IT'S A JIGGLYPUFF VIEWED FROM ABOVE

Hm.. I got a question.

Do you think the panel of judges used for the VGA's was a wise choice. Do you think they could have used something better? From what I understand, a people's choice brand of judgment ends up being mostly madden titles.

When I do watch them, it seems they get people to go that are not even half way interested in gaming. Was this reflected this year also? Or has it changed? Whats your opinion?

We all know that videogame piracy is bad and it ultimately harms the industry , but what about downloading ROMs for consoles like the SNES. Is there a cut off point for when it is legally acceptable to pirate a game?

I don't download anything current gen or last gen, but as far as I am concerned PS1 etc are fair game - does this make me a bad person?

Should games be rated on their contribution to the industry as well as their quality? (An example would be Maze War, the first first person 'shooter', the first instance of avatars for players, level editor, first peer to peer multiplayer online game, online chat, observing mode, etc.)

As for my siegelpun, "Don't get mad, get Mad World."

What was the biggest surprise (if any) of the VGA's?

For me it was prof layton winning best handheld game.

Siegelpuntz (nvgr)

Don't Wake Daddy, but this game will keep you up all night!

Why does Podtoid suck so hard?

Who here thinks Geoff Keighly looked like a tool last night, and a trained monkey could've done his job better?

Also, what (if anything) saved the VGAs from being completely abhorrent? My guess is either Tim Shaefer's entrance, or the 5 seconds of Hideo Kojima.

Geoff Keighley is a fat liar.

Back in 2003, Ubisoft rebooted the Prince of Persia series with The Sands of Time, bringing creator Jordan Mechner on board as consultant and writer. The game was brilliant and everybody was happy. Then Ubisoft ran the series into the ground with two more games (no Mechner involvement) that sucked out loud. Realizing they had ruined their so-recently revitalized IP, Ubisoft decided to reboot again, but missing a key ingredient from the successful 2003 outing, created Prince of Persia, an insulting game that I can only hope will be the last PoP game Ubi ever makes.

So to recap, every Prince of Persia game ever made without Jordan Mechner has been bad. Every game Jordan Mechner has ever made has been great.

Sometimes I think that we tend to single people out for credit undeservedly. Warren Spector, Will Wright, Peter Molyneux, etc. hold godlike status in our subculture (trickster god status, in Molyneux's case), but they don't shape games out of the ether by force of their will. Games are collaborative efforts by dozens or even hundreds of people, and these figures serve as the "front man", a focal point for praise. That's not to say that they aren't brilliant and creative, but they are not the sole authors of our favorite games.

Nevertheless, circumstances like Ubi's handling of the Prince of Persia franchise make me wonder if one person really can make the difference between a good and bad game. Since Sands of Time, the central problem of the series has been terrible writing and design, two things Mechner specializes in. Could his involvement have turned PoP 2008 around?

Do you guys think we unfairly heap praise on a few individuals at the expense of the unseen game dev proletariat? Or are there really monolithic figures who Make Good Games? And when you answer, think about this: Tim Schafer has never released a game that wasn't brilliant and hilarious.

My question: with the growing popularity of shorter and simpler games such as XBLA and WiiWare titles, do you think there should be an award category for games of that kind, whether categorized by length, price(under $20), or simply independent games, like Braid which garnering much praise?

I love you Podtoid.

That isn't a question but I still want it anwsered.
;)


phonetic spelling: Fall-Inter






also, I missed the vga's don't spoil them until I can torrent them!

with the end of the year coming soon are their any little known games that made a big impression on you guys that would recommend for people to go back and check out.

How underrated was No More Heroes this year? It came out late January and yet I've rarely seen it mentioned on "best of 2008" lists. It's a game where I suplexed a magician into the ceiling so hard he burst into coins and blood. How can a game warrenting that previous sentence not get praise?

Looking back at the past year in gaming, what games or specific moments have given you the most unbridled joy? What has brought you back to the reason we do all of this in the first place - having fun?

Conversely, what has made you want to scream and smash your controllers against the wall?

Also, if you could go back in time and give your younger selves some gaming-related advice, what would it be?

Gamer Holiday wish time:

The holidays are miraculous times. You get one wish to change anything related to gaming. So I guess my question is, if you could change any one thing related to gaming in anyway, what would it be?

looks like a godzilla

Question: What do you think a good video games award show would look like?

Question:

Could one of you please infect Topher again? It transformed his already sexy sexy voice into something which gives my ears orgasms just thinking about.

Follow up question:

Topher, have you ever considered a career in audio book recording?

With the Spike awards having that independent games category, do you this marks these smaller games breaking into the mainstream? If so, do you think this will change the games at all?

Also, Brutal Legend looks fucking amazing.

Seeing as discussions of EA and financial success (or lack of it) inevitably leads to industry complaining about used game sales, I would like to offer up a slightly different take on the used game sales issue for your consideration.

Many have defended used game sales by pointing to the used car industry as an example of how other industries have embraced used sales (usually reluctantly if you look at the way used car sales was similarly disliked by automakers initially). While I am personally of the opinion that one should be free to sell whatever they want free of restrictions, I think the used car sales analogy is not actually correct. However, it might actually explain why so many in the game industry is upset.

So here's the thing. Generally, we understand what a new car is. We understand what a used car is. To be stereotypical, if you have money, want the latest car model, or want a car in prime condition, you go and you get a new car. If you don't quality under these conditions, you go and you buy a used car.

In other words, there is a concrete division between what is a new versus used car is and who buys what. If someone could afford a new car, they probably would: it is not a lost sale since the person could not afford it in the first place. In addition, people are not likely to sell a new car until much more than one year, which is pretty much the lifetime of a "new" car since at that time the new model comes out to replace it.

In contrast, by its very business model, Gamestop seems to have stripped away that difference between new and used games. Most of the Gamestops I visit are layed out in such a way that it is far easier to find used games than it is to find new games. There is aggessively pushing of both buying and selling used games. Hell, half the time I go to buy a new game, I see that they have already opened the package so it is pretty much a used game already.

In other words, the used car business by its very nature does not really cannibalize the new car business. In contrast, Gamestop seems to be redefining used games in such a way that massively cannibalizes on new game sales because they are basically sending the message that games are disposable pieces of entertainment. It is simply not worth you buying new and even if you buy a game new, you can get more of a "benefit" by selling it back ASAP for a new or used copy of the next big game.

So basically this long-winded question and analysis basically boils down to this. Do you guys think this might be why the game companies are upset with Gamestop and used game sales? That is, that Gamestop is not just selling used games: it is redefining and in many ways reducing the intrinstic value of "new" games.

i was playing eternal sonata recently and i felt like i was battling the same 3 bosses the whole game. metroid prime hunters on the ds does this a lot too. has there ever been a game that successfully pulled off only having a couple different bosses?

I looked into the World of Goo piracy mentioned several episodes ago...

Apparently the game has not been released in Europe yet for download, and several people I have seen on the internet that have pirated it say they did so because they are European and wanted to play the game.

Do you think this justifies any of the piracy at all (a game not being released in another country for several months)?

Also, will bonerquest be a region-locked title, and will European countries be able to receive the game at the same time Americans will?

When you guys write a review for a game and give your score for it, why do you guys think of people that lose there shit because you gave it a lower score than they thought it should have received a higher score?
My Home related question is this; A BonerQuest game space with a phalic disco ball hanging from the center of the room?

What's the hardest/most conflicted/most troubling decision you've ever had to make within a videogame?

Hey Rev, Rant about something. Anything. Those NGDs aren't doing it for me. Can you at least give me 5 seconds about what you had for lunch?

More serious question for the whole cast:
What game in your collection have you had the most replay value out of? Why that game? What other games do you want to play though again but haven't? And what games do you still own that you never want to touch again?