I was absolutely amped to play the Nintendo Wii prior to today. I guess I should throw out some of my history with Nintendo before I get into the rest of this blog.

I have owned every single last one of Nintendo's consoles, except DS. I actually borrowed one, but I never owned a DS. I thought that Nintendo had the console battles on tap for years and years, until the N64. I did love the N64, but when 1999 rolled around, I realized that Nintendo was losing...to Sony. I was enjoying my Playstation a lot more by then than I was my Nintendo 64. As time went on, the PS2 was released as was the Gamecube. I bought a GC and I didn't really get that feeling that it would ever be my primary console. It never was. I basically used it as my way of playing Metroid Prime games, and I also dallied a bit into Animal Crossing for a few months. When it came to pretty much any other games, I went to PS2. I also tried the Xbox but I just don't like the controls or Halo, and if you don't like either of those, the system might as well be obsolete.

So now the Wii is out! I have one in my dorm room right now. I'm watching my friend make a Mii. I've been playing this thing for about a four hours. I have to say, it seems more like the controller should be a Gamecube add-on. As I stated before, I really wanted to play a Wii because I was waiting to see what the games would be like. Controlling the games seems to be the only real difference so far. Games aren't any more or less immersive than they were on the GC, and the console itself doesn't seem to do much that the previous console didn't do. I wish Nintendo would have just put out something like the PS2's Eyetoy addition. I would've liked a lot more to just put a piece of equipment in the controller slot and play GC games with a different setup.

I think the one thing that the Wii will do better than any other game console before it is attract people who don't normally play games. Party games for it will give it a huge following (presumably) and logically so. Wii is a fun thing to watch, and it can be great in a social situation. However, all party games die quickly. Mario Party fell off the radar very fast. Fusion Frenzy hasn't had a sequel in four years. Even the "softcore" gamers are going to grow very tired of party games in a short amount of time. Nintendo can try to appeal to the casual gamer, but the Wii's success will be determined by the hardcore without a doubt. They need to appeal to that group.

I was told by a friend who lives across the hall from me that I was being too critical of the Wii. He said I shouldn't look at it like it's a bad console because it's not all that powerful. He also thinks that the Wii allows developers to do things that they can't on other consoles, that they've been wanting to do for a long time. I don't think that the Wii needs to be a powerhouse of a console (even thought that wouldn't hurt). I just think it should be able to do a lot more than the Gamecube if it will ever become known as a serious system. As far as allowing new possibilities for games, I haven't seen much good on the horizon. Metroid has some nice little moves for players and I'm sure Super Smash Bros. will do something crazy with the Wiimote, but for the most part, the games fall into one of two set files. One file is the games that let you "point-and-click". These will most likely be the shooters and maybe a few other games. The other file is the games that let you move with the analog and perform most actions with the A button, plus some movements mixed in. This has been done on other consoles. It's one thing to say that Wii has some great things on the horizon, but it's another to actually look on that horizon. I've seen some of what the 360 and PS3 will have in a few years and most of it looks incredible. Wii's future looks like Smash Bros. and Metroid, and those look like they could be spectacular, but they would probably just as spectacular on the Gamecube.

I don't dislike the Wii, but it isn't the next generation in gaming. I can't shake the feeling that the entire console could have made a great Gamecube add-on. It seems like Nintendo only made a new console to stay in the system war. They're not changing the way we think of games at all. They're giving us new ways to play games we've already played. The end result is, it's still the same game. I'm hopeful that Nintendo will prove me wrong.

Rey Mysterio is the best ex-champ ever. I don't mean he's the best champ to have ever lost the title. I mean I'm happier that he lost the belt more than I've ever been happy about anyone losing it. I like Mysterio as a person. He never says "die". He never quits. But there's something going terribly wrong backstage with his storylines. Nothing he's involved in is entertaining!

I'm watching Smackdown right now and he just cut the lamest promo ever. It wasn't bad based on how he said his lines. It was pitiful because this thing with Chavo is pointless. "They tore out my heart. They raped my soul." The only way this whole beef could be worse would be if Rey still held the title. Therefore, he's the best Ex-Champ ever.

I was just thinkin about some things I would like to put out there. I am a huge WWE fan and I wanted to say that I support the seemingly imminent return of the Hardy Boyz. I also think John Cena is the best superstar on Raw so if you disagree, good for you. I want to see Undertaker and Batista go at it for the World Heavyweight title. Lastly, I want to see Lashley in the main event at Wrestlemania XXIV.

Aside from all that, I still think Shadow of the Colossus is the best video game on the market today. Til next time, Live fast. Fight hard. TNP

I have played and completed  a LOT of games in my lifetime. As such, a number of games have made me believe they are quite possibly the greatest games ever made.

From a gameplay position, Devil May Cry 3 is one of the best ever. In terms of story and plot, the Final Fantasy series reigns supreme. With respect to just great multiplayer fun, I tip my hat to Soul Calibur or Super Smash Bros. In just being an all around incredible game, I think of Metal Gear Solid.

However, there is only one game I can think of that is truly unlike anything else I have ever played. This is a game that I don't even feel comfortable calling a video game. It isn't my favorite of all time, but it is the epitomy of unique and one-of-a-kind. That game is Shadow of the Colossus.

I won't go into detail about specific reasons because gamespot did a great job of that in their review. But if there was ever a reason to get a PS2 or just to play a video game period, SotC is the reason. It is, for lack of a better term, a Work of Art.

I'll keep it short and simple. Stop making games that take place in the "hood". I live in the "hood" and none of us give a damn about games like 25-to-Life or 187 Ride or Die. We wouldn't even care about GTA: SA if the other GTA games weren't so great. No one here likes True Crime either, okay? Just make good games! We don't care if the character lives in Detroit or Paris.

Post FFVII, my favorite genre was RPG. I played nearly all the PS2 RPGs worth playing and I think the Shadow Hearts series is the best. However, fighting games have de-throned RPGs in my opinion. I first began thinking this way when I played Soul Calibur II. I have 100+ hours on there not counting the times I played my friends at their houses. Tekkens 4 and 5 have also taken a lot of my precious time. Now Soul Calibur III is my choice for game of the year. With the exception of Shadow Hearts 2, there hasn't been a RPG worth playin in three years. Does anyone else think this way? 

I think I've read all the Burning Question segments thus far but the one for this week is absolutely hilarious. Alex is asked a question about why he pretty much only gets to review crap. Read it!

It Takes One to Know One

Alex,

I was looking through some old reviews the other day, and I could not help but notice that you have had to review some serious crap in your time, Alex. Big Rigs, Charlie's Angels, Robocop... I mean, yeesh! That's about the most hideous line-up I have ever seen. I can't imagine that you actually picked those games one by one, and there are a few others from other editors I would say the same about. Also, I have noticed some of you tend to review the same genre's over and over, as if you got the chance to pick.

The question here is how do all of you editors and reviewers pick the games you review? Or do you even pick at all? Is it out of hat? Did lady luck simply frown on you the days that big rigs was pulled out of that hat?

Trevor Adamo
Redondo Beach

We use an elaborate random-number generation system that picks numbers between one and 20 and assigns them to games and editors. We roll the 20-sided die...er, I mean, use our elaborate number-generating supercomputer until all games are assigned out. If any games are left over, we throw them to the mobile guys. If any editors are left without a game, they are promptly killed and eaten.

All right, now that the bad jokes are out of the way, all such questions are answered in our ratings guide. If you're too lazy to read the whole thing, we give games to editors who are familiar with and enjoy the genres and types of games that they're assigned. Hockey and crap are the only two things I understand in this world, hence, I review hockey games and...well, crap. --A.N.