Beat ya, Zaps!  Whooo!  My score?

290,810

I could have busted 300K, but I missed three key star power moments.  Oh well.

I also beat my "blind" record today with 160K.  I'll vid blog that ASAP.

You'll notice I categorized this as "science".  Those who've played enough GH will understand :wink:.

Everybody knows the story of Nintendo's fallacy in the 90's with the N64 and the cartridge vs. CD shindig, but it's worth recalling here, if only for old times' sake.

Long story short, Nintendo didn't want to move to the CD format for its games, even though the benefits of the then-new format were undeniable.  However, instead of moving on to the superior device, Nintendo was true to its beliefs (read: stubborn as always), and wound up losing an indescribable amount of marketshare.  They still haven't recovered.  There were many possibilities as to how and why Sony was able to topple the giant, but there is perhaps one that is more compelling than the rest: affordability.  The games on Sony's suave little PlayStation, compared to those of the Nintendo 64, were cheap.  And they were good.

If we were to simplify everything and translate this into a formula, it might go "good games + low cost = victory."  If we then attempted to prove this theory with concrete evidence, we would point to Sony's dominance of the home console market, starting with it uprooting Nintendo. 

Now, fast-forward to late 2004/early 2005, and Sony starts boasting about its new "cell processor" and its mysterious "Blu-Ray" somethingmajig.  At first, there wasn't enough meat on these tidbits of information to even scrounge together a decent ensemble of rumor reports and brew up any real speculation.  But if you move ahead to 2006, there are plenty things of things that can be deduced.  Better still, other things are known for sure.  Take this fact for example: Blu-Ray--one of Sony's key selling points for the PS3-- isn't cheap; not the players, not the discs.  None of it.  Gamers are already displeased in paying $10 extra for select XBOX 360 titles.  So, if we're to assume PS3 software will be similar in price (a generous notion, considering how much they're losing on hardware as it is, not to mention the cost of Blu-Ray in itself), we can begin to paint a scenario in which the tables have not only turned against Sony, but they have been the ones to turn them.

Imagine the irony.  With the PlayStation, Sony proved the relevance of affordability (among other things) and made 'PlayStation' the name synonymous with video-gaming.  This was huge.  Whether they intended it or not, cost-friendliness had become their unofficial secret weapon.  And now, with their position as market leaders in more peril than ever before, they've handed that secret weapon over to two experienced, competent, serious competitors.

To be fair, it's impossible to say for sure what will or won't come to pass in the next generation of gaming, but some facts, proven by history, are impossible to ignore.  Sony has faced criticism on Blu-Ray and their "cell processor" since they announced it, became the laughing stock of the gaming community after unveiling the PS3's motion-sensing controller--their "best kept secret" (read: latest hijacked Nintendo innovation), and did all this before even pinning down the price for the console.  When they finally did, they shook their fanbase to the core in a bad way.  The tremors are still being felt, and are occasionally strengthened by new reports of ill from the Sony camp.  Since E3, the PS3 has lost at least one major exclusive title (Assassin's Creed), and have softened what grip it still had on the market after its European release date was recently pushed back to Q1 '07.

When the PS3 finally hits store shelves across the world, the only thing in its favor will be its brand name, and it will depend almost entirely on brand-loyalty in order to retain a respectable, profitable chunk of the market, let alone rule it.  Even if Sony pulls it off and the PS3 is somewhat successful, the games and movies it plays are still likely to carry higher price tags than those of its competitors.  And we've seen where that leads, haven't we?

Aim for the toes, Sony.  Aim for the toes.

Score:
234,041

Ironically, speculated with a friend of mine today that I'd be fiving Cowboys very soon.  Didn't exactly see this coming.  Still, it's monumental for me in my Guitar Heroics, and is justifiably blogworthy.  I rule.

Score for 'Cowboys from Hell': 188K.  Don't remember exactly, but with a score like that, a five-star rating should come very soon.

Well, most of what I said in my first impression still holds true, but I can tell you that with certain mentalities, StarFox Command is worth playing.  For some, it might even be worth buying.

It's like this.  If you're looking for that good old fashioned StarFox gameplay you had on the 64, you'll be sorely disappointed with StarFox Command.  However, if you step back and think rationally, casting all your preconceived notions, wishes, and disappointment with recent feedback to the wayside, you'll see that StarFox Command is enjoyable in its own way.

The game eventually got to be a little more fun when I started to warm up to the whole strategizing bit.  The maps are laid out in ways that actually provide a little bit of real, actual strategy; not just "move your ship onto their ship then blow 'em up".  It's still a relatively easy game, and it's terribly unvaried in terms of mission types, but at least it's short.  Wait, maybe that's not such a good thing.

Ah-hrrrmmm... anyway.  There are a few unlockable levels that I've yet to try, plus Wi-Fi, and now that I'm having to give the game back to EBgames (perfectly legal--my wife is allowed to check out games from the store so long as they've already been opened.  This was a "gutted" copy, so it's all legit), I actually want to keep it.  Would I pay forty bucks to keep it?

*winces, purses lips, cocks head, and looks at ceiling*

Nah.

I'm not really diggin' it.  Call me crazy, but I wouldn't mind if Nintendo gave us an upgraded version of StarFox 64 for our DSes.  And after playing Command for a little while, I'm starting to wish they would have.

The problem for me so far is that they've made this game too story-driven.  With a talking fox, a giant talking toad, an oversized old hare, and a skinny, bipedal, nigh-wingless falcon as the main characters, it's difficult to take them as seriously as this game's story might want you to.  The more the game points out that the main character in StarFox is, well, a fox, the more it makes me think "why's this dude a fox?"  Point is, I never thought about any of this before, because the gameplay was so good.  That could only mean. . .

Yeah, the gameplay this time around is bland to the max.  It's so bland, if vanilla tasted it vanilla would say "man, that's blaaaa-aaand."  In the days of good StarFox, you pretty much just got in an Arwing and soared through levels picking up powerups in hard-to-reach areas and tagging lines of enemies with your lasers.  In this StarFox, missions start with an advance-wars-esque map on which you have to plot your characters' courses to engage nearby enemies.  Said enemies make a beeline for Great Fox (your mothership), and you must destroy them to protect it.  Powerups like missiles and refuel canisters dot the air, and you can pick them up as you go on about tracking down the bad guys.  When you and an enemy collide, you finally get to fight them StarFox style.  Only now, it's boring.

On the overworld map are these little icons that represent certain numbers of enemy ships.  So, once you engage them, you only have to shoot down three or four enemies, pick up their "cores" (a spinning, floating star they leave behind when they 'splode--has something to do with the boring, pointless plot), and you're done.  You then go back to the overworld screen and do it again.  For reals.

I'm sure once I get further into the game it'll be more challenging than all this, but the truth is that at this point, I don't even want to get further into the game.  Besides being too plot-driven for its own good (which opens the game up to a bunch of eye-rollingly trite dialogue...), the gameplay itself is only so-so. 

You do everything except shoot with the stylus.  Every other button, (save for start, select, and power) shoots--even all four directions on the d-pad.  The controls are comparable to the FPS feel of Metroid Prime: Hunters.  There's a touch-button for doing loop-de-loops, another for doing the famous StarFox U-turn, and another "B" icon that is probably supposed to shoot bombs, but I haven't gotten it to work yet. 

To hit the brakes, you have to double-tap on the bottom of the touch screen, causing the ship to slow down and quickly drop in altitude, and to speed up you double-tap the top of the screen.  Again, this causes you to speed up and suddenly climb, so you have to get used to double-tapping then recentering your stylus in order to keep your bearings.

Barrel-rolling is a problem, since performing it requires you to quickly scratch back and forth with the stylus.  If not for the fact that moving the stylus on the touch screen is how you steer, that wouldn't be so annoying.  But, thanks to this needless mechanic, barrel-rolling and accurately shooting/flying is an excercise in futility.  Why didn't they just make the triggers do the barrel-rolls and let the direction of spin be determined by which way you're turning?  Do we really need ten "shoot" buttons?

Don't run out  and go buy this, especially if you're looking to relive the glory days of SF 64.  It's a pretty okay game with a few hints of fun here and there, but it's shaping up to be marginally fun at best.  StarFox might be better left as a memory.

Amanda: "Hey Adrian, taste this salsa I made and tell me what it needs."

Adrian: Picks a chip out of the bag and pretends to dip it in the fresh salsa.  "Mmmmm mmmmm!"

Amanda: "Oh fine!  You don't have to try it!"

Adrian: "I was kidding.  Come back here, let me try it."  Gets a new chip and really dips it this time.  "There's cilantro in this, huh?"

Amanda: "Yeah."

Adrian: "...I'm good 8).  Anyway, this isn't salsa, it's pico (de gallo).  Ditch the cilantro and make the ingredients finer."

Amanda: "What do you mean it's pico?!"

Adrian: "I mean... it's good pico?"

Amanda: "All right, I'll go see if I can find my food processor."  Leaves the room. "But I can't get all the cilantro out..."

Adrian: Laughing "You're so immature!"

Amanda: mumbles to self "...you're immature."

Round 2: After coming up here and reading this:

Amanda: Laughing "We're idiots.  Anyway, I'm going back downstairs to clean, do you want me to leave these chips and the salsa?"

Adrian: "Nah..."

Amanda: "Fine.  You're not getting a steak tonight"

Adrian: :?

So my first video blog is turning out pretty poorly...

okay, no backspac3 starting,...now~!

Let me be honest with you.  Ive been drinking.  I('ve been drinking quite a bit.  Of alcahol.  Kii,,,looking back, i can see that i messpekkled that.  But, no cackspace, so...

Anyway, the ir is pretty cool dialogue on the blog, but you can't her it bacause i turned the bass up too loud on my TV.  Plus, i Uturned out all the li9ghts except for my tv, so... it video dkind of ducks too.  Ti ducks... like daffy.  Anywhoo, I 'm not so sure this is toign to be a gooe blod, since i'm too drunk to be conmprehensivle, and the vido 1uality sujcksorzz!!!1one.  When i post it(which well tipend on when i digure out how to ...)_, I hope yoyu all anjoy it.  IN the meantime... dopn't jusdge me.

BYE~!

Hey guys, don't worry.  This isn't another notice of resignation.  I was just catching up with the officer promotion thread, reading through some of the other officers' responses, when this feeling dawned on me.  It was something like guilt and remorse mixed together.

There are many of you who I feel I know well through your contributions, be they ReviewSpotting submissions or critiques.  And I like that.  Unfortunately my current career sort of undulates, and it affects my free time.  Many of the older CCU members may recall a lull I had between ReviewSpotting #5 and, I don't know, ReviewSpotting 20-something.  The point is, sometimes I just get overloaded, and right now happens to be one of those times.

So it gives me an uneasy feeling when I'm reading through your applications and I don't feel I know you as well as I once did.  I hope you all won't move on without me, because you can be sure, I'll be able to devote more time to the CCU like I used to again soon.

Enough of that.  Right now I have more applications to peruse so we can get you guys through the ringers and into leading the union.  Thanks for all your efforts, guys.  That goes for everyone.

Not long ago, a friend and co-worker of mine asked me how I am able to still like Street Fighter after all these years.  He didn't ask why I wasn't bored of it, or why I hadn't expanded to different fighting games (he has no problem admitting that he likes the Dead or Alive series the most solely because of the graphics), or anything like that.  Oh no.  He wanted to know how I could stand to play it with its dated look.

He sat there on top of the bench with his feet on the seat smoking a cigarette, and I looked at him for what must have been a solid sixty seconds.  I opened my mouth to respond, but only a weak scratch came out.  A few more seconds passed, mostly silent except for the sporadic squeaking, as I tried to make myself accept that he was actually serious about that question.  I mean, he doesn't have the hardest core, but he does play games.  That classifies him as at least some kind of a gamer.  Suddenly, I was aware of my tilting head, squinting eyes, and sagging jaw.  "Oh my g…" I thought.  "He's serious.  Wait… what?"

So I tried to level with him.  After all, he asked a legitimate, if bewildering, question, so I tried to give him a legitimate answer in return.  I started by explaining that it wasn't Street Fighter II that I was playing, but Street Fighter III.  But he knew that already because, as he reminded me, he'd actually played it with me once before.  By my thinking, that should have cleared everything up.  Street Fighter III: 3rd Strike is not the same as Street Fighter II after all.  However, even having experienced it, he couldn't see it.  So I tried to explain.  It's a lot deeper.  It's way more balanced, for one thing.  And it introduced parrying, which begat all-new strategies, adding yet another layer to…  But that's all he needed to hear.  His next statement made me understand exactly what kind of a battle I had let myself get into, and it showed me that there could be no winning him over that day.  He cut me off in the middle of my very strong argument to point out the one major "flaw" that I was overlooking – Street Fighter III still looks the same as Street Fighter II.  If that was enough to make my head hurt, what followed was enough for it to burst into flames.  [more]

This is the best ReviewSpotting title I've come up with yet.  Sure, it's not flashy or entirely creative on the surface, but it's got some substance.

It hit me as my wife was touching up the image for ReviewSpotting 34 -- an image of a Jedi that fades into an image of a Sith, with a slogan that says something about choosing the Light or Dark side.  I guess as the blue and white Jedi image was up, I was thinking "okay, I'm a good guy."  Then, as it switched to the menacing red and black image of the demonic Sith I thought, "better think again."  Then, "hey", I thought.  "That wouldn't be a bad title for the issue."

I also knew that I was going to dedicate this issue to syk, and the fact that he was having second thoughts about his own life --second thoughts that led him to decide to cut back on geeking out in front of the PC -- seemed too perfect to pass on.  But there was one other piece to the puzzle that sealed those words' fate as the title for this issue of ReviewSpotting.

For the first time in ReviewSpotting's short history, honestgamer himself entered one of his reviews in the competition (for those who don't know, hg is the founder of an extremely popular user-review site called honestgamers.com).  It struck me as more than a little odd that Draqq decided to pit him against the other contestants, considering his credentials, but in order to keep things simple, I decided to say nothing.  I don't regret that decision at all.  ReviewSpotting deserves to be honored by hg's contribution, and he deserves to compete if he wants to, just like anybody else.

But I can't deny the impression I had when I saw his name among some of my CCU acquaintances.  Having read one of his other works, a nigh-faultless Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past review, I automatically thought his Ocarina of Time review would win ReviewSpotting #34.  I thought that before I even read it.  Turns out, I was wrong, but not by much.

Actually, I was half wrong.  When I read his review, I only found a few errors and a couple of moments where it seemed to lose me.  But, just so you can see what I mean by "this was an amazing entry", here's a link.  Anyway, I scored his review at a soaring 86, and was at that point preparing to tell my wife to think about making an OoT image for the issue.

Right away I realized that I wasn't being fair, and that I needed to reconsider how I was approaching things.  From the get-go, I was convinced hg would win.  With that type of thinking, was I being fair to the other contestants?  Of course not.  So the only thing to do was to try not to think about who wrote the review, but just consider it to be great on its own and move on.  I had to get away from the issue for a little while; play some Guitar Hero and Mario Kart (sup Zaps), but I finally got to a point where I was ready to think about the issue instead of thinking "wow, hg is in this issue."

That eventually lead to another kind of imbalanced thought pattern, only this time, it was unfair for hg.  Now, I was thinking "let's find something to beat hg."  Talk about wrong.  The long and short of it is that I took another break, and this time I was able to clear my head of what was clouding it and just press forward.  And then skrutop's Star Wars-omfg-this-is-a-long-ass-title review came along.  I read it, scored it, and placed it a few notches below hg's work at an 83.  In the world of the CCU and ReviewSpotting, that's saying something.  The only reason it didn't score even higher is because it had a handful of errors in there.  Besides that, the review was comparable to a pro's.  Don't believe me?  Check out the issue.

In a simpler CCU, I could have featured either review as the winner and nobody would have really questioned me.  However, in this new CCU, where every move is scored, tallied, and otherwise accounted for; where politics and policy have slowly begun to pick away at the heart of the union, and where a strict divide between the honestgamers.com crowd and CCU crowd is painfully evident, this put me in an awkward position.

If I were to go strictly by score, the answer would be simple, wouldn't it?  But there's more to it, not the least of which is the simple fact that despite really liking hg's review, I loved skrutop's.  Sure, skrutop's wasn't as technically polished or artistically impressive (you guys need to check out hg's reviews.  He is able to write descriptively without wasting words or your time.  His OoT review begins, it flows, and it ends with a tug at your heart, all without emphasizing flamboyance over substance the way so many other "artistic" reviews often do.  Masterful is the word to use), but it was more focused as a true-blue review, and had the perfect blend of showmanship and informativeness.  Although hg's review had more panache, skrutop's paralleled what I'd be impressed to read (not expect to read) in a national publication.  It also fell more in line with what I'd want to read.

So, with that, I knew.  Instead of hg, skrutop would be the Featured Reviewer of RS #34.  I thought I knew the answer before, but I had to think again.  Like a person choosing to go to the Dark side from the Light side, or a person reconsidering his priorities, I too was thinking twice.  Could the title be more perfect?

And now, as expected, the controversy begins.  To make a long story short, there has been some debate on how the CCU should welcome the honestgamers.com crew.  There are those of us who think they should simply be grafted in, going through all the steps just like any other person would do (Mystic_Flames did it, and he doesn't seem at all resentful), and those who believe the hg crew should, by virtue of their credentials, be placed among the CCU's Honored members under the pretenses that they'll quickly end up there anyway.  So, bearing this in mind, I knew my decision was going to create some turmoil.

I find it somewhat distressing that Draqq PMed me about his so-called "confusion" on my verdict (you can say it Draqq, you're pissed).  Since hg scored higher, he should have been the Featured Reviewer, end of story.  Or so his message to me would imply.

One thing I'm tempted to do but refuse to is point out occurences in ReviewSpotting's history where winners have been chosen not by how well their review scored on our scoring rubric, but on the judge's discretion.  Effort has been a reason for someone to win, as has improvement.  One judgment was made based on indecision.  If you're curious about these precedences, look them up.

At this point, there's really nothing I can say that will un-blackball me.  In fairness, I'm only speculating that this is the case, but considering the dearth of response from any hg participant (a not-so-quick aside here.  I actually despise the notion that there are hg-ers and CCU-ers.  I welcome every new member as exactly that: a new member -- of the union.  There is no "them", to me, in the CCU.  However, going back to the politics I mentioned earlier, this ideal is apparently far too simple for the union's currently inflated mode of operation) in either the ReviewSpotting thread itself or even the scoring results thread.  Okay, GameSpot's been a little dodgy these past few hours; perhaps they haven't been able to connect.  The next couple of days shall tell.

In any case, I recognize the position I might have put myself into in the eyes of a few, but there's nothing I can do about it.  For that matter, there's nothing I would want to do about it.  When it came right down to it, I liked the Star Wars review more than the OoT review, regardless of the scores I gave (for the record, there is no "tilt"-like criteria for scoring reviews under our system, unless you count "Presentation and Style", where I thought skrutop edged hg out).  It came down to either looking like I was intentionally trying to slight honestgamer and his crew, or to backing down and giving him the win just to make things easy on myself.  It seems like a lose/lose situation, but for any self-respecting person worthy of co-writing ReviewSpotting, the answer is easy.

So, honestgamer, and all hg.com-ers and affiliates who might look back upon RS 34 with resentment, I hope you will all take me at my word when I say this, in no way, was a "move" at all.  Eventually, usernames were out of the picture and I was left with two reviews by two very capable authors, and that was it.

Perhaps I shall think twice once more.