Yeah, on the Xbox 360 Ninja Gaiden Black loads much slower than it did on the Original Xbox. I'm guessing that's because of the emulation software Team Ninja threw together. Too bad, as it's still an amazing game. I wish you had the original game so you could throw up a comparison... I wish I knew someone with the original game to anything with the DL version, but most of my friends either own all the original Xbox games they want, or they just buy them used at Gamestop for less that $15... but you can't even get Halo at Gamestop for $8.50 without tax, it's $9.99 with tax (I work there btw). Also, Google is not yielding any aswers as well, so unless someone just happens to know something here, nobody's going to know any better...

Okay, so I was thinking about the practicality of the Xbox Originals off Xbox Live... do they run any different at all from the HDD rather than their disc counterparts? I'm wondering because I own Halo, but my disc is pretty jacked, and since it's only running for 600 MS Points this week, I was thinking about DLing it. Why Halo when I have Halo 3? Becuase Halo 3's Campaign sucks @$$, and I'd rather play through Halo right now. Sure, H3 for Multi, but I'm not in the mood right now.

Basically, is an Xbox Original more reliable, or maybe even slightly faster in loading, than an Xbox game disc? And if so, what's the difference?

I didn't think Sony actually OWNED God of War, I thought they just published GoW, GoW2, and GoW:CoO.... kinda' like how Tecmo published Ninja Gaiden and Ninja Gaiden Sigma, but M$ published Ninja Gaiden 2.

What I'm trying to say is, even though the first 2 and the PSP spin-off were published by Sony, doesn't mean that the 3rd will be. M$ could still get rights to it if Sony doesn't already have full rights to the game, simply because Sony isn't making the game... although that's like saying that Halo 3 would have come out on the PS3 after being announced for the 360, simply because the game wasn't made by M$, but was being published by them.

The point is, you can't know for sure if it won't go multi-platform because Sony doesn't own the rights to the title "God of War" and because Sony isn't actually developing the game. M$ bought and paid for the rights to "Halo," and they have full authority over it, so no, it won't come to the Sony console unless Sony starts selling itself on the street for some "private" time... oh, and it's extremely unlikely GoW3 will come to the Xbox 360. I don't see it happening... then again, I never saw FFXIII coming to the 360... then again, Sony doesn't publish or make the FF series. I'm just trying to keep things clear. Sony doesn't make or own GoW, they are simply the publishers. Sony has made it a hard stance to not buy any titles in recent years. If devs want their games on the Sony console, they'll come to Sony. Not the smartest business approach, but hey, whatever floats their boat.

Playing Gunstar Heroes for the Sega Genesis on Expert difficulty and having to fight Orange or Green... THAT was annoying... beyond annoying. I can't believe I used to be able to do that.

And for those of you who don't know what Gunstar Heroes is, or who the developers Treasure are, here's a vid of someone trying to play on Expert difficulty:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkPYeUKsmck

Yeah, Treasure did Gunstar Heroes, Guardian Heroes, Mischief Makers, Sin and Punishment, Radiant Silvergun, Ikaruga, Gunstar Super Heroes, Bangai-O, Bangai-O Spirits, and more recently Bleach - The Blade of Fate... basically, anything they make is gold, because all of these games average score over 8.5, and they're all amazingly addicting. If you buy one, you buy them all.

The game was made using the Halo 3 game engine, and technically is an expansion, but as it's its own game on disc, rather than a download, it will be reguarded as it's own title. The games release date is Halo's anniversary, next year. It will include online Co-op, multiplayer, and of course it's own campaign where you play as a lone ODST whose trying to make his way back to his unit, and is being guided by some mysterious force he comes to know as "The Superintendant," an A.I. system that's been damaged and gone rampant.

As far as gameplay goes, I'd expect Bungie to do something similar to the CoD style, you know, you have a shield, it's just invisible and makes your screen turn red when your shot 2 or 3 times. every game has that nowadays though. I also see a lot more stealth missions, or even missions requiring teamwork, rather than lone ranger running in, guns blazing, while all the Marines die.

I hope Bungie does it right. If they don't I figure they'll get a lot of flac for it.

I've got a restraining order on anything CoD related made by Treyarch... so yeah, I can't legally, or ethically, play this game.

What the f*** do you mean not a true gamer? Are you a stuck up pre-teen/teenager who gets all his games from mommy and daddy and never has to pay the full $60+ price??

Games are stupid expensive, and the point of getting them when they come out is because by the time the price drops, there's usually another game out that you want to play. The problem with that is simple: the games cost an arm and a leg.

$60+ is almost 2 tanks of gas for me, being about 3 tanks a month (2000 VW Jetta, costs about 35 a tank), aside from the $10 to $20 a day food budget (from regular home made meals, all 3, to eating out), the $100 cable and internet bill, the $50 XBL bill, the $100 to $200 water bill, the $30 sewer bill (yes, it's retarded, but we have to pay for the sewage lines in Aurora, CO), the $300 electric bill, medical bills (which vary a lot in price), $350 car insurance... yeah, can't think of any others, but there are more... that's about... $1215 a month... aside from paying for entertainment like games.

$1215 for me. Yeah, because I've got tons of money to throw away on games. That's about $14400 a year, aside from all the unexpected costs, like dates, movies, repairs, maintenance... it's not exactly cheap. It usually ends up being around $25000 a year, usually more, so don't ever pull that bullsh** garbage of "not a real gamer." At least I pay for it.

I hear you man, it's not cheap, and personally, I think game quality is going down, not up. Sure, games look more cinematic and have better graphics, but most the games I've played in the recent years aren't as fun as games I played 3 or 4 years ago, sometimes even longer ago. $60 is a rip-off. $50 felt just right, but of course they would kick it up for the "next generation." If they do that again for the following generation of games, I'm not getting the next console. I will only pay full price for games that I absolutely want. Games that I want, but not badly, or games that I think will be keepers, but not games I'll spend a lot of time on I wait for. A price of around $25 to $35 is where I like to sit.

I swear, there are so many absolutely ignorant and stupid people that live in the world today... makes me sick.

Wow. This one of the most single minded threads ever... and to think I'm bored enough to post in it.

There's no such thing as "best 360 ever", and to try and say there is just points out an individuals own self-sustaned ignorance and disregaurd for others opinions.

In my own opinion, Gears of War is a horrific choice. It has virtually no Campaign, and it's multiplayer is a little too buggy (not sure if it's still like that first hand, but I still hear from my friends that it is). It's a game built for competative play, and had a Campaign that was basically worthless tacked onto the end. It's a sort-of fun game, but it's not really all that great other than it's graphics.

Halo 3 isn't a great choice either, but it's better than Gears. A solid, but a little shallow Campaign, and a multiplayer that's still rolling strong (not saying Gears isn't, but it's nowhere near Halo). Tons of extra features that are cool, but almost feel pointless after a while, and an ever-changing online environment, thanks to Bungie. It's a shallow single-player game, and a multiplayer game for those who like running and gunning.

Call of Duty as a series or just the recent Call of Duty 4 aren't the best, but they're pretty good (save for 3 and the upcoming World at War). CoD 4 has a rockin' Campaign, one of the finest in years. It's just plain entertaining, in every way you can be entertained. The multiplayer is okay. It's pretty fun at first, but once you realise that there's no reason to really charge into battle, it starts feeling less like a competative shooter, and more like a game that is there just to have fun. The whole competative nature is thrown out the window when you can start with a Sniper Rifle, or a P90 right off the bat, and just play like that from spawn to death. There's no real reason to charge into battle... you just charging because you want to, not to get the tactical weapons, or to get into a good position, you're just running and gunning with no real reason. It's still fun, just not for the competative at heart.

Bioshock was one of those games that when I played it for the first 2 or 3 hours, I was amazed... then slowly less amazed... then shortly thereafter, bored... then just tired of playing it. It's not fun. It's really not. You shoot the same things over and over, you hack the same things over and over, and the dark and dank environments just get old and lose their appeal, and pretty soon you have an idea of what the next place is gonna be like... dark and wet.... that's it. Sure, the special "Plasmids" were kinda cool, but they very quickly became a nitch in the gameplay that you get used to, and it doesn't feel like it evolves past the basic idea of elements; ice freezes, bee's sting, fire burns.... never saw that coming. The gun play doesn't force you to become good either, you just shoot until the enemy dies, from 5 to 15 feet away. It's not really that hard, and it's not really that interesting shooting at a faceless, personalityless figure. Big-Daddy's were kinda' cool, until you realise, "oh, just shock them," then they're just plain dumb. The story isn't all that special, though others would want you to believe otherwise. It's not really that motivating, and it's not that compelling... WHY did you take the submarine down into the city? Why didn't you just stay at the top and wait for help? A plain just crashed, help will be there in a few hours.

There really isn't any game that I can point out and say, "I think this is as close as it gets," but that would be stupid of me. I don't think like that, and I don't expect others to agree with me. If they do, great, if not, great. I'm not even gonna' go into GTA, that series as a whole sucks. It's not hard to realise why, so go do it on your own.

I really wish silly topics like this would just stop showing up.