few years of its life. While all of us are waiting on the Playstation 3’s upcoming hit titles, one has to wonder: Will a few big games be able to sell a system that has no discerning features other than the games themselves? The answer is yes. Of course they will sell systems. Will they sell systems to the level of Sony’s past success with the Playstation 2? Very doubtful.

That’s the entire point of this blog though. The era in which one console will dominate the market is over. The market has grown and matured into so many different types of consumers, designing a console to dominate the market is simply obsolete. This is definitely good news for those of us who play games, since it means that the experience will not be shackled to the limitations of a single design, vision or interface. It is an exciting new era that it beginning now, and it is very difficult to predict where the console market will go, or what it will provide, as few as five years from now.

The Playstation 3 will be an important part of this market for years to come. As of this writing, Sony just announced their "home" internet service plan. While I am still a little skeptical about how this will integrate with playing games like the Xbox Live does, if it’s even half as fun as it is interesting, then Sony is in fine shape, and well on the road to success. Obviously, Sony’s problems regarding this shift in power is not the result of blatant arrogance, mismanagement and poor assumptions on the needs of the consumer, but growing pains in a vastly changing and maturing market. I wish Sony all the success with their new Playstation 3 console, and I also wish them their fair share: 33.3% of the market. Anything else would not be to the benefit of us, the people who play games.

The very first shift in power within the video game console industry came in 1986, when it became clear that the Nintendo Entertainment System would become the leading choice for console gamers around the globe. Previous to that, it could be easily observerved that the market was dominated by Atari with their Atari 2600 console. According to history, that domination ended in 1983 with an industry wide crash, disappointment to consumers on a devastating level and a landfill full of unsold E.T. cartridges. Arrogance, mismanagement and poor assumptions on the needs of the consumer have all been cited as major catalysts for this event.

The next major shift in power came in 1996, when it became clear that Sony's Playstation console was a major contenter and not going the way of the 3DO, Jaguar and CD-i. Sony's dominance became an undisputable truth in mid-1997, when Nintendo's N64 console had failed to overcome many of the technical limitations along with a lack of quality software. Sony was the biggest player in town, with Nintendo and Sega quickly slipping into secondary positions. Like ten years previous, arrogance, mismanagement and poor assumptions on the needs of the consumer have been recorded in history as the reasons for why this happened.

Now in 2007, we come to the end of another 10 years cycle, for what seems to be another shift in power. Sony's Playstation 3 console is trailing far behind the Wii and Xbox360 in worldwide sales. Sony has taken alot of negative press in both the game specialized and mainstream media over the fact that the PS3 has been outsold by the Wii and Xbox360, and over the fact that the PS3 is too expensive for the average consumer. As Sony scrambles to make the machine more affordable for both itself and the consumer, they have taken alot of criticism as to the ways in which they have done so. As always, arrogance, mismanagement and poor assumptions on the needs of the consumer are being talked about in regards to Sony and their current situation. On this point of view, I couldn't disagree more.

At the risk of destroying the momentum of this writing, please allow me to interject my own opinion on the fact that Sony has been "arrogant" in the media as of late with regard to the Playstation 3. In this regard, Sony has certainly fallen victim to unfair and narrowminded commentary. While promoting their Playstation 3 product, Sony has been steadfast to reinforce that they believe their product to be the best and that consumers are clamoring for it. Whether they are correct in those statements or not is not really a relevant issue. What would Sony say publically otherwise? How would they be expected to win consumer confidence at the price they are asking if they did not appear to have confidence in their own product as well? Comments such as "we know we will sell out of PS3's whether we have games available for the system or not" should have been read as "upcoming software shortages will have very little impact on the consumer confidence regarding the quality of our Playstation 3 product". In my opinion, had these statements been issued by a competing company, the reaction would have been much more docile, if there was a reaction at all.

If we use the model of arrogance, mismanagement and poor assumptions on the needs of the consumer to explain Sony's current situation, the only one of these that may vaguely apply is the last one...poor assumptions on the needs of the consumer. While many would speculate that price would be the culprit, in the sense that Sony overlooked the consumer's need  for an affordable product, I assert an altogether different reason. Sony overlooked the consumer's need for differenciation. While Sony may have thought they knew what exactly that meant for them in order to be successful, one would be hard pressed, especially in their market position, to realize that we have come to the end of an era.

When I refer to "the end of an era", I am not refering to the end of Sony's market dominance....though that interpretation is almost logically applicable. The end of the era in which I speak of is the end of the era of dominance, not specifically for Sony, but for all three of the major companies in the console manufacturing business. We have arrived at a point now where there are so many different people who play games all over the world, that a thriving market has come into existance that transends the usual boundries of game player's taste graphics, gameplay, features, affordability, new and experimental concepts and lust for next generation hardware. The sales of the DS and Wii have shown us that new and casual players can still be lured in. Strong Xbox360 sales have shown us that the market for hardcore gamers desiring the "next generation" is alive and well. Strong sales of the Playstation 2 have shown us that the market for last generation hardware and software is far from over. These market trends should now show us that the video game market is not just one market, but has matured into a conglomeration of different markets.

Did Sony realize this when designing it's Playstation 3 console? I suspect that they did, but I also am of the opinion that they may have realized this far too late. Honestly though, with ten years of market dominance under their belt and record-breaking sales of their Playstation 2 console, could anyone have come to a different conclusion if they were in Sony's shoes? While the failure of the PSX in Japan and the defeat of the PSP at the hands of the DS worldwide could have been an indication, it's very hard to say for sure. Indeed, those products represent Sony's vulnerabilty as of late, but a console in the "numbered" Playstation line may carry enough consumer recognition and confidence to overlook the real reason these products failed*. The real reason these products failed is they were designed for a concept that no longer exists: market dominance.

(* Please note: When I refer to the failure of these products, I refer to their failure to dominate the mass market. In reality, the PSP has an extremely healthy installed base and should rightly be considered a commercial success in many ways)

The Playstation 3 was also designed much in the same way. While being unrivaled in graphics, sound and storage capacity, Sony had found a way to do so while using a custom processer and media format. From a business standpoint, this is a very profitable venture with little risk, considering the vast R&D devolopment resources and product strength that Sony is in a unique position to enjoy. Unarguably, the PS3 potentially can offer the best sound, visuals of this generation while never having to worry about storage capacity while doing so. Unfortunately, having the best visuals, sound and storage capacity doesn't mean as much as it used to. Most people either don't have the equipment or the knowledge to realize why Sony's product is the best on the market in terms of power. Sony's hardware advantage at present is invisible to the average consumer.

As far as the Playstation 3's other features are concerned, they lack the aforementioned differenciation. Unfortunately, these features were rushed or unfinished at the time of the Playstation 3's release, or altogether ill-concieved. Let's take a look at these features and allow me to explain why there is a lack differenciation:

Playstation's Online service is still not finished in regards to the standards Sony themselves have been talking about over the last few years. Obviously Sony's online service pails in comparison to Xbox Live, but it still doesn't encompass all the features Sony themselves desire. Seamless intergration between the PS3, PSP and PS2 platforms, an effective online business model for third parties and intuitive online player experience that goes beyond multiplayer are things that Sony has yet to achieve. The bottom line is, as far as online goes, the Xbox 360 does it better.

The Sixaxis controller is something that I can't decided whether it was a good decision or a bad one. On one hand, it brings a feature that will allow the PS3 to share in some of the Wii developed titles, such as driving games or any game where you pilot a vehicle. One the other hand, it is so severely limited, that one has to wonder whether Sony would have been better off releasing a peripheral that perfectly mimics the Wiimote's functionality at a later date. The Wiimote is a superior motion sensor controller to the Sixaxis controller in every way. The limitations of the Sixaxis won't incline Wii developers to release Playstaion 3 versions of thier software, rendering the feature almost useless from a competitive standpoint. The bottomline is, as far as motion sensing control goes, the Wii does it much better.

Timing is of the utmost importance when you release a console. Unfortunately, timing is mostly a factor of luck. There are too many unknowns to time a console launch perfectly. Production problems, consumer demand, software development delays, loss of demand for certain types of software...these are all things beyond the company's control. A bad launch can kill a console, while a mediocre launch can cripple a console for the rest of it's life. Sometimes, even an excellent launch can't get a console off the ground if the company has had a series of disappointments.

In 1995, the PS1 was launched at an ideal time. The console market was a two-horse race. Sega and Nintendo were in a slow battle with their SNES and Genesis console war, and always seemingly in a deadlock. The Genesis launched first and crept ahead, Sonic was released and it became a contender, the SNES got Street Fighter II and gained ground, the Genesis had the version of Mortal Kombat with blood in it and became edgier, SNES had Donkey Kong Country and boasted next-gen visuals....meanwhile both systems were basically getting the same big third party releases, with little differences. While arcade showed glimpses of what the future held in terms of 3D, the SNES's Super FX chip and Sega's CD add-on peripheral could not offer an experience "next generation" enough to justify the high prices. By the time the Sega's 32X hit and did nothing more than offer the SNES's colour palette to it's 2D games, coupled with the appearance of the headache inducing Virtual Boy,the market was undoubtably stale.

Although there had been other entries to the market coming from 3DO, Phillips and Atari...Sony's machine put on the best show for what gamers at the time wanted. Ridge Racer was an incredible showcase for the system, and the systems 3D abilities along with promises of slick production values due to the CD format, the Playstation was born into success. Nintendo's arrogance would cost them market leader for a number of reasons (cartridges, third party bullying, ignoring consumer demand) and Sega's disorganization would keep them inept. The perfect window of opprotunity. With early games like Ridge Racer, Warhawk, Resident Evil and Tomb Raider, Sony proved that the next generation was here. The fact that the name "Sony" already carried weight among electronics owners as a trusted-name brand didn't hurt either.

Fast forward to the year 2000. The Playstation had become a household name. The gaming industry had grown considerably since the launch of the Playstation, mostly due to the existance of the Playstation. The PS2 was on the horizon and it had an indesputable collection of promising titles on the way. Final Fantasy X, Metal Gear Solid 2, Grand Turismo 3 and Silent Hill 2 were all incredibly anticipated. Sony's success with the PS1 showed some people that they had what it took to compete with the big guns like Sega and Nintendo. To others, it was just the passing of the torch from toy companies to a true electronic entertainment medium.

Whispers of the appearant death of Sega were foreshadowed by EA's lack of support for the Dreamcast. Microsoft's interest in the market created a great unknown variable, and Nintendo's state of management transition left it on a predictable path. The safest option at the time was Sony. You see, there was no Oblivion alternative to Final Fantasy, no Splinter Cell alternative to Metal Gear Solid and no Forza Motor Sport alternative to Grand Turismo back then. Halo had a chance at being a promising PC game and the Grand Theft Auto series was still in 2D. Sony was the safe choice. There were simply no alternatives that could effectively compete on the same level. Unfortunately, the PS3 could not enjoy either of these situations, and not really through any fault of Sony's. Other than Sony believing one of these scenarios still existed.

The Playstation 3 was launched too early, and it was launched too late.

The Playstation 3 was launched too early. There are many, many reasons to argue this. Foremostly, all regions could not be launched at the same time. Europe will launch in a month of so of this writing, to consumers who may have: already bought another next generation system, been soured by Sony's selection of Europe to be the region that goes without or become reluctant to invest in Sony's machine since it's failure to "sell out" in the other regions. The PS3 should have been launched in ALL regions.

Secondly, there are no competative titles on the radar for months. Ridge Racer 7 doesn't quite have as much of an impact when Ridge Racer 6 is available on the Xbox 360. Resistance is not as fulfilling an experience as Gears of War. Final Fantasy XIII, Metal Gear Solid 4 and Grand Turisimo 5 all have serious competition. The PS3 should have been launched with stellar games, if not two, at least one.

Thirdly, the state of services Sony is offering with the PS3 can't be called anything but rushed. The online service is functional, but surprisingly lacking considering they've had a successful model to compare with for over a year. The PSP connectivity features are a mess, and will certainly go the way of the GC/GBA connectivity fiasco is they are not redesigned soon. The PS3 should have launched competent services, or launched the services when the were ready to be competitive.

Finally, while it isn't an issue now, it shouldn't have been at launch. Lack of stock. How many more PS3's could have been sold if Sony had met consumers demand? How many sales were lost to the competition because of this? How many people would have bought a PS3 if it had been a simple experience? The should have been enough PS3's to meet consumer demand.

At the same time though, the PS3 was launched too late. While the Xbox 360 had only a year's head start, it seems that all that Microsoft needed. Microsoft actually started working on the Xbox 360's launch in the middle of the original Xbox's lifespan, showing an incredible amount of preparedness rarely seen in this industry. Within a year's time, the Xbox has provided gamers with more quality next generation games and services than Sony can hope to accomplish in 2007. Sony's obsession to custom create everything inside the PS3 has cost them precious development time, time that may not pay off anytime soon. Development kits went out too late, and the architecture is too complex for low cost port-support, causing many games to not even utilize Sony's machine as well as they utilize the Xbox 360. Sony should have been ready to meet Microsoft in the market in a much more competitive timeframe.

Also, launching within days of Nintendo's Wii, was not particularily wise either. Nintendo's Wii is competition that could have been avoided due to the unique design and ultimately different market approach than either the PS3 or Xbox 360. Launching within days of each other only forced consumers who hadn't been following the available media on either machine to assume a sense of equality between the two platforms where essentially none exists. It's true that both compete for dollars in the same market, but as we'll explore soon, a completely different type of consumer. The PS3 should have launched long before the Wii.

Of course, it was impossible for Sony to be "on time". They were doomed to be too early or too late in one sense or another, but not being able to minimize the damage done from either can simply be called altogether "bad timing". As we'll soon discuss though, this is not the only aspect of timing in which they've failed. It seems that the market has changed, and Sony hasn't changed with it.

Next: (Part 3) The end of an era

I must apologize. The title of this blog is a bit of a ruse to get your attention. So if you were expecting a big rant about how Sony is failing, you're going to be disappointed. Rather, I would like to offer my perspective on Sony's current problems, having  fairly intimate knowledge about the North American and Japanese game territories. Now allow my to explain what my blog's title:

Last Place

Currently, in all territories, Sony is in last place. Of course, since they haven't released yet in Europe, it doesn't seem fair to say but with the current generation already hitting its stride, being this late is going to hurt Sony considerably. That is, if Sony's goal is market share domination in that territory. I think at this point though, turning a profit is the most important agenda.

Why has the PS3 been met with cold feet when compared with the PS1 and PS2? To understand the many problems surrounding the PS3, it may be a good idea to take a good hard look at the PSX, a console Sony released about two years ago in Japan only.

The PSX was a console that cost in the neighborhood of $850 USD. What it was, was a DVD player, recorder with TiVo-like capabilities and a wealth of multimedia functions. It also played PS2 and PS1 games. Nobody bought this machine. It sat on store shelves and collected dust in Akihabara, the capital shopping district of Japanese electronics. The last television commercial for it I saw of Japanese TV where Sony was trying to push sales, it didn't even mention the game playing functionality. It had in previous commercials, but now Sony had learned a hard lesson: the type of consumers interested it a DVD player/recorder/TiVo unit are not interested in playing games. Not for $850 USD.

Why would Sony do exactly the same thing a few years later with the PS3? They fell in love with the idea of their Blu-Ray format. They justified the PSX's failure with the notion that the PSX didn't offer anything really next generation. The PS3 offers a next generation gaming experience and a high defination video experience. Cheaper than other stand alone HD-video players on the market, even at $600 USD the PS3 sounds like a pretty good deal. Make no mistake, the technology Sony is offering you with the PS3 is an amazing value. The PS3 is a technological marvel. The PS3 is way ahead of it's time.

Therein lies the source of many problems. First of all, consumers all around the world are not ready for the next generation video format. It might amaze you to know that many people all over the world are purchasing thier first DVD player. VHS tapes are still being bought and sold in this day and age. Most people will not buy a high-definition television set within the next 5 years. The world doesn't really need a next generation video format yet. Nerds do, but remember, nerds are still a minority.

This box of Sony's does more than play movies, it plays games. This is where Sony's machine doesn't perform quite as well, simply by design alone. Spending so much time devoloping amazing hardware for the PS3, Sony neglected other important aspects of a game console. These are:

Online Infrastructure: Sony's Online service pales in comparison to Xbox Live. The Xbox 360's online integration has set the standard for this generation and all that will follow. While Sony's Online experience is not horrible by any means, it just does not compete. Achievement points, Live Arcade and constant access to other players are some aspects where Sony is lacking or altogether missing. Sony needed something almost exactly like Xbox Live.

Backwards Compatibilty: While some argue that the importance of this feature is questionable, it has become clear that it's a growing concern. The PS3's ability to play PS1 and PS2 games has a few forgivable flaws, save one: the lack of access to previous generation's peripherals. Not being able to use unique controllers and stardard memory cards really hurts the PS3's appeal when you realize you have to have your PS2 hooked up beside it in order to play your faorite games. This design flaw alienates the casual game consumer.

PSP connectivity: As of now, the method in which you download PS1 games for the PSP is convoluted and the result of trying to get some download service out to the market without developing it fully. It is such a sloppy system that it shakes confidence for future service even with the Sony faithful, and alienates consumers who are not tech-savvy. This design flaw hurts consumer confidence in the product and service, alienates the average comsumer.

The PS3 can't provide game consumers with the same experience as the competition...yet. While these design flaws can be overcome eventually, they hurt Sony the most at launch. With no major PS3 releases drawing consumers, and such limitations on the online/connectivity/backward compatibilty experience, it isn't much of a surprise that the PS2 is outselling the PS3.

Under the hood, the PS3 is capable of amazing games. Unfortunately, few PS3 games released thus far have shown anything that even hints at this potential. Pair this up with the fact that most players are playing on a standard definition television and some more wind comes out of the PS3's sales. At this point in time, it takes to many factors outside of the PS3, to get the most out of the PS3's technology. As of now, the PS3 is not the best buy for the average person interested in playing some video games.

These design flaw are currently the shackles to which Sony is bound. Intelligent management and time will help counter or altogether eliminate these issues. Unfortunately, the things outside of Sony's control might be even more of an alarming concern.

Next: (Part 2) Bad timing and the last generation

I actually posted this in a forum at first....but I put so much work into writing it, I couldn't just let it go. It is just a rant, but a few things dawned on me while I was writing it. Do you ever sometimes find part of the answer to your own question? That's what happened here:

I am one of those 30 somethings that been around since the days of the Atari 2600. I think you've definately got a good point. It's not just backwards compatibility though. If you look at the difference between PS1 and PS2 games, it's fairly obvious there was a visual upgrade there. In fact, most PS1/N64/Saturn games look so horrible, that I can't stomach playing them anymore. (There are, of course, exceptions. I won't list them here.)

If you look at the difference between the PS2 and PS3, you can see a difference. It isn't the difference that most of us are looking for this time around though.

Here's the classic example. Soul Blade, for the PS1. Released in 1997.Great game. Great fighting engine. At the time, it was a great PS1 3D fighting game. Perhaps still the best on that system. It had incredible backgrounds, dynamic lighting in those backgrounds, that lighting reflecting off the characters, excellect music and rock solid gameplay. There was jaggies, pixalation pop-up/draw in and polygon tearing and alot of low resolution textures, but back in the day, it looked better than almost all the other games on that system.

Fast forward to 1999. The Sega Dreamcast launch and a game called Soul Caliber. Same great fighting engine. More amazing backgrounds. More dynamic lighting affecting a wider variety of objects, both in the forground and background. Very few jaggies, no pixalation, polygon tearing or pop-up/draw in and beautiful high resolution textures. While this looked wholly more beautiful than Soul Blade for the PS1, none of the above are the reasons this game was forever remembered for knocking our socks off.

It was the effort put into the fluidity of movement of the characters. Motion caturing with real martial artists. Every move you performed in the game looked as if it was being executed in a believable way, and there was always a smooth and believable transition from one move to the other. The backgrounds had alot more life...lotus leaves falling while the trees were in bloom, more than adequate realistic water effects for a fighting game, and a variety of environments with so much detail packed into the background, it would take a minute or two of staring at it to absorb it all in. All this and more options, modes ,unlockables and special features ever seen in a fighting game ever. At home or in an arcade. This game was TRULY next generation. It was all these features and details meant to submerge us into the world of Soul Caliber, that blew us all away.

When you first played Ocarina of Time on the N64, you were blown away. It wasn't going through the first "Great Deku Tree" dungeon that blew you away. It was in a sense the intuitive control set-up, but not entirely. I'm willing to wager that it was the same moments that put you in utter disbelief that I also found to be genuinely amazing....the way Saria's face looks sad and worried after giving you the Ocarina as you exit the forest, the cinematic of her standing there alone on the bridge for the few seconds after Link walks out of the forest, and then reaching the sprawling Hyrule Field that stretches out as far as the eye can see as you realize that the sun is rising and setting in real time as you make your way to Hyrule castle. These are the memories that stay with us forever. When a new feeling is achieved. A new level of immersion.

Twilight Princess, unfortunately, offered very few of these moments. While it is a most amazing game, and there where time when I played it where I just stopped and stared, I was not MOVED. For example, the ruined entrance to the Temple of Time where you first get the Master Sword is beautiful. One of the most beautiful spots in the game. But how much better could it have been if more of the little details had been addressed? A light breeze making the leaves turn as branches sway back and forth, the light filtering through the leaves dynamically as their position changes...the grass beneath your feet swaying in unison and the occasional leaf fluttering down around you. A scene this immersive has yet to be achieved in any game.

The problem with the Wii/PS3/Xbox360 is that the launch games didn't make these kind of leaps. While the graphics have obviously been improved...something is missing. Even if the visuals were double what they are currently at launch, the problem is that GAMES still look like GAMES. No matter how many polygons characters are made up out of, whether their movement is motion captured, and especially even if the lighting and environment are almost photo realistic...these games still lack....life.

That's what we expect now. We expect it to be difficult to see the difference between a game and a movie, but it's still easy to tell the diffence. Especially now that Sony and Microsoft want us to buy a new HD television to view these visuals with, we expect them to be almost real. For the untrained eye to say....."I didn't know that was a game." Hoping that we ourselves will even forget one day that we are playing a game. But this isn't going to happen anytime soon.

That is exactly why this new generation feels a little.....lacking.

I realize it comes off as a little arrogant since I have yet to jump into the new generation myself as of yet. I'm sure there are games now that offer what I was talking about..I suspect "Gears of War" or "Wii Sports" may be those games. But it still happened differently than alot of people expected....and less frequently...or so it seems.

Finally I have completed The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess. I must say I am disappointed. I am disappointed that it ended. That's as far as my disappointment goes.

In the time that I played Twilight Princess, I believe that I have completed everything 100%, as far as collections go. As far as things to see are concerned, I'm quite sure that I didn't uncover everything. Not that it means much, but I'm proud to say I did almost all of it without a guide. I turned to the online Poe Soul FAQ when I was missing just one, turns out it wasn't as useful as I thought it would be. I couldn't tell which one I was missing and had to systematically check each one on the list. It really wasn't worth it, especially considering what happens to poor Jovanni. I have an obsessive compulsive disorder when it comes to completing games.

Now, I'd like to say that the final boss battle along with the ending were awe inspiring. Ganondorf really looks menacing this time around, and the entire process of the final battle is by far one of the most entertaining sequences of the game. While the ending itself isn't really as climactic as Ocarina of Time, it still blends in with the entire process well, creating a very satisfying sense of closure. Hyrule Castle was amazing as well. Inside the castle was stardard fair but the architecture of the outside of the castle was an awe inspiring sight.

Complaints about this game being too easy are well founded. It's very obvious that Nintendo wanted their new found Wii audience to be able to get through the entire game without being frustrated. Why the Gamecube version shares this attribute, I don't understand. The game doesn't need to be harder in the context of puzzles. I found the puzzles to be exetremely true to the logic established by the Zelda series while being inspired and inventive. The balance between the amount of damage you do to enemies and how much damage you recieve is the greatest flaw. By the end of the game, I could kill almost everything with one swipe, and only have to fear losing a quarter of a heart if I got hit. If I did get hit, there was always a jar or a barrel nearby, full of hearts.

There has been alot of noise in the forums about the continuity of the series being comprimised due to the storyline in Twilight Princess, but I found exactly the opposite to be the case. This game paints a perfect picture of exactly what is going on, not only in this game, but previous and future games. I could quote many of the things Ganondorf said before the final battle to explain the entire concept of the Zelda series timeline. I suppose people had thier own ideas of how this story should have been told, and when it didn't end up that way, stopped paying attention.

This game has had alot of unfair critsism directed towards it. I suppose that's because it took so long to come to market. While most people claim to have been waiting for it since it was announced in May of 2004, I have been waiting to play Twilight Princess ever since I completed Ocarina of Time in November of 1998. Eight years gives way to some pretty astronomical expectations. Amazingly, most of those expectations were filled.

Completing Twilight Princess was bittersweet, and a somewhat sad event. A little of it has to do with it being the last new Gamecube experience, but not much. A little of it has to do with me wishing there was just a little more content in this game, but that actually isn't really much of the reason either. For me personally, this was the last time I will ever sit down for this many hours and marathon through a game. The timing of when this came out in my personal life was uncanny. I had just written a number of exams and was taking a break from my studies. I had 3 weeks off from my job to play it, all the time sick with a nasty case of bronchitus with further gave me an excuse to do some excessive gaming. This was indeed a rare occasion.

It is also the last time a Zelda game such as this will ever be made. The next Zelda will be designed for the Wii from the ground up and in my opinion probably be radically different. The series will probably go into a new artistic direction concerning storytelling and gameplay, not only because of the sense of closure with Twilight Princess, but because the series really needs to. This will probably be the last new Zelda to be released with a traditional control scheme. This game, in a sense, represents the end of an era.

That said, let me make this clear: The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess is now my favorite game of all time. I has so many perfected gameplay systems, and so many characteristics that got me playing video games in the first place, no other game gives me the same sense of completeness that Twilight Princess does, except maybe Ocarina of Time.

I look forward to playing it again in about 5 years, when I've forgotten where most everything is. In the meantime, I think I'll go through Wind Waker again. Maybe this time, do all the sea charts. Meh.....maybe not.

Fighting three Iron Knuckles at the same time was just nuts. I learned about the careful art of "L triggering" and cafefully measuring my distance to be just out of their reach but close enough for them to try to strike. In Ocarina of Time, when you where engaged in a sword fight with some capable enemy, the other enemies in the vicinity waited for their turn. No such luck in Twilight Princess. I actually got my ass kicked on my first attempt at the Cave of Ordeals, three rooms away from the end. This part of the game was definately not a pushover.

I had just finished the Sky Temple before going into the Cave of Ordeals, which I have to say, was awesome. I'm not sure if the Sky Temple is my favorite dungeon, but it is definately one of my favorites. The twin clawshot is an awesome concept. Once I figured out the controls, I was swinging around like Spiderman. In fact, ever since Lakebed Temple, all the weapons I've aquired from dungoens have been completely new to the Zelda series, to my pleasant surprise. I was thinking that I would go through the second half of the game and get my fire arrows, ice arrows, long shot, mirror shield...etc, but none of those are anywhere to be found. I really like all the new weapons, especially the ridiculous ball and chain. I love how Link can just pull something like that out of his pants like it just makes sense.

But what I originally wanted to say was that until I had entered the Cave of Ordeals, I was feeling that the combat in the game wasn't fully fleshed out. Having acquired all seven special move scrolls, I didn't really see too many opprotunities to use all of these interesting techniques. Luckily, the Cave of Ordeals really kept me on my feet, and I found uses for every last fighting technique.While it took me a few hours and I thought it was a little difficult, I genuinely enjoyed it.

So I have all the pieces of the mirror, but I'm hesitant to go forward with the story because there are still things I haven't done. Whether or not there is another dungoen, and whether or not I'll get a full heart piece from it of not, means I have either 3 or 8 more heart pieces to find. I wasn't interested in collecting 60 poes, but in my travels I have inadvertantly collected 53 poes. I'm so close, I might as well find the other seven. I still haven't found one type of fish in my fishing log, and I still can't get past the first level of "Rollgoal". As far as fishing goes, I think the biggest thing I've caught at the fishing hole was a 24 inch Catfish, which can't be anything worth writing home about. All this and I'm still finding treasure chests and underground caves that I didn't notice before. A fairly decent bit of content, after spending 74 hours with the game.

I've been staying away from walkthroughs and strategy guides, so the amount of time I've put in could probably be reduced substancially. During this amount of time in Hyrule I've learned a few things that I'd like to share, that I think not many people know:

- if you have all the heart pieces you can possibly get with the weapons you possess, the fortune teller won't be able to show you anymore visions and will refund your money

- if you go visit your buddy at the ranch (Is his name Rusi? I don't remember) he'll get you to herd goats for a heart piece. Afterwards, if you change into the wolf, you can herd him into the barn. You don't get anything for it, and it doesn't say "Man In" when he enters the barn....but he runs like he's in dire need of some Preperation H, which I found quite amusing.

- if you stand still and listen to the band play in the town square, other people will shuffle up, listen for a while, lose interest and leave.

- if you dig with the wolf behind the sign at the fishing hole, you can catch earthworms in a bottle for bait.

- In the Lakebed Temple, you can catch the annoying fish that attack you with Colin's fishing rod. The are called "Skull fish"m and they won't be added to your fishing log, because the game says these fish are forbidden.

I doubt I'm the only person who has discovered these things, but I found them quite amusing. I think they be easy to miss unless you were doing as much running around as I have been.

I'm sort of at a dilema right now....should I go on and advance the story? Will it render certain areas inaccessable or accessable for the first time? Should I finish hunting for hear pieces and poes? I'm so close.....but that also makes then next to impossible to find. Should I devolop my skills as a fisherman for a while? Should I play "Rollgoal" even though I am clearly the worst "Rollgoal" player in the universe?

Whatever happens, it's safe to say that I'm still in love with this game. With the amount of time I've put into it, I've been playing this game for 9 days in 8 hour shifts. That continues to blow my mind.

Even now, while I'm sure I have seen 85% of this game, I am still shocked at the sheer size and scope of it all. When I was exploring the environments for the first time, I was amazed at how big they were, but they seemed so empty when compared to Ocarina of Time's secret packed areas. This first impression couldn't have been more wrong. If you were to compare directly the square footage of secrets per area between Twilight Princess and Ocarina of Time, I'm sure the latter would have more, but only because the areas are so small. In any case, I continue to find things in areas where I previously thought I had completed everything. I am very satisfied in this respect.

I may also be the worst Twilight Princess player ever. I seem to have alot of trouble having enough gold to do the activities I like. As I had left the game, I was fishing at the Zora Domain fishing hole with Colin's pole, because I can't afford the 20 rupees it takes to rent a boat and gear. Looks like I may have to go back into the Lakebed Temple, to get some of that cash I left behind. I already went back into the Goron mines to collect leftover cash in order to buy the Magical Armor. Ironically, I can't use it now that I have it, since it costs rupees while you wear it. I thought I could get around it by riding Epona while wearing it....no dice. Epona can't take the weight and bucks me off. I find it ironic that while other players complain that the game has far to many rupee filled treasure chests, I'm all broke.

That's party because I've been spending alot of time fishing, bug hunting, and trying to find all the little sopts I previously didn't know about in Hyrule Field. I collected 20 poes, but the thought of collecting 40 more is a little unappealling, but I may have to in order to get the biggest wallet, an item I sorely need. Bug hunting has come in quite useful, since Agitha ( or whatever that creepy chick's name is ) pays you well for all the bugs you find. I finally figured out the wolf songs, and am happy to say that I am updated with all the lastest fighting techniques. I still don't know what all those owl statues are for all over Hyrule Field, and I have some purple markers on my map which I don't understand. Ah.....the mysteries.....

For a long time, I was trying to get over the gorge in the Hyrule Field north of Kakoriko Village, namely the one on the eastern side. It definately looks like there is something over there...but alas, there doesn't seem to be a way to get across. I want to shoot some bomb arrows over there to see if I can damage anything, but I'm out of bombs.....I need some cash before I can do that.

As you can see, I am completely entralled and absorbed by this game. This is actually the first time this has happened in the DC/PS2/GC/XBOX generation, which is appearantly over now. Ha ha ha.... better late than never.

Appearantly, I'm now supposed to be collecting 3 more pieces to that mirror in the desert, but I'm not really in a hurry to do so. I'm have to much fun doing other things.