Review: Samurai Warriors (PS2*)

Graphics- 5/10
Sound- 5/10
Gameplay- 6/10
Replay Value- 6/10
Overall- 5.5/10

Samurai Warriors from Koei is pretty much the same game as Dynasty Warriors, just set in Japan, not China. So if you've played any of the 5,000 Dynasty Warriors before, you know what you're getting. If you liked those games, or if you like other pointless button-mashers, you'll probably like this one too. If you didn't, then stop reading this review, because nothing will convince you to buy this game.

Samurai Warriors is set in ancient Japan. And while I'm pretty sure this game might have some historical accuracy, I can't really tell. But it doesn't really matter, because the stories suck. Each playable character has a separate story, although since almost all of the stories overlap, a lot of similar elements are used throughout. There are a good deal of playable characters, but it's rather pointless to play them all, since you just unlock new characters with the same story you have already heard. Also, you can create your own character if you like, and while the character creation mode is pretty good, I don't really see the point for the same reason mentioned above. But if you get bored, which you will, you might want to give it a shot.

And to make it worse, this game is a pure button-masher. You can upgrade your character to give them new moves, but it doesn't really matter, since you just press the same button or two over and over again. There are two attack buttons, Square and Triangle. Square is your basic attack (the only button you'll ever need) and Triangle is a stronger attack. However, all you need to do is press the Square button 100 times, anytime you are near a group of enemies, and you will get the job done. Speaking of the enemies, they all look the same. There are maybe five different types of enemies, but most of the time you will only see a group of 20 of the same type of enemies. And if there happens to be more than 30 enemies and/or allies (which also look the same) on the screen at once, the game will start to lag. Because of this, you can usually only see enemies that are 20 ft. in front of you or closer. But it doesn't matter, because the AI sucks too much to attack you anyway. You can run straight passed a group of enemies, and they will just stare at you. To prove my point, I took the character with the worst defense at level 1, and just stood in a group of enemies. Even with two officers, it took me 2 min. to die. That is way too ridiculously long, even for a game of this low caliber.

Because of your near-inability to die, most of the time you lose a mission, it's not because you died, but because of the next point. The game will give you objectives based either on a timer, or on your progress. You will sometimes think you are going the right way, and then will get an objective telling you to go to the opposite side to the map, and since the characters move incredibly slow without, and most of the time even with, the use of a horse, you will not reach where you are supposed to go in time.

Every once in a while, there will be an "officer" (very slightly stronger enemy with more health) who comes along. After you defeat them, you see a cut scene to break up the monotony. However, the voice acting is so bad, and because you most likely won't care about what the officer has to say, you will skip it. Speaking of the cut scenes, you know how, in most games, the cut scenes look better than normal gameplay? But do they in Samurai Warriors? No. They look just as bad as the rest of the game does, and most of the time, the very repetitive animations during gameplay are actually better than those in the cut scenes. The only reason I bought this game was because I played a little of Dynasty Warriors at a friend's house, and the game seemed fun. It was for a little while, but soon enough I began to see this game for what it really is: the same garbage featured in every other Dynasty Warrior game, and a poor excuse to make money.

Pros: A lot of playable characters, character creation mode, ability to skip cut scenes, same as Dynasty Warriors.
Cons: Button-masher, stories in story mode suck, voice acting, animations, graphics, lagging, AI, same as Dynasty Warriors.

Review: Eric

*Also available for Xbox. Review for PS2 only

Editorial: The Xbox 360 is More Than Halo 3's Bitch

People keep saying that all the Xbox 360 has is Halo. Why? They can't think of a better way to call a wonderful console bad. They say the 360 has worse graphics than the Playstation 3 because it doesn't have the HDMI output. Look at Gears of War, the best graphics ever besides Killzone 2 which were PRERENDERED. If a game's visuals in-game can match the prerendered graphics of Killzone 2, then it's obvious who owns in terms of graphics. By the way, Gears of War is also an amazing game. Halo 3 and Gears of War, two of the biggest games ever- found only on the 360. People freely bash Xbox Live. Why? Because of a $50 A YEAR subscription price... 50 bucks a year is not a lot when you look at the services and quality offered by Live. Now lets look to future games- Metal Gear Solid 4, Devil May Cry 4, Final Fantasy XIII- these are all pretty big threats to the future of the 360, but people have to actually look at what the 360 is packin' before they say the battle is lost. Besides some very high-quality games already out, the 360 has a line up of Halo 3, Fable 2, Mass Effect, BioShock, Blue Dragon. These are all exclusive games coming out within a year to year and a half and all of them have some pretty big names behind them known for their high quality of games.

But you know what? I'm tired of comparing the 360 to the Playstation 3. The 360 won 2006. Better graphics, better games, better online. The fact is, the 360 is a great console. Whether you compare it or not. Has the console had some bumps in the road? Yes, but it still managed to get the first year done not just right, but great. Look at its power and price, it's a perfect balance between the two. It already has a developed online system, has great games out, and has plenty of great and promising games coming. Sure, not all Xbox games are backwards compatible on the 360(for now), but those that are work just fine.

But we can't focus on its backwards compatibility. The quality of the console is what matters, besides games that is. And the quality is superb. A fully developed online set up that is unlike anything consoles have seen before. The power to deliver graphics such as those in Gears of War(which are considered the best to date) without killing your budget. As well, the system can be personalized in numerous ways for that extra touch, and truly becomes a gamers console. The console itself is the best looking out there in my opinion. Of course, equally important are the games available on the console. Call of Duty 2, Call of Duty 3, Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, The Elder Scrolls 4, Lost Planet, FarCry, Hitman: Blood Money, Enchanted Arms, FEAR, Rainbow Six Vegas, Splinter Cell: Double Agent, Gears of War- these are just a few of the good games already out on the 360. They may not all be exclusive nor the best of the best(while there are some that truly are) but these are all great games out now and there is something for everyone. And by playing those multi-platform games on the 360, not only do you get access to some amazing exclusives, you don't have to spend more than half a grand on the console nor do you get sub par graphics. Also, besides the exclusive games already mentioned that are still in development, multi-platform games including Resident Evil 5 and Grand Theft Auto IV are coming to the 360. This is a pretty killer line up.

Sure the 360 has had a bit of rough start, but it still proved itself against the bashings of Wii fans and PS3 owners. Was it a complete failure, did it have only terrible games all year round, did it not deliver on what it promised? No. Is there more than Halo 3 on the 360? Yes. Just like there is more than just Metal Gear Solid 4 on the Playstation 3 and Legend of Zelda on the Wii. The Xbox 360 has an amazing arsenal of games and plenty of ammo left, along with some very high quality services and features and some of the juiciest graphics out there.

Editorial: The PS3 is More Than a $600 Grill

I'm sure you all have heard people comparing the PS3 to a grill, due to its likeness in shape to the George Foreman grill, similar to the photo on the right. And while this picture is obviously fake, some people did actually convert their PS3 into a grill. While I cannot think of a bigger waste of money... maybe the Zune... I must admit there are many similarities between the grill and the PS3's shape. That being said, that is where the similarities end. Well, maybe not...

The PS3 is a gaming powerhouse. The George Foreman grill is a grilling powerhouse. Ken Kutaragi is risking his good name on the system. George Foreman is risking his good name on the grill. And with the amount of heat the PS3 generates, it probably could cook a steak in about 10 minutes (unlike the Xbox 360, however, it doesn't overheat). But that's not the point. The point is that the PS3 is not a joke. Just about everybody who isn't planning on buying one thinks this, and even some of the people who have bought it think this. Sony knows what they are doing. Look at the original Playstation and the Playstation 2, and look at their other electronics. Sony brand stuff is the usually some of the highest quality stuff on the market. (And actually, Betamax was the better quality format, but lost anyway.)

I will agree with some people though, Sony may have been a little overconfident in their ability to sell the PS3 based on the fact that its got the Playstation name. Also, Sony may be in some trouble in the game department, as they have lost a lot of once-exclusive titles. However, if Motorstorm, Warhawk, Lair, and Metal Gear Solid 4 are as good as their supposed to be (a big "if", and if Killzone looks just about as good as it did at E3 2005 (monstrously immense "if"), then I think the PS3 has a major shot at winning the console war. And I will go on record saying this: if MGS4 isn't an exclusive, Sony lost. And although they have lost some exclusives, they still have Heavenly Sword, Devil May Cry 4, Final Fantasy XIII, Gran Turismo 5, and I can't forget Ratchet and Clank 5. But if that's not good enough for you, don't forget about all the exclusive games that were on the PS2, seeing as the PS3 is almost fully backwards compatible, something that cannot and will never be said by the Xbox 360.

One thing I must say, Xbox fanboys: stop comparing Gears of War to Resistance: Fall of Man. Yes, Gears of War is the better game. However, you simply cannot, or rather, should not, since people obviously unfairly can and have, compare a game that came out one year after the console launch with a launch title. That's like comparing Metal Gear Solid 4 to Perfect Dark Zero (actually, Resistance itself is better than Perfect Dark Zero), or comparing MotorStorm, or maybe Gran Turismo 5, to Project Gotham Racing 3. Not very fair now, is it? However, because Resistance was compared to Gears of War, it made Resistance look bad.

Also, you may or may not have heard stories about some stores having a plentiful supply of PS3's for while. Most commonfolk would interpret this as the PS3 selling poorly. However, this is not the case. The real reason is that since Sony didn't want there to be a shortage of systems available, they were flying them over, rather than shipping them by boat, to shorten the time of delivery. And since most stores are getting shipments every week, and sometimes more often than that, people are seeing lots of PS3's on store shelves. And the PS3's launch wasn't bad, it's just that the Wii's launch was better, and less violent. It's actually quite the contrary, since the PS3's launch was the best launch of a system Sony has ever had.

A point I have seen made about the PS3 is its online and how bad it is. First of all, I don't really know where this comes from. Yes it could be better, but it's definitely not bad, and is a hell of a lot better than the PS2's online service, which was pretty much none (sure it had online games, but other than that...). Second, I will agree that it should be better. I mean, look at how far Nintendo has come in its online offerings, only two or three games had online and I doubt any of those were really worth playing. My point is though, the PS3's online service isn't bad. Yes, Xbox Live is better. Yes, there is room for improvement. The best part of it is, though, that its free. I paid $600 for the system (actually about $650 with tax), so I would expect some added benefits. And since its free, I can understand how it's not as good as Xbox Live, which, if you didn't already know, costs $50 a year.

Another thing I have against the public's view of the PS3: its price. Stop complaining about its price if you weren't going to buy it in the first place. It's like if I was buying a Toyota because I needed a car, never considered buying a Ferrari, but complained about its price anyway. I don't and shouldn't really care about the price of a Ferrari because I know I'm not going to buy it. Same thing if you are buying a Wii because of the games, so you never considered buying the PS3; don't complain about its price because it doesn't affect you. On the other hand, if you were thinking about buying a PS3, but the price turned you away, then you can complain about it. Dan's right, the PS3 is for hardcore gamers, and hardcore gamers will be willing to pay the $600 for the console, and might end up buying all three next-gen systems. (Unless, of course, they're cheap bastards, then they'll just buy the Wii.) And if you are getting a console, no matter which one, as a gift or by some other means without actually paying for it, you have no right to complain, you lucky bastard. And a major (or minor, depending on the person) selling point was the fact that the PS3 is a cheap Blu-Ray player, but since this doesn't have to do with games, I don't feel like arguing about right now.

So as you can see, the PS3 is more than a $600 grill. It's a $600 grill that can play games and movies. What more could you want?

Editorial by: Eric

Editorial: The Wii is More Than a Hula Hoop

I have read a few articles recently that have stated that the Wii is nothing more than this generation's Hula Hoop. While I guess I know what they are saying, I obviously disagree with them.

One of the main reasons I disagree with them is the Nintendo DS. Back when this portable system was launched, it was scoffed at and only bought by extremely hardcore Nintendo fan boys and by parents who didn't understand or were just to cheap to by the PSP, which at the time was the front runner. Message boards all over criticized Nintendo for it's approach to their next portable system and claimed that the touch screen was nothing more than a gimmick. Sound eerily familiar? When the DS was launched there was a huge sales surge and while it was popular for a while it soon died down and it seemed that Sony was poised to take over the portable market just like they took over the console market. Fast-forward to now and look at the sales of the DS verses the sales of the PSP. The PSP has 24.70 million units shipped worldwide as of December 31, 2006. The DS has 35.61 million worldwide as of December 31, 2006. That's over 10 million more. The DS has seen this recent surge largely due to the surge of good games; games that actual used the touch screen well after initial complaints that some games used it horribly. I must say the DS looks like a good purchase to me right now. What does the PSP have?... GTA's? PS2 ports? There isn't much right now. In short PSP = PS3, and DS = Wii.

Before the Wii was launched, it didn't garner much respect from the gaming community, and I will admit to originally being on the PS3's bandwagon. Then more details where revealed about the Wii and it's games, soon followed by the details of the PS3's availability which lead me to the glorious conclusion of getting the Wii. I got up early on launch day and went to the local Best Buy and managed to get a Wii pretty easily, which I had expected. I got Wii 67 out of 102 possible Wii's; the last ticket given to a buyer was given to a guy who walked up at 8:45... the store opened at 9:00. As the days went by after launch day, I began to see reviews of the system online and the games and the articles raving about it and the articles bashing the PS3. I soon realized how lucky I was to have gone out and gotten one right away. However the thing was it was not that hard to get one. Most of my friends who went out to get one on launch day did in fact get one. Compare that to the PS3's launch where you had to camp out for ridiculous amounts of time to get one for sure. Now the tide has turned, I have had five different opportunities to purchase a PS3. I have passed all of them up and surprisingly money was actually not a factor, I could have scraped the money together (600 dollars is still way to much.) I was expecting to be able to walk into store now and see the shelves lined with Wiis, which is simply not the case.

Many people will also claim that the Wii is like the Gamecube (the most portable console ever) because of the lack of third party support. While many third party companies were with the PS3/360 at the beginning, the strong launch of the Wii seems to have convinced them otherwise. Furthermore "Third party developers didn't receive proper Wii development kits too long before the consoles release. With the average game taking well over a year to make these days, we should see an influx of third-party releases -- developed specifically on Wii kits (not GameCube placeholders) -- rushing to Wii later this year and in 2008.*" The main reason that companies didn't believe in the Wii was because of the failure of the Gamecube. The Cube had no third party support and it's first party was very weak. Wind Waker was a miss for many fans as was Super Mario Sunshine - they where both good games but they definitely did not reach the high standards that where set by previous installments. Now look at all the reviews for Twilight Princess and the initial reception of Super Mario Galaxy.

Another thing that is forgotten when people consider what console to purchase is the Wii's Virtual console. If the future Wii games are lacking people will always be able to download old classics that where not lacking from the NES, SNES, N64, Genesis, and TurboGrafx- 16. On top of that the Neo Geo and MSX have games available for download in Japan and they have been first to get everything meaning America should soon follow. Not only will you be able to download old games but some companies have hinted that they will release brand new games exclusively on the VC.

The Wii is more than a 250 dollar hula hoop. The Wii is definitely here to stay and I predict it to win this generation's console war. We have seen Nintendo take this approach before and succeed; they do know what they are doing. The Xbox 360 will stay on top for a while because of the massive head start they got, but the Wii appeals to all gamers and will have games for gamers of all ages. The PS3 is for hardcore gamers and the 360 is for cheap hardcore gamers while the Wii is cheap and for everyone.

*http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/archives/2007/02/19/
is_the_wii_another_hula_hoop.html

Editorial By: Dan