As many of you may have heard (probably from Nintendo fanboys gloating), Nintendo Wii has overtaken the Xbox 360 as the best-selling console in North America. This while software - especially 3rd party software other than Guitar Hero - continues to lag ridiculously behind the Xbox 360. To call it odd is an understatement.

The whole phenomenon of the Wii hardware doing so incredibly well while the software does so phenomenally poorly is one I can't really see having been replicated in the industry. In the post-crash era, the software sold best on NES, SNES, PlayStation and PlayStation 2. It's just common sense that the best-selling console also have the most successful software library.

Common sense until the Wii came along. Despite selling 10.9 million units in North America, the software attach rates on the Wii are pathetic next to the 360. Also, with the exception of Guitar Hero and Wii Fit, the only consistant software sellers are Nintendo Mascot games (Wii Play, by any notion, sells because of the remote). This isn't to say that there aren't good 3rd party games, despite what Nintendo fanboys tell anyone who'll listen. There ARE good games out there that aren't selling, such as Boom Blox, which has tanked phenmonimally, or No More Heroes, which was marked down in price in two or three months after release because Ubi just couldn't move copies. The good games just aren't selling well, with the exception of Rayman Raving Rabbids the two Resident Evil games on the platform.

So what's created this strange atmosphere? It'd be easy to write it off as just casuals only buying it for "exercise" or some nonsense like that (though I'm sure that's happening in large numbers), but I suspect the real problem is us, the gamer.

Because of the Wii's inexpense compared to the Xbox 360 and PS3, many owners of the next-gen systems also own Wiis. However, as software sales are suggesting, the Wii is not the primary console for these people. I know that I myself look at 360 first, then PS3, then PC (I recently upgraded my rig), THEN the Wii. Boom Blox and Chocobo's Mysterious Dungeon aside (I want to get those badly), I mostly use my Wii as a Mario/Zelda/Metroid player. It's no common secret that the best selling Nintendo games, even among their first-party titles, have been mascot games for well over a decade.

The question then becomes "what can be done to make the Wii a primary console?" Titles like Madworld are a huge part of that shift, but for it to happen, Nintendo themselves need to be more agressive in courting the gamers, convincing them that their Wiis are good for more than just Mario, Zelda, Metroid and some Pokemon. Nintendo needs to take risks in the software arena. 3rd parties also need to help. While there are plenty of good 3rd party Wii games, the 3rd parties are more concerned with clinging to their piece of Nintendo's novelty crowd, knowing that gamers are more likely to buy for the 360 and PS3. We need more good, gamer-focused games that aren't crappy ports of PS3/360 titles (I'm looking at YOU, Activision).

However, even if that happens in the short term, will 3rd parties back away at the first sign of failure? If MadWorld doesn't do well, will the rest of the 3rd-party development community take it as a warning not to put big money in making games for the Wii? If that happens, we'll have no one but ourselves to look at for viewing the Wii as a Nintendo mascot machine.

For the few of you who may not have head, Final Fantasy XIII will be headed to the Xbox 360. Not only that, but Europe and North America will see the 360 version released on the same day as the PS3.

To say this is a major coup for Microsoft would be putting it lightly. Considering the original Xbox's complete lack of RPGs that mattered outside of KOTOR, MS has done an absolutely amazing job turning their second system into the RPG powerhouse of this generation. Eternal Sonata, Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, Enchanted Arms, Mass Effect, Operation Darkness, and now Final Fantasy XIII, now make the Xbox 360 the first choice for RPG lovers. This will also be a sure seller of 360s in the future. To say that MS is on top of the world right now would be an understatement.

But where does that leave Sony? Yes, Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots was a huge system seller, but what's their next major exclusive? Yes, Final Fantasy Versus XIII is still exclusive for now, but it's only a matter of time before that game goes multi-platform. That doesn't leave Sony with a lot to boast outside of Resistance 2, LittleBigPlanet, White Knight Story and Killzone 2. So the question becomes this: What does Sony do to ensure a steady stream of exclusive games? There's really only two things they CAN do, honestly:

1) Start paying publishers. Microsoft's gotten pretty far by bribing publishers left and right. I strongly suspect most Japanese publishers wouldn't even look at Microsoft were it not for generous kickbacks, considering the Xbox 360's pathetic position in Japan. Considering the sheer girth of Sony and their recent strides in streamlining the PS3 production process, Sony should really look into buying some exclusives the way Microsoft has. Failing that, they could do...

2) Greatly strengthen 1st party development. The PlayStation 1 and 2 saw relatively few mega-hit titles from Sony themselves. Yes, the titles they put out were often quite phenomenal (Shadow of the Colossus, Jak & Daxter, etc), but unlike Nintendo, Sony's always been overshadowed by 3rd party efforts on their systems. If Sony's not willing to start paying for exclusives, they might want to start making a whole hell of a lot more of their own titles, and advertising the everloving hell out of them.

Either way, the days of Sony getting tons of exclusives because of the PlayStation brand alone are long dead. The last two years have damaged that name in the eyes of consumers and publishers. It's time Sony started rebuilding.

Hello again, everyone.

Sorry I took such a long break, but after my last few non-review posts caused so much crap, I needed to get out of the blogosphere for a bit. One can only take so much drama. Anyway, these last few months, I've been giving Second Life a spin.

Continue here.

This one's gonna take me way too much effort to gimp for Gamespot, so go here instead and save me the time.

(Keep in mind that this is based on the PlayStation 3 version of the game. Owners of the Xbox 360 version may have a different experience)

Having thouroughly enjoyed the original Rainbow Six Vegas, I eagerly pre-ordered Vegas 2 and snatched up my copy on release day, then proceeded to tear into it with the sort of childlike enthusiasm that rarely takes hold of me nowadays. However, once I'd absorbed the single player experience, things began to unravel.

The first thing that got to me was that there was a patch ready on the PlayStation Network on the first day out. As bullcrap as this was, I had assumed that this was some sort of multiplayer fix, so I simply went with it. After the patch and the nearly 3 gigabyte install time, the game title screen shows up. Rather than taking control of the previous game's protagonist, Logan Keller, players step into the boots of Bishop, a hardened military instructor pushed into service as the terrorist attack on Las Vegas begins. Rather than being a pure sequel, the game goes the Resident Evil 3 route with parts of the game happening before, during and after the original R6V, with the tutorial first level taking place five years before and providing some excellent foreshadowing. The first thing players will notice is that their character is customizable, with facial details, armor, and gender selectable at the start, a feature only available in the original's Terrorist Hunt and online modes. Also spilling into single player is the experience system, which was previously online-only. Players will unlock armor by earning rank, and weapons by earning points in marksmanship, close-quarters combat and assault disciplines.

The single player game is the same sort of experience for the most part as the original game, though the experience system will initially limit the sort of weapons and armor available. Also, mobility versus protection will have to be weighed when selecting armor, as people who like to fight straight-up will not benefit from light armor. While armor type affects Bishop's abilities, the camoflage options don't seem to have any effect on the game. It makes no difference whether you're decked out in all black or all pink, enemies will see the squad the same way in single player regardless.

The main single player game is about equal in length to that of the original Rainbow Six Vegas, with a suitably epic storyline that ties up the first game's loose ends quite nicely. However, gamers may feel an extreme sense of deja vu, as there has been little in the way of change other than a streamlines layout and a sprint feature. The game is just far too conservative. Also, the copious amount of product placement, most notably for Comcast and Major League Gaming, serves to break immersion at times. Also breaking immersion is the fact that enemies often simply say the English language version of what the enemies said in Spanish in the original game. These niggling bugs aside, the main story is an enjoyable game for fans of the original Vegas.

Terrorist Hunt returns mostly unchanged from the previous game, save that players can now take the main game's AI partners in with them, making it somewhat more playable than the previous title. Those who prefer going it alone may enable the "Lone Wolf" feature in the Terrorist Hunt menu. Other than that, though, nothing new here.

(On a side note, to unlock the Comcast gift map go to the Comcast Gift option in the Extras menu and type the following when prompted: COMCAST FASTER)

I'd like to tell you about multiplayer, which seems to have an impressive array of modes, but I ran into a small problem in multiplayer. Actually, a rather large, imposing problem of being incapable of entering a game. Almost every game I tried to enter told me I couldn't get in, and the few that I could get into cut me off within minutes, making it an unplayable mess. It's a shame too, as the game boasts a variety of modes. However, if Ubi can't be bothered, I don't see why I or anyone else should be either. Considering many first-person shooters rely heavily on multiplayer for their long-term appeal, this is a massive blunder by Ubi Soft Montreal.

For those who enjoy a great single player experience, Rainbow Six Vegas 2 will provide a thrilling, if entirely conservative experience. Those looking for compelling multiplayer, however, are better off taking a pass and sticking with Call of Duty 4.

Gibson's lawsuits against Activision over Guitar Hero and the trio of Electronic Arts, Activision and Viacom (owners of MTV) over Rock Band are getting messy.

For those of you who somehow haven't heard, Gibson is suing everyone I mentioned above because of a patent they filed some time back - after the release of Konami's Guitar Freaks, mind you - for technology "simulating a musical performance." Now, ignoring how ridiculously vague that is for a moment, let's look at the full patent in question (I'd link straight to the US Patent and Trademark Office page, but it's giving me crap right now). Take a look at that picture. We have a stereoscopic headset, an 8-channel mixer, and a real musical instrument. Guitar Hero has none of these things. Indeed, you're not simulating anything close to what Gibson is talking about here in this patent with either Guitar Hero OR Rock Band. These games are nothing more than Amplitude with cute novelty controllers.

So why are we here? Why are we talking about a lawsuit regarding a patent that is wildly different from the products in question? Am I perhaps oversimplifying Rock Band and Guitar Hero? Am I maybe overanalyzing the Gibson patent? Or is it that maybe, just maybe, Gibson saw just how popular Guitar Hero has been for the last few years and decided that their licensing deal with Activision just isn't enough money? We've seen many instances of patent trolling over the years, though most end with either out-of-court settlements or the suing party being bought out. That isn't going to happen here, or at least it seems like it isn't. The Evil Assimilators have an army of lawyers that would likely put several real armies to shame, and with Activision and Vivendi recently forming like Voltron, they've likely got an impressive set of legal eagles as well.

In other words, I fully expect Gibson to be nicely roasted in court, assuming they don't have a fit of common sense and withdraw these ridiculous lawsuits.

I also expect future Guitar Hero controllers to NOT be based on Gibson models.

To see this post in its fullest glory, inclusing pictures, go to http://yukoasho.livejournal.com