The story is weak. And for the most part the cutscenes are annoying. But you don't even have to watch them if you don't want to. From how you described your wife, if you are interested in them, watch them while she isn't around if you care. She will by annoyed by them more than likely.raahsnavj

Yeah I will skip them when I play through with her, and maybe watch then another time by myself.

Thanks for the info.

[QUOTE="CossackNoodle"]In january 2007 Microsoft claimed they had an attach of 5.3 per console now after the ps3's first year it has an attach rate of 5.2 per console so I dont know why lems are so proud of the attach when the PS3 is on the same path the 360 went when it comes to number of games sold per console. I can only see it increasing in 2008 for the PS3 with its biggest most recognised titles comingblackace

XBox 360's attach rate is was 7.6 for 2007 and the PS3 attack rate was like 5.0. The Wii had a larger attach rate then the XBox 360 in the month of Dec, but that's about it. They have since dropped back down to 5.0 attach rate. The Xbox 360 just sells way move software then the competition right now. This could change by the end of the year, but right now the 360 is still on top.

The Wii sold 11 million more units of software in its first 14 months than the 360 in its first 14 months. The attach rates were 5.3 (360) and 4.6 (Wii) at this stage in their lifetimes, less than one game difference.

speedball 2

Xenon 2

SWOS

Eye of the Beholder

magic pockets

shadow of the beast

lotus Esprit

syndicate

alien breed

flashback

another world

there are so many that I would want

[QUOTE="NathanDrake"]

[QUOTE="the_h_bomb"]Microsoft have an attach rate of 8 or something. stop lying cowthe_h_bomb

Haha!! That was very funny " 8 or something" :D

If you are not sure about what you speak of you can't call others liars when talking about the said subject, can you now??

Booyah!!!!

It seems that you are the one who doesn't know what he's talking about

You should read the entire thread. The 360 attach rate was 5.1 at the end of its first 14 months, which is what I think the OP was getting at. The Wii and PS3 have slightly lower attach rates, but nothing dramatic at the same point in their lifetimes (4.64 Wii and 4.26 PS3). The Wii actually sold 11 million more units of software (7 million if you take out Wii play) than the 360 in the first 14 months of their lifetimes.

Don't you wish you had that (gameplay AND graphics)?

So you are telling me that PS3 and 360 have no games that are some of the best looking graphically and some of the best gameplay? The_Crucible

Well name me some games that have excellent gameplay that couldn't be improved on. There aren't any on any platform, because there is always room for improvement if the developer just had more time or budget.

Would CoD4 be better or worse if it had worse graphics but a 15 hour campaign? Would Mass Effect be better if it had released 6 months later with the graphical issues resolved? Would Halo3 have been better or worse if they had gone for a more realistic look rather than rendering each frame twice to create the HDR effect?

And yes I don't think that the PS3 or 360 have games that excel in the gameplay department as of yet other than maybe Halo3 and CoD4.

[QUOTE="actionquake"]The question is not which game do you think looks better, but which game do you think is going to be better. The_Crucible

Wrong, that isn't the question(s). Read again.

Don't you wish you had that (gameplay AND graphics)? The_Crucible

They are not mutually exclusive, you can't improve one without sacrificing some of the time/money devoted to the other. Yes I would like better graphics if it didn't mean a sacrifice in other areas but this is not realistic.

I love the Wii. It is a fun and creative console, and game downloading services like VC and WiiWare impress me. However, the main thing I dislike is the fact that the Wii only has 512mb of storage space. For a system released in late 2006, 512mb is rather unimpressive. I am sure Nintendo could have raised the space to 2gb without any major cost increase, because flash memory is dirt cheap nowadays. Even if it did raise costs, Nintendo could have easily regained the money from people downloading more VC/WiiWare games as a result of extra storage space, so cost is of little concern here.

Due to the Wiis rather limited storage space, I will not be showing much concern for WiiWare, and will focus on XBLA for game downloads. My 360 Elites 120gb HDD > 512 flash memory.

Anybody else feel this Way? Would you support ideas for Nintendo to move to some new SKU with 4gb flash memory?

PandaBear86

Yes you have it exactly right. We should judge all games by the memory footprint. This is why PS3 games (Blu-ray) are three times as good as 360 games (DVD9), and 360 games are equivilant to Wii games (DVD9). *sarcasm*

Or to put it another way, yes the Wii storage is restrictive and something needs to be done about it, and no this does not mean the games realeased on WiiWare are at some kind of disadvantage.

[QUOTE="bigevil_rashek"]I don't understand why halo hass more mass appeal than some other similar shooters(like UT3). Don't get me wrong, i love the halo games, but i am curious about it. Its a phemomenon like Gta and mario. But halo and halo 2 were on the xbox, which was not a casual system, and the PS2 dominated the casual market, but how did casual gamers know about it and get interested in the xbox, because most the casual gamers i know had a ps2(my colleagues, my dad) but they also know about halo(and now have a 360). So what power does halo have over other fps like half-life or Unreal.mjarantilla

Advertising.

Bingo.