Yeah, another gaming feature I don't want. It's right up there on my priority list even moreso than the Kinect. How exactly would knowing my emotional state improve a game's experience? Nah, it won't, you're either moved by the story or not. I'm sure that a the computer constantly asking me if I'd prefer an easier game setting while raging over that same stupid cheating computer would calm me down from the brink of computer vandalism. No, this crap is being designed to do one thing and that's to find out the when the best time to sell me product X is.
@dexda: I think all consoles are gravitating toward a standard architecture similar (if not identical) to the PC. On the PC, you can select games from a range of Minimum to Recommended settings. Instead of releasing a console that sets the maximum performance limits, MS/Sony could make a console with a minimum and maximum range. So if you buy at launch, the minimum spec'ed console will sell for say $500 and the maximum spec'ed console at say $3,000. As time marches one the cost of the electronics will trickle down and the lesser hardware of the launch system will be phased out. You can either force all games to still render games to the minimum specifications or brand your console in a way that clearly identifies which grade of game it's capable of playing. As long as the consoles designed to run in the maximum range at launch can play all that generations games, I don't see much of a problem. People buying a lower end system will know they may be limited in the future and need to upgrade.
One way this can be achieved can be to color code the system/games. Say Green for the low end games, Blue for the Mid range games and Red for the High End Games. If you have a green system, you can only play Green boxed games, Blue plays Green and Blue and Red plays all three. Towards the end of the generation, the Red consoles will be priced at the launch price of the Green consoles.
I'm sad to see the end of the store for the psp. I still regularly play games on it, and I'd have purchased a PS Vita if it played UMD games. I must have 40-50 unopened UMD games yet to play for it.
So anyways, I'll probably never get to playing it, but should I buy Persona 3 before the store closes? I've never played a Persona game, but it's one of the few games I have some slight interest in for the psp (and don't already own). The social life part of a Japanese high school seems like a real turn-off to me. I like playing strategy RPGs and some other RPGs though. I can't imagine its any more grindy than Valkyria Chronicles 2 or Crisis Core.
@mike468: What do you like? If a game sounds interesting to you look up the physical version on eBay or Amazon, then check the Sony store. Most "new" and popular psp games are selling for $35 and up, while most used games of varying quality average around $15 and up. I haven't really found any single game in the psp shop over $20. I'm not sure how to buy it through PSN and transfer to the psp, so it's easier for me to just buy any game I think I might like now through the psp store.
If you like strategy RPGs, I hear Disgaea 1 and 2 are pretty good. I think they sell for $15 and $20 directly from the store. You can go to Gamestop and buy codes for (I think) $10 and $15 respectively. In terms of RPGs, I'd recommended the PS1 classics FF7 and FF8, if you don't have them. If you've never played Lemmings, I'd pick that up. It's just a direct port of the original PC classics though. I loved the game Alundra on the PS1, and it was kinda like a rip-off of a Zelda game released around the same time. Never played it on the psp though. I've been addicted to Valkyria Chronicles 2 for some time now, and it was Tactics Ogre before that. Though the final dungeon in Tactics Ogre really got on my nerves.
@MarcJL31: Personally I think the movie looks bad and I've no intention of seeing it. I'm just tired of all the "white" shaming precipitated by the Oscars. There's nothing wrong with casting all white actors or even if they wanted to, casting all black actors in this type of corny action movie. Movies are going to be cast based primarily on the demographics of the country producing the film and not with some sense of historical accuracy to native peoples.
@alldaelong: Have you seen the previews? I can assure you there's no historical accuracy in that film. The language of the movie is geared toward English speaking audiences, therefore they needed English speaking actors. An accent can work for like one or two characters in the film, but you'd be hard pressed to find more than one actor of Egyptian decent who can speak the English clearly.
@drizzygadget: How many Egyptian actors work in Hollywood? How many movies about Egypt are "kinda" accurate in terms of exact skin shades or actual inhabitants (that also speak English)? Raiders of the Lost Ark probably had the most accurate depiction of Egypt's residents, but they still cast a Welsh actor (John Rhys Davies) for the speaking role.
So "black-washing" the cast would've made the movie better? I guess Will Smith would've gotten an Oscar if he was cast as the lead instead of Gerard Butler?
I really wanted to like the Revenant, but the story was just too contrived and some of the scenes were just boring. Yeah a nice big vista of trees, let's watch it for 5 minutes and slowly pan the camera around. I didn't think DiCaprio's acting was award worthy in this film either. Overall, I found this movie just a tad better than Star Wars. They shouldn't allow Hollywood to bill their movies under the banner of "based on true events," especially this film. I'll discuss some spoilers below.
DiCaprio plays his character like he's an expert woodsman (ala Daniel Day Lewis' character in the Last of the Mohicans). Sorry an expert woodsman doesn't get mauled by a bear and expert woodsman tended not to wonder off alone in the woods either. (NOTE: Glass was part of a hunting party when he was mauled, btw). Why does Hollywood force the notion that the lead actor must be an "expert," especially the real Glass definitely wasn't any more an expert than anyone else in his party? Glass never married an Indian or had a half-Indian child. As such that child was never murdered by a white racist either. Hollywood just wants to change history and have a love affair with Native Americans. Following the BS propaganda campaign, the antagonist obviously has to be a racist. Glass' real journey was pretty boring as he moved down the river eating berries and such. However, Hollywood uses that opportunity forward more propaganda about how wonderful the Indians were and how evil the white man was along the way. The movie then has to culminate in a battle of "good" vs. "evil." Does every movie need to end this way? In real life Glass did track down both of the "two" guys who abandoned them, and then he forgave them both. Fitzgerald returned Glass' rifle to him. Fitzgerald had joined the military and killing him would've been a death sentence for Glass. Hugh Glass was eventually killed by the Arikara (the bad Indians in the film) in Yellowstone.
@xantufrog: The PS4 doesn't need a "PR" boost and Sony isn't interested in backwards compatibility. Sony wants you to stream old games to their system for additional revenue. The XB1 only implemented this feature to try to gain some ground against the PS4. As a 2:1 console sales leader Sony has no reason to ponder such a feature.
Suaron_x's comments