hi guys i was just cheking the GT5 section in wikipedia,and i looked at the release date and i was kinda shocked,

• NA November 2, 2010[1]

• EU November 3, 2010[2]

• JP November 3, 2010[3]

• AUS November 4, 2010[4]

why is it that it is coming out first on NA and then Second in EU and third in JP?

shouldnt japan be the first?

have i misunderstood something?whatsgoing on?i mean what is the deal with NA?what gives them the ability to have the GT5 first,even before japan?didnt japan develope the game?

i dont get this...

I've decided that I want to get a handheld this year and it'll either be a DSi/XL or a PSP 3000. I saw an XL and a 3000 for the same price ($180) and I was wondering what I should get. I REALLY want a DS (again) since my last one got stolen and I sold my Lite but the 3DS release could be right around the corner so I don't think it's a good idea to get a DS right now, not to mention my sister has a Lite I could use (freaking pink though). As for the PSP, I've been wanting one for quite a while now but never got round to picking one up. Never owned one before so all games would be new experiences for me. Also there's no "PSP2" announced right? so I don't think it'll be obsolete in a few months :P As for games, these are what I want for each:

DS - Layton games, Last Window, Dragon Quest IX, Okamiden, Kingdom Hearts 358/2 Days and Re:Coded, Final Fantasy IV and maybe buy the old games I used to have like GTA Chinatown Wars, Mario Kart and Shin Megami Tensei and maybe the new Pokemon game.

PSP - I want one mainly because of Kingdom Hearts Birth By Sleep but games like Tekken, Metal Gear Solid, Crisis Core FFVII, and Patapon look good.

Or I could use the money to buy more games for the PC and Wii and maybe just get another console instead. So tell me SW, what should I get?

PS: Sorry if this is the wrong forum. Oh and those prices are normal for where I live. Games and consoles here are a "little" bit more expensive.

Kenny789

yea i posted one of these bafore and i got the DS aswell,i think DS is good cuz it offers more for your money and is kinda unique for a gaming device

I think people here overate the benefites of exclusive games. when in reality it's what system a game doesnt come out for that matters.

Say Fable 3 comes out on 360 and PC and not PS3. The fact that it doesnt come out on PS3 is a HUGE plus for pc and 360, even if it's not exclusive for 360 it's still a giant reason why someone would buy a 360 or pcover a ps3. Just because it's not exclusive doesnt mean it's not a big deal. It is. What people have to realize is what games DONT come out for what particular system is what matters. That in my opinion is a bigger deal than exclusivity.

TheMistique

when the Ps3 came out, everyone thought it was so much more powerful than the 360, like x2 times more powerful. the polygon crap was funny, of course Sony spread lots of lies as always. the CPU is indeed the only advantage the Ps3 has over the 360, but somehow "we" are still blaming it on the LAZY devs when it comes to the inferior multiplats. when you have so many games that perform better on the Ms system, then it's not the devs' fault, but Sony's for making an arguably crazy hardware, a pain to develop games on.

So, why does the Ps3 have such beautiful looking games? the power of the cell? I don't think so. it's the power of the talented devs, which is something that Ms seems to lack. remember the ps2 how weak it was compared to the other systems? yet they were able to impress us with God of War 2, no one could ever imagine that the ps2 could push such graphics.

So when people say that the ps3 is like a Ferrari and the 360 like an average car, they're kidding themselves. over 90% of the games are multiplats, hence overall the 360 is winning in the graphics department, except for the exclusives' that they don't seem to care for much.

the techno buffalo guy said that the bluray is a big advantage for the ps3 and that dvd9 is even limiting the overall quality of the graphics on the 360.. I don't know how a support can make better graphics, but he may have a point.

thoughts?

aia89

Can we all agree the PC is the best platform for gaming on but doesn't have the best games?

I mean it's obvious with the PC's superior graphics, mods, community etc makes it theoretically the best platform to game on by a long way but when we look at the games we see that consoles have more AAAA, AAA games. Hermits can yell STANDARDS all they want which is fair enough butonly to the extent that multiplats with superior graphics, frames per sec etc recieve the same score as the console version, not the popular MGS4 = 8.0 MAX ON PC!!!

A good show of this is that PC hasn't had GOTY since 2004 (WOW), an award which obviously doesn't have standards because all games are put in direct competition with each other, not relative to the systems they are on but the other games. PC gamers can say PC has more AA, A etc but TBHme and most othersprobably only play arounf20 games a year max and I want these games to be very good, not just have 50 or so good games.

The PC has a narrower range of genres then consoles and while it does havemore niche games, the big budget, high scoring titles are generally from a narrow range.

Of course which platform has better games comes down to opinions but the scores and logic show consoles have better games than the PC.

gamebreakerz__

Gears of war 3 looks so good. I think its proof that xbox 360 is about equal in power to ps3. To me its the most realistic game on consoles with all the blood and gore it has. Im sure theres gonna be better looking games on 360 than gears of war 3. The 360 isnt at any disadvantage in graphics power.

slipknot0129

yeah but thats not true,untill we get a game that is 2 to 3 layered DVD we cant say what you just did,even you know that ps3 has the power,but you are just trying to fight it,unless i see a game on 360 that includes a multi layered DVD,i dont believe a word that you are saying.sorry

[QUOTE="M3ran"]

Hey guys ,i just beaten the game to 89.5% complete and i somehow feel deperessed about the ending:(,IMO it could have been alot better,

what do you guys think.i mean its like seeing nico bellic die in the last mission or like seeing tommy vercetti killed in the last mission by other gangstas.dont you think?yea so what if his son is alive,we dont care about his son,yea they made him exactly the same as his dad to tell us that his legacy still lives on,but it just doesnt work for me.John marstone is the same character we played in Red dead revolver,red harlow i think or what ever,

the fact of the matter is that they made the ending so wrong.i mean people should end up being happy they played as John Marstone,but its the exact opposite.

the thing that annoyed me alot was the chance that the creators give you to use the Dead Eye.on all those people for no reason!what is wrong with you Rstar.

lets see what you think people.

gizmo12345

I'd have preferred the game to end at the scene where you see Jack Marston standing in front of his parent's graves.

Playing as Jack Marston let the game down for me as he wasn't a likeable character. Far too annoying.

KlepticGrooves