Nottle

Ico and Shadow of the Colossus because:

1. They are both pretty short.
2. The are both great (ok I need to play Ico but people say it's amazing)
3. Both are very unique
4. If you are interested in the kind of thing both are brought up when people talk about "games as art."
5. Shadow of the Colossus is so fucking rad.

Really I think after MGS4 this universe can be anything.

MGS1 and 2 are fairly consistent with each other but once we get to 4... retcon everything to fit into each game.

Is there really anything that insane about this game other than the final boss?

Imagine how good it would be selling if reviewers knew how to look at a watch.

I definitely need to get it soon.

I often think about both games when I think about this past generation.

Replaying GTA4 recently after I've played games like Vanquish made me kind of sick of GTA4. GTA has always been so messy. There is such a poor focus on everything. I think I've learned a new respect for games that know what to focus on and execute on their goals flawlessly. Now GTA4 seems like a lesson that everyone needs to consider going into the next generation of consoles. Cool tech does not trump good design.

As for MGS4, I like the game, it wrapped up a series I really like, it does some ballsy things with the story, there are great moments... BUT at the same time I think it just goes to show that in terms of continuity MGS is terrible. I will defend each of the games to death, I think the stand alone stories in MGS1, 2 and 3 are great. If the post credit Ocelot talking to government sequences weren't in any of them each game of the series could have been the last game in the series. Snake could have ridden into the sunrise with Otacon/Meryl with a new lease on life, Raiden could have quit the military and finally lived his own life with his new family, and MGS3 would just be a great prequel that humanized the series antagonist.

The series was silly but I had fun with how silly it was, Vamp was a vampire in the US Navy, thats super dumb, but I like it, he didn't have to be nano machine powered. After MGS3 I was willing to believe Ocelot could have Liquid in his arm. For some reason they decide to explain everything with nano machines which is just lazy, stupid, and takes away something special. Which is a shame because I know Kojima isn't lazy. MGS1, 2 and 3 are beautifully crafted games, with tons of detailed interesting stories that had a whole lot of research done behind them. Depending on when you ask me I could say any of the first 3 MGS games are maybe my favorite. I think they all have flaws that drag them down and parts that make them the best; however I can't say the same thing about MGS4.

Over Rated:

GTA4- It was impressive at the time, but now I'm convinced that game will not age gracefully.

MGS4- I believe this game's greatest strength is that it's a sequel to MGS 1, 2, and 3. It's greatest weakness is that it's a sequel to MGS 1, 2 and 3. It pays homage to those great games, but doesn't do anything that's as interesting as the previous games.

Mass Effect 2- I don't like the direction the series went. ME1 was a better game in almost every aspect.

Under Rated:

MGS2- I don't understand the hate for Raiden. He's not as cool as Snake, but that's kind of the point. I think the people that hate this game just don't get it. After playing it several times I see it's flaws, but I feel like it is the most ambitious MGS. Weak in a lot of areas, but still my favorite.

Super Mario Sunshine- Ever notice people hate the follow ups to the greatest games ever made?

Bayonetta- Why this almost never got a sequel is beyond me. Mechanically there has never been a better action game.

Of course. If you don't than that is fucking crazy. It's not like systems have to be at the same technical parity to be part of the same gen.

Would you consider the Game cube and Wii as part of the same generation? Would you consider the Ps1 and N64 to be different gens because 1 uses discs and one used cartridges?

The Wii U is Nintendo's next generation of console, though I don't plan to get a Wii U until the Wonderful 101 and Bayonetta 2 come out, I can at least appreciate that they do something different. I also am a firm believer that good mechanics, Smart ideas, and a good sense of style age better than new technology.

Thanks, I bought the Midnight Purple. I need that Fire Emblem.

The thing is Nintendo has Valve like Pacing when it comes to when they release game. Nintendo usually takes their time with Zelda so Skyward Sword was the last game in that series, I didn't really think it was a bad as people say, though I agree I would like to see them get away from the hand holding stuff, tonally every Zelda game is different from the last and even mechanically they evolve quite a bit.

The New Super Mario Bros games are ironically never that new, but 64, Sun Shine and the Galaxy games are all very different. Mario 3d land was supposed to be pretty fantastic too. Sadly I think the side scrolling stuff sells better than the more clever and interestingly designed games. You play though either Galaxy game though and you are always doing something new, those games were refreshing.

The Metroid games are all fantastic but they don't put those out every year. Metroid has existed since the 80's but there was not a Metroid game between 1994 and 2002. Also I bought Other M 4 weeks ago, I liked it despite what other people say.

I'm excited to see what sony has next, I'd love to play the Last of Us, and the Last Guardian it just seems strange to me that Nintendo is accused of coming out with the same games over and over when Sony has probably ended more franchises because they made sequels every other year to make money off the hype.

It wasn't until very recently that I turned on my Wii for the first time in a year, it made me realize pretty and shiny only lasts so long, God of War 3 can have the most impressive neck ripping tech available, but in time, Wind Waker will look better.

But really though, you are right, Sony is capable of making something incredibly ambitious like Little Big Planet. There are dozens of other PS3 games I adore. Do we know what exclusives Microsoft has? Halo, Forza, Fable and Gears? I like Halo and Gears, but I feel like Microsoft has no real reason to be on top other than making a decent online community early on. If we are talking about making innovative games, I don't think Microsoft has you covered.

I can easily see Nintendo outliving sony if the Vita doesn't get games.

Sony hit a few walls this gen. I don't think they will have Ps2 success again. Nintendo survived the game cube, N64 and wii eras, they can live on with Wii U.

Despite what people think Nintendo continues to live on because they DO change their franchises. But Sony's marquee titles get stale by the 3rd entry. Also many Nintendo games would stand the test of time as long as they were in 1080P. There would be few games that would look better than Mario Galaxy if that was in HD.

Jak, Ratchet and Clank, spyro, Crash, God of War, Resistance, Killzone, Sly Cooper, have all peaked. Not to mention their games that came out in the past year haven't done great have they? Twisted Metal, Starhawk, Sly, Sony Allstars, they had hardly any marketing right?

@dethfish: Absolutely games this gen are not going to age well unless there is support on next gen consoles. So many games this gen are dependent on having a multiplayer community too. That's going to be gone in 10 years, look at Halo 2.

Imagine trying to play Mass Effect 2 in 15 years and you'd have to track down all the DLC that was good and really added to the story.

Also while we are on the topic of not aging well, the photorealistic look many games have is not going to be treated well by time.