PixlBit

An all-digital future does not interest me.  Companies have been pushing for a while now (especially EA) to turn their games into services and not products, where they have complete control over the games you buy.  If that's what they want to do, then that's fine.  I just won't be there to support them.  I also don't like the idea that the cost of storage has now been pushed onto consumers, yet the cost of these digital goods has not decreased to compensate for the change.  It's just a terrible scheme (to take Sony's words for the system), and it saddens me that it has come to this.  At least I still have a massive backlog to keep me company should the entire industry fully embrace the new delivery method.

Hmmm... I wonder if I should try doing that after I finish up with the Mega Man games.  It just might push me through my indecision over what to play next.  Anyway, having a portable version of Super Mario Bros. is dangerous.  I have a bunch of the GBA Classis releases, including SMB, and it's all to easy to get absorbed by them and lose an hour or two.  The portable format lends itself well to speed runs, too, as you want to see how far you can get in ten or twenty minute sessions.

That said, I could use portable versions of first six Mega Man games right now (the PSN releases stopped at 3).  I haven't had as much time as I would like in front of the TV as of late, which means I can't play the Mega Man games that I need to (I'm currently working through MM2).  So, I've been playing the Game Boy ones instead.

Also, that really stinks about Rayman Origins.  Cheap and lazy ports are not appreciated anywhere, especially when they could have opted for a larger cart and included all the content of the console versions.

It definitely is a nice looking book.  Also, it's been over a week now since you got it.  Have you taken a good look at it yet?  I just got it recently myself (it's been in my house for a while, but I had to wait for it because it was a gift), but I haven't had the opportunity to thumb through it.

Also, the cost of Super Mario Galaxy 2 has been stopping me from buying it, too.  If the game didn't sell to Nintendo's standards, which means it didn't sell enough to get on the Player's Choice line, then why hasn't any retailer started clearing the game out?  They could at least meet us halfway like they did with Brawl and Donkey Kong and knock it down to $30.

This is a good reason for me to draw out simple maps whenever I get around to playing Tales of Graces f.  I remember the same type of nonsense when I was playing Ar tonelico Qoga, where there was a series of ladders leading above and below a base.  Everything starts to look the same after a while, and I would actually get a headache trying to keep track of it all in my head.

Lego Batman 2 had far too many of those moments.  You're basically supposed to play through the entire campaign first, and then go back to play around in the stages and the city after you've unlocked all the characters and free mode.  As for the campaign, unless you were trying to do something you couldn't do at the point (which happens quite frequently), it should have been an easy romp through the game, provided you didn't encounter any glitches.  There were a few times where the game glitched out on me and simple actions wouldn't trigger.  That was very frustrating and disappointing, because I was wasting so much time trying to do something that was never going to happen.  Anyway, the game itself was one huge collectathon, so I'd say you're not missing out on much by sending it back (the same goes for LEGO Lord of the Rings, in case you were curious).

There is no purpose to splitting rpgs between regions.  For the longest time these games were just known as rpgs, but somewhere along the line a unnecessary distinction was made.  It's just as bad as the distinction between computer rpgs and console rpgs; they're elitist comments meant to demean what is on the other side or to imply one has less worth than the other.  Just call them what they are, which is rpgs.  Where they come from or where they reside is irrelevant.

That said, rpgs spread far beyond turn-based gameplay.  While the earlies games in the genre needed that sytle in order to convey their scope, it has evolved to the point where everything can be done in real-time, action-oriented frameworks.

Finally, I have no idea who told you that Zelda was a Western rpg.  It's bad enough that the series has very loose ties to the genre itself (the original Zelda, which set the tone for the rest of the series, was an adventure game), but for someone to say it's associated with Western designs must be confused.

Skyrim is definitely one of those games where you only get out of it what you put in.  That goes for other open-ended games where you have to set your own end-game goals (perhaps you want to play until you're exhausted with it, see all the content, get all the achievements, etc).  I remember when I was playing White Knight Chronicles and all the times I thought I was going to quit playing.  I needed to dig real deep to find the resolve to finish the online portion of the game, because I wasn't going to let the game (or its terrible community) beat me.  I truly wanted to see everything the game had to offer before moving on, even though it took me a year to do that.

The same goes for more structured games; I don't move on until the game is done (either the credits roll or all the extra content is explored), regardless if I enjoy it.  There have been exceptions, though, especially when it comes to games that have static gameplay experiences, like Dungeon Explorer and Valhalla Knights (both on the PSP).  I have better things to do, and other games to play, than to play a game whose gameplay and difficulty remains the same throughout the entire experience.

I'm so glad I bought this when the GameCube version was released.  For what the game goes for now, it makes the $40 purchase seem like a steal.  Anyway, Ikaruga is one of my favorite Treasure games, too.  The gameplay is so simple and elegant, and it was designed in a way that you wanted to push yourself to do better.  Yet, I think something would be lost if a sequel were made.  Outside of giving us more challenges within the game's framework, I don't know how they would expand it without becoming silly (more colors to cycle through, a power-up system to change shot effects, etc.).

I can't say I'm thrilled that this game is as combat-focused as Lords of Shadow.  I've also learned that Mirrors of Fate has the closed-off encounters from it, too.  Anyway, this reboot is not going off in the direction I had hoped it would.

That's pretty much what happened.  Einhander came out right when I got my first desktop PC, and I was swamped with new games to play.  My patience for Einhander was thin before I even started playing it and I was in no mood to learn to play a game that frustrated me.

That said, I do find it curious - but not unusual - that Square has not revisited this game as a PSN remake.  I'm pretty sure they know the demand is there (which could easily be gauged by a release of the PS1 game) and they're missing a golden opportunity with all the shmups that have been released in recent times.