E3 2009: Microsoft, Part 2 - My Thoughts

Since I stupidly left my notebook at home, I'll have to go from memory here. Luckily, this is the part of the event that I paid the most attention to. Odd that it wasn't the games, right?

What I really like about Microsoft this year is that they didn't focus 100% on games. While its true, a platform is only as good as the games available on it (as Sony is discovering), in this day and age, that's not all a piece of hardware is good for - playing games is only part of the whole media experience. They also didn't focus on who sold what and how many, like they did last year, which is a point in their favor, as well.

Beyond the games, Microsoft seems to be changing the way we think about entertainment in the living room. To start with, integrating Netflix's streaming services into Xbox Live last year was a huge step forward. Now its going to get even better, being able to browse DVDs and adjust your queue right from the console interface. Just last weekend I was showing a friend of mine how the Netflix streaming service worked, and I had to get on my PC to show him some things because I couldn't do it right on my 360. We ended up watching five episodes of 30 Rock, which I will now watch religiously all summer while there's nothing else on TV.

The point being, improving the Netflix functionality is awesome. It will be nice to be able to take some or all of that functionality that was once only available through the PC interface and make it available through the Xbox dashboard.

Last.fm is also coming to Xbox Live, so now instead of just streaming movies and TV shows, we have streaming music coming in, and it will be free to gold members of the service (its not that expensive, get over it).

In a move that was praised by my wife, the social butterfly that she is, Microsoft is also bringing Facebook and Twitter to Xbox Live. You'll be able to do just about anything you can do with these services online through the dashboard interface this fall. What I like best is the new ability to take screen shots from inside a game and immediately caption them and post them to your Facebook. (In the first draft of this, I wrote "screen snots". I laughed out loud.) That might be really fun. The only issue is, it sounded like the functionality would have to be on a game-by-game basis instead of built into the Xbox itself. I don't know how I feel about that - I think you should be able to do it inside every game you own, even if you have to access the Xbox menu and tell it you want to enter a "screen shot mode" or something. Still, the service sounds pretty cool if it can become widely supported by developers.

Quickly, I'll mention that the movie and TV download service through Xbox live will now allow instant play (streaming) of the movies you purchase and offer them in full 1080p. They're also expanding the regions of the world where the service is available, which is always a good thing.

The part of the presentation where my eyes remained glued to the TV was where they introduced "Project Natal". This is a motion- and voice-detection device that, I think, could drastically change the way we experience interactive entertainment on our televisions. It allows you to use your body as the controller.

What impressed me the most was the demo Peter Molyneux and his team at Lionhead put together of a real woman interacting with a digital boy named Milo on the screen. These interactions were simply amazing. She was able to converse with him and he would, through this technology, be able to pick up on her emotions, the inflections in her voice, determine how she's feeling and respond in kind. He would "toss" her an item and she would go through the motions of picking it up. She would draw on a piece of paper, hold it up to the device and that piece of paper would be digitally rendered on-screen to give the appearance she was giving it to Milo.

At this point, the possibilities of what gaming could be entered my head. I was imagining games where you were able to interact with the environment in the game by opening doors, hiding behind corners, climbing ladders, leaping gaps - all with only your body and no physical controller. Imagine interacting with an in-game companion such as Elika (from Prince of Persia) or Sheva (from Resident Evil 5), where they could pick up on your expressions and voice inflections and respond to them in ways that we never thought were possible. Imagine playing Madden or Fifa and giving yourself a full body workout instead of just hiding behind a controller working your finger muscles. The possibilities are endless.

If Microsoft is able to come forth with this technology at a reasonable price and actually make it work, without turning it into another useless gimmick of a peripheral, things will be simply amazing.

Microsoft seriously brought it this year and didn't disappoint. Their presentations were entertaining and enlightening and it really seems like they're pushing the boundaries of what is possible with interactive entertainment.

I'll echo my thoughts from the beginning of my last post - I'm turning into a Microsoft fanboy. They're doing so much, and its so good, that its hard not to be. Sony sure better bring it now, because its going to be incredibly difficult to top the whole Xbox experience.

The Switch to BluRay - How Many Are Actually Doing It?

Its been quite a while since BluRay officially won the high definition format war, but how many people are actually converting their DVD library to BluRay or, at least, buying BluRay from here on out? Of course, I have no solid numbers, the question is just rhetorical for the purposes of this discussion.

Although, there are some figures I can throw out. The Dark Knight's BluRay sales have been outstanding, making headlines at the end of last year. Also, stand-alone BluRay players have become more mainstream and more affordable. Many models have finally dropped under the price of the PlayStation 3, in fact. This is good news for consumers.

What about me? I would like to start buying movies on BluRay exclusively, however I only have two movies in that format and one of those came with my PS3. The things that are stopping me from taking the full plunge are 1) I still feel the price of the BluRay movies are too high and 2) I don't have a television that can take full advantage of the high-def technology.

First off, for me to start buying BluRay movies religiously, the typical price would have to be closer to $20 per movie instead of $30 or more. Yes, sometimes you can find movies you want at a more reasonable price - I know Amazon has BluRay sales fairly frequently, and there's always at least a few on sale at Best Buy. In these cases, I may actually pick a movie or two up. More times than not, however, none of the titles are ones that I want.

Secondly, as mentioned above, I don't have an HDMI-compatible HDTV. I bought mine just before HDMI became standard, so I use analog HD cables instead of digital. The picture for TV programs and gaming, for the most part, is still very good for an HD experience. Still, I can't get the full benefit from BluRay movies until I upgrade my TV at some point in the future.

Although, I will tell you, there are a few movies I'd likely spend the $30 for. I'll be jumping all over the Star Trek when it comes out on BluRay and I'd die for the Battlestar Galactica complete series on BluRay when it comes out later this summer (although I could probably buy a new TV for close to the price that they want for that box set!).

So, all this is kind of making me wonder - am I just behind the adaptation curve or are there more people out there who aren't making the switch to BluRay very quickly? I have nothing against the technology, for sure. It just isn't cost-effective for me yet. And, don't even get me started on converting all the DVDs I already own to BluRay. That would cost a fortune.

And, yes, I would like to add myself to the millions of people who purchased The Dark Knight on Bluray...but I'll wait a little while longer. ;)

Review: Star Trek (yes, the movie)

I'm not going to do a major in-depth review or anything, but these are my thoughts on the new Star Trek movie. But first, some background - I've been a Trekker all my life, starting back in the days when I was younger and they used to run marathons of the original Star Trek on New Year's Eve. My dad would let us stay up late that one night while we were in elementary school, and we'd watch the original Trek for hours on end. Once The Next Generation hit, I was a full blown fan of the entire franchise, and that only continued into Deep Space Nine and Voyager. It only started waning when Enterprise came around, and the disappointment that came with that series. So yeah, I'm pretty knowledgeable about the whole franchise and a lore junkie.

By "lore junkie", I mean that I respect the lore, but don't mind minor lore disruptions for the sake of making good television or movies. I'm not unreasonable. Keep that in mind when you read my cons below.

WARNING: THERE ARE MAJOR PLOT SPOILERS BELOW - IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE, DON'T READ ON UNTIL YOU HAVE!!!




We'll start with the good things:

• It was incredibly entertaining.
• The visual effects were outstanding.
• The general plot was intriguing.
• The acting was awesome, as were the actors/actresses involved.
• I like J.J. Abrams.
• I loved all the in-jokes: Star Trek homages and in-jokes form the cast and crew's past projects abound.
• The Romulans look awesome - in fact, they should have looked more sinister, like in this movie, all along. Who says the Klingons alone can have that honor?
• Leonard Nimoy. 'Nuff said.
  

Now, onto the bad (brace yourselves):

• Who the hell puts product placement in a Star Trek movie? Nokia and Budweiser - seriously?
• Yes, we know Spock was half human and that he has wrestled with those emotions in various episodes and movies throughout the last 40 years - but this thing with Uhura that he has going on in this movie is, from my viewpoint, an unacceptable, out of character use of those stray emotions form his human side.
• They blew up Vulcan - one of the most well known, iconic, beloved planets in the Star Trek universe. What. The. Hell.
• The time travel gimmick has been used to a nauseating amount in the last 40 years of Star Trek, not to mention the rest of sci-fi. This isn't a problem, if its done well. But, you don't use it to change the last 40 years of Star Trek. What was Paramount thinking by allowing that to happen?

I'm quite aware this is supposed to be a "reboot" of the franchise, and I will even agree that it was needed, but there are some lines you just do not cross. Changing small bits of lore here and there is fine, if the end result is a better movie. Changing huge chunks of the lore just for a "reboot" screams to me that the writers, producers and whoever at Paramount was involved in this just don't care about or respect the last 40 years of Star Trek. Frankly, I'm surprised they didn't move Starfleet HQ to New York City and power the Enterprise's warp engine with butter instead of dilithium crystals.

In fact, I think what they did to Star Trek lore would be what The Lord of the Rings would be if someone did a movie and changed it so that Frodo died half way to Mount Doom, the ring was secured by Sauron and the entirety of Middle Earth was turned into a Mordor-like furnace.

Now that I got all of that out of my system, if you take the movie on its own merits and, god forbid, completely wipe everything you know about Star Trek out of your mind and pretend like you're starting fresh, this is a great, entertaining, funny, action-packed movie that I think you should go see just once, especially if you're not a Star Trek fan. If you are...I'm sorry.

Post of the Day: 4.27.2009

FFVII's Cloud apparently has universal appeal - a poster that bears a striking resemblance to our pointy-haired hero made its way into the Caprica pilot/movie that was just released this week.

Post of the Day: 4.18.2009

Final Fantasy VIII: Advent Children Complete box art is hot.

Post of the Day: 2.27.2009

Why do gamers see video game movies? Most gamers do, do they? I don't. I haven't seen a movie based off a video game since my brothers and I begged our mother to take us to see the lame Super Mario Bros. movie back in the early '90s. (Correction: I guess the Tomb Raider movies would count as a movie based off a game...I saw those.)

Post of the Day: 1.28.2009

Here's a shocker for ya - video games outsell Bluray and DVD in 2008. If there's one thing Nintendo is good at its selling gimmicky consoles and games to ignorant soccer moms the world over.

Streaming Netflix Leaves a Lot to be Desired

Most technologically-minded people know by now that Netflix is able to stream movies near-instantly to your TV (also in HD) or PC (unfortunately not in HD yet), assuming you have a piece of hardware that is capable of doing this. My XBox 360 happens to be one such piece of hardware.

I was chatting with a friend and he was talking about all the TV shows he was spending time watching in HD with Netflix, streaming through his 360. So, I decide to give it a shot. It would be nice not to have to wait for discs when I want to watch something. Note this, because its important - the whole point of streaming is to watch a show instantly without having to wait for the typical disc-mailing process.

So, I set everything up and get to watching stuff. I started watching the first season of Sliders. I watched the first three episodes and when I went to watch the fourth, to my surprise it said, "This episode available on disc only". Odd...but ok, one episode. As I got to looking at the rest of the shows (a mix of typical live-action TV and anime), I noticed several series, most notably the new Doctor Who seasons, have nearly half the season available "on disc only". A couple of my anime have the "disc only" episodes scattered throughout, so any way you look at it I would have to wait for the disc to come in the mail to watch things straight through.

Now, remember my point above that I said to note, because it was important? Here it is again: The whole point of even bothering to use this streaming Netflix service is to watch a show instantly without having to wait for the typical disc-mailing process. It makes no sense whatsoever to even bother using the bandwidth and storage space necessary to stream these shows - in HD, no less - if your subscriber is going to have to rent out the disc anyway to see every episode. What is the point? And, more importantly, why is this even an issue? I can understand why perhaps an entire series isn't available on demand, as there are licensing issues involved, I'm sure. But for half a series to be available and the other half not? Why? How does this happen? What's the point?

If Netflix truly wants this service to take off, they need to be more consistent with what they have available, because I'm not going to bother if every other episode of the series I'll have to rent the actual physical disc anyway. The quality is great, the convenience is great, but the selection and availability of episodes leaves so much to be desired its probably not worth bothering with it.

New DS Lite and Buying Blueray Movies

I happened to be browsing GameStop's site last week and noticed they had quite a nice deal going - if you trade in a DS and two DS games (or a PSP and two PSP games) you get an extra $20 trade-in credit. I have been wanting to upgrade my old DS for quite some time and this had been the perfect opportunity to do so. The only thing the site didn't tell me is if there were any particular games (which is usually the case) or if it had to be a DS Lite.

So, I called my GameStop and asked the question. The girl who answered knew that it could be any DS game, but didn't know if it was limited to DS Lite trade-ins or not. I took my equipment up to the store anyway, because, truth be told, I was going to upgrade to a DS Lite regardless. It turns out, they did accept old DS systems for that deal and I got my extra $20. I also traded in an old SSX PS2 game, which I had received back from my brother, having completely forgotten I lent it to him ages ago.

All total I ended up with almost $80 credit, which immediately went to the purchase of a new red and black DS Lite. I also picked up My French Coach, which my wife and I had been talking about purchasing recently. She's a French teacher, so I figured its time I learned some, I suppose. ;)

The following day, my brother and sister came over and we played Rock Band almost all afternoon. I also found out a disturbing issue with Burnout Paradise. I don't know if I'm just slow or if I missed it in all the talk back when the game came out, but there's no two-player mode in this game. What kind of racing game has no two player mode?! What were the developers thinking? I had been on the fence still about actually purchasing that game. I've had it on rental from GameFly for over a month. My decision was made as soon as I discovered that little tidbit. I packaged it up and will be mailing it back to today.

This day also included yet another first - I bought my first Blueray movie (Spiderman 3 doesn't count, it came with my PS3 system). My wife and I had been at a crossroads, discussing if we really wanted to start buying movies on Blueray instead of DVD, at Best Buy the other day. Finally, she did decided that she wanted the Blueray version of Enchanted. We all wanted to watch it on Saturday night, so my brother and I ran out to Best Buy and picked it up.

So, this weekend, I got my hands on a DS Lite for the first time, bought my first Blueray movie and realized for the first time that the developers of Burnout Paradise were smoking crack when they decided not to put a two-player mode into the game. (I also spent a good eight hours on Sunday playing Persona 3.) That was my weekend.

Stargate Continuum - High Praises from Gateworld

While the recently released feature-length wrap up to the last two seasons of Stargate SG-1 - The Ark of Truth - was fairly well received, and sold very well, many people don't understand the differences between the two Stargate movies coming out this year.

The Ark of Truth was most definitely not a stand-alone Stargate movie. I think some people were expecting it to be, in some manner, and didn't like it as much because of that. All this last movie was aspiring to be was a feature-length "last episode" to the series to tie up the story arc of the last couple seasons. That's it. Sure, it has some manner of feature film quality to it and a larger budget than your average two-episode SG-1 show, but all it really was was a continuation of the series.

The next movie - Stargate Continuum - aspires to be a whole lot more. Its a stand-alone adventure for our favorite characters, which apparently serves well to introduce people to the franchise, as well as refresh the love long-time fans have for this world that has been 11 years in the making.

The big-wigs over at Gateworld were able to attend a special screening of Continuum recently and they had nothing but the highest praise for that movie. The Ark of Truth apparently pales in comparison to Continuum as a feature film. This is good to know. While I did enjoy The Ark of Truth very much, I think I'm looking forward to Continuum even more. Set your calendars for July 29, 2008!

The Ark of Truth Hits Store Shelves

So, the huge finale to the last two seasons of Stargate SG-1 was just released last week, straight to DVD. According to some people I've talked to, it was sold out fairly early on at some Best Buy stores. We've been waiting for this movie for nearly a year, since the final episode of SG-1 aired last spring. Was it worth it? Definitely!

A lot of people are hating on The Ark of Truth because of a few continuity issues (all of which are rather subjective, as is) and overuse of some previous themes and foes.

~~~ SPOILERS BELOW THIS LINE...YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED ~~~




Overall, I definitely enjoyed the movie. Its a fitting conclusion to the last two seasons of SG-1, that's for sure. Too many people like to nitpick, and personally, I fail to see how you can enjoy a movie (or anything, for that matter) if you nitpick so much. Its a movie, its for entertainment purposes. I sure was entertained, that's really all that matters. There were a few issues, though. Here's my run down of pros and cons of the movie.

Pros:
~ The story overall, the IOA sub-plot.
~ Tobin becoming a good guy (although this was hinted at near the end of SG-1)
~ Excellent camera work, good transition from television to movie format.
~ Awesome soundtrack, mixing original Stargate, SG-1 and Atlantis themes all together.
~ The replicator surprise - I was completely not expecting that.
~ The Daniel/Vala dialog near the start of the film.
~ All the archaeology stuff...reminded me of early SG-1.
~ The way it all came together at the end - Morgan Le Fay telling Daniel that she has already helped and the audience figuring out that we've already seen the results of her help.
~ The contrast between Morgan Le Fay and Adria really shows the differences between the Ori and the Ancients. I don't think that distinction had ever been seen on-screen like that before.
~ The final scene where the team referred to the fact that there's still a lot of unexplored planets out there. Things continue on, business as usual (until Carter decides to transfer to Atlantis, that is).

Cons:
~ No RDA.
~ As much as I liked the introduction and the surprise, too much focus was given to the replicators. Seems like they relied on it as a crutch to fill time.
~ Too little Adria, although I liked the fire effect that surrounded her in those few short scenes.
~ Where was Doctor Lam in the Infirmary scene near the end?
~ Lack of screen time focusing on SG-1 discussing the moral implications of forcing the Ark of Truth on the Ori, you would have thought this would definitely be something that Daniel would bring up.

Again, great conclusion to the last couple seasons of SG-1. What it is not is a stand alone movie to introduce people to the Stargate franchise. If you try that, even with the prologue that recaps seasons nine and ten, they're likely to be more confused than interested in watching the whole series.

Cheapest Entertainment Possible?

I was reading Tobold's Blog this morning, and he had up a post discussing the possible price per month to play Warhammer when it comes out later this year, and how it will likely be more than a monthly WoW subscription (which is $14.99). This post isn't about the differences between MMO pricing, but about something he wrote later in that same post.

"If you buy a MMORPG and play it for a year, you still pay less money than if you buy a regular video game every 2 months. Counting on a dollar per hour of entertainment basis MMORPGs are extremely cheap. Even watching paint dry is more expensive, if you have to pay for the paint. Movies, books, magazines, everything costs more per hour of entertainment than World of Warcraft does. Total profits of the video game industry are declining, because too many people spend too many cheap hours in WoW instead of buying new expensive video games that can be played through in 10 hours."

I completely agree. WoW (or, really, any MMORPG with a price point around that of WoW), is probably one one of the cheapest forms of entertainment in the world. While I personally still spend money on other forms of entertainment, even outside of gaming, if all you did was play WoW for your entertainment purposes, you'd probably save a ton of cash.

Let's break this down. A monthly subscription to WoW is $14.99. Let's say a month has 30 days. That is a tiny bit less than 50 cents per day or about two (2) cents per hour. (No, no one plays 24/7/365, but that's what it breaks down to.)

Let's compare a bargain matinee movie. I just went to see Cloverfield last weekend and it was $6.50 for the ticket. The average movie is probably about two hours long, or less. That's $3.25 per hour of entertainment.

The average PS3 game is $60 these days. The time it takes to play through console games are variable, so we'll give everything the benefit of the doubt and look at a typical RPG, which is about 50 hours long (going off the average FFXII play through time, even though I played longer). That's $1.20 per hour. Keep in mind 90% of games are shorter (Heavenly Sword takes roughly six hours to complete, making it $10 per hour).

I won't even get into books, cable TV, rented movies, concerts and the like because they all come nowhere close to costing only two cents per hour of entertainment. This all boils down to the fact that if you want cheap entertainment and a cheap hobby, play MMOs. ;)

Cloverfield

My brother and I went to see Cloverfield this evening. I hadn't really heard much about it other than it was supposed to be an American Godzilla...and there was going to be a teaser for the new Star Trek movie on the front of it. There was indeed a teaser, but not much of one.

Cloverfield was a great movie, I thought. I really enjoyed the way it was filmed - using a hand-held camera. I also really liked the fact that us - the audience - didn't know any more about what was going on than the main characters. There was one part of the movie I was a bit disappointed with, but in the interest of keeping spoilers to a minimum, I'm not going to talk about which scene it is.

Definitely go see it, its worth it!

Stardust

Last night Danielle and I watched Stardust, which we had in from Netflix. The movie seemed interesting back when it came out in the theaters, but it didn't really grab my interest. After seeing it, I'm interested enough to want to read the book.

I thought the acting was great and the story was truly "fairy-tale" in nature. For some reason it reminded me a lot of Tin Man, only better. I'm not sure why I drew parallels between the two, as they don't really have much in common.

Stardust had comedy and dramatic elements all rolled into a nice love story that, in the end, wasn't too "chick flick" or romantic comedy. Throw in gorgeous Claire Danes as the fallen star Yvaine along with Robert De Niro as Captain Shakespeare and you have one good movie.

StarTrek.Com Situation

Yesterday I pointed out that CBS Interactive had "shut down" startrek.com and "eliminated" (their words, not mine) the staff working on the site. Today there's no mention of the article I quoted yesterday. Instead, I found this:

"CBS Interactive, which oversees StarTrek.com, is reorganizing the way it does business to align the division's workforce with its new vision that focuses on building communities online.

CBS Interactive remains absolutely committed to StarTrek.com and to growing the site along with its users by directly tapping into and utilizing the passionate fan base that has supported the site.

It has been your support and contributions to the lore of Star Trek that are what make StarTrek.com a vibrant place to be. To that end, we encourage you to keep the conversation alive and flowing using our message boards."

If they feel that way, then why did the do what they did over the weekend? Obviously the team hasn't done a bad job or anything, given that the site is updated with fresh info every day and sees thousands of visitors on a daily basis. This boggles me...

CBS Shuts Down StarTrek.Com

As if Mondays weren't bad enough, today my wife e-mails this link to me at work about CBS Interactive disassembling the startrek.com team, effectively shutting the web site down. Just in case it gets taken down, here is what was posted on the site.

"Sadly, we must report that CBS Interactive organization is being restructured, and the production team that brings you the STARTREK.COM site has been eliminated. Effective immediately.

We don't know the ultimate fate of this site, which has served millions of Star Trek fans for the last thirteen years.

If you have comments, please send them to editor@startrek.com - we hope someone at CBS will read them.

Thank you for your loyal fandom over the years. It has been a pleasure to serve you."

So, I sent a nastygram to CBS Interactive via their feedback form (scroll to the bottom of the page and click on "Feedback"). Here's what I wrote:

"As a long-time Star Trek fan and reader of startrek.com, I'm very disappointed that you have eliminated the startrek.com team, effectively closing down that site that thousands of people visit every day for information on their favorite television franchise.

Its very disheartening to know that you no longer care about the fans of the Star Trek franchise - some who have been around for 40 years."

I kept it very short and to the point and tried my best not to be extraordinarily evil.

DVI, HDMI, Component - Blah, Blah, Blah

So, a couple years back we bought a projection HDTV. As far as I can tell, all it has is component video in (which can support up to 1080i HD, but its analog and not digital). That was fine at the time - the cable box and the DVD player we got with it supported that technology and it worked.

Not too much later, along comes DVI and, eventually, HDMI. They're both digital connections that support both audio and video. That's all well and good, but now modern devices like, say, a PS3, have HDMI output for true digital 1080i HD picture. Technically my TV can support the picture, but it doesn't have a DVI or an HDMI plug for input. That being the case, I have to use my PS2's old component video input.

Now, this is all well and good, it works fine with games and the like, it supports full HD but it doesn't support much of the new digital technology that is being thrown on new hardware - DVD players, game consoles, etc. So, I looked online for possibly a HDMI to component cable. Guess what? Apparently HDMI includes this new copyright standard (mostly for DVD, BlueRay, HD-DVD movies) that is incompatible with component inputs (the whole digital vs. analog thing, I'm sure), so, for all intents and purposes, its illegal to let your new devices output a signal that strips away that protection. (Granted, there are ways around it, but its not easy or cheap...and again, its technically illegal.)

So now its pissing me off that I can't get true, pure, digital 1080i HD out of my PS3 because the connections on the back of my 2-year-old HDTV won't support it. Seriously, do things have to change that quickly in two years?! I'll be glad when we can get rid of this massive paperweight of a TV and replace it with something that supports the new digital copyright standards (and which will probably be completely outdated two years after we purchase).

The Ark of Truth Gets Release Date

Its official! We finally have a firm release date for the first post-series SG-1 movie, Stargate: The Ark of Truth. It'll be available in region one DVD format only on March 11, 2008. You can bet I'll be picking it up that day, as it would be nearly a year without any new SG-1 material...and I'm aching for more. ;) According to GateWorld, its a 97-minute feature, presented in wide screen format (16:9), which will likely come packaged with commentaries and other extras, much like the season box sets.

Entering Next Gen

I finally took the plunge. I got a "bonus" check this month and I spent it on a shiny, new PS3. Along with it, I bought the one game I've been wanting for a while - Oblivion (Game of the Year edition, if you're curious). My thoughts on the system so far:

1) Its easily twice the size of the original model PS2 and is very, very quiet. The controller feels like I'm going to snap it in two at any moment because its so light (due to the absence of a "rumble" component at this point in time). However, wireless, rechargeable controllers are awesome.

2) The XMB (Cross-Media Bar) is familiar, because its very similar on the PSP, which I've owned since release. I quickly downloaded a theme and some backgrounds that I like right from the system's web browser. The customization tools are nice.

3) Downloadable demos are cool. I've already downloaded the demo for Uncharted and messed around with it (awesome visuals, but not my type of game). http://folding.stanford.edu/ is a cool idea, as well. I'm not much into downloadable media like movies, TV shows, etc., so I doubt I'll be filling my hard drive with those things anytime soon, but the occasional demo or possibly PS1 classic isn't out of the question.

4) Blue-Ray is in. My system came with a copy of Spider Man 3 on Blue-Ray. I haven't watched it yet to compare the quality to a regular DVD, but I did switch all my Netflix movies over to their Blue-Ray counterparts, since we're using the PS3 as our DVD player now anyway.

So far, very happy. At this point there's not a lot of "must have" games in my preferred genre (RPGs), but there's a lot on the horizon - The Last Remnant, White Knight Story, Final Fantasy XIII, Star Ocean 4, etc. Plus there's a few other games I'm likely to purchase eventually - Gran Turismo 5, Midnight Club: Los Angeles, etc. Some games I'm interested in trying are the new Ratchet & Clank and Assassin's Creed.

Get With the Program, Netflix!

Netflix is a wonderful thing. Its allowed me to see TV shows and movies that I probably would never have seen otherwise. There's just one big thing that annoys me about it - their slow acquisition of "foreign" or re-released DVDs.

I was in the middle of renting the first season of Farscape, and suddenly the studio recalled all the DVDs, because they wanted to release an entire first season set instead of just having the individual DVDs to purchase. That's fine. Netflix had the entire first season, we were in the middle of watching it. The re-released set has been out for over two months now, and Netflix hasn't restocked. The rest of season one has been sitting in the "unreleased" section of my queue for months with an "unknown" release date. What's the deal?

The same thing seems to be happening with some anime that's released in the U.S. A new series I'm renting called The Third: The Girl With the Blue Eye is a prime example. The first disc of the first season came out over the summer. The second disc was released last month. Yet, Netflix doesn't have the second disc. I can easily go to Amazon and buy the freaking second disc and have it delivered the next day, yet Netflix doesn't have it in yet.

Some series there's just one disc listed as "unreleased" with an "unknown" release date out of the whole season. Its been sitting in the "unreleased" section for months. What's the deal? Get with the program Netflix. You're known for having hard-to-find movies and TV shows, so start paying attention to what you have and what you still need. If you have the first disc of the series, why on earth aren't you getting in subsequent discs? It makes no sense.