For those of you who are not aware, raptr (available conveniently at raptr.com) is a mash-up of various forms of internet communication, xfire, and GiantBomb's achievement system (though not as interesting) with some web 2.0 principles attached. It combines instant messenger systems much like how Pidgin combines them into a single client. Additionally the client tracks game playing while the user's individual raptr web page mines for players achievements (unfortunately PS3 achievement mining is broken until Sony can get a better handle on scalable hardware). It can also hook up to Facebook and Twitter-like services to broadcast what the user is currently playing.  It's a very interesting push into the future of social networking and gaming and as an example, here is my own:

  

The next big coming change to social gaming is coming from the next update to Xbox Live, bringing Twitter and Facebook integration.  While PS3 users will correctly argue that they already have Facebook and Twitter on their systems via the built-in web browser, it is not integrated to the core of the system as it will be in the Live update.  From what I've seen, it allows you to do things like find friends who may also be hiding their secret 360 love affair as well as walk through people's profiles and pictures with a controller instead of a mouse.  (Pro Tip:  You can hook up a USB keyboard to your 360 for typing stuff and keep it around for the same thing on your PS3).

In the end, I question the effectiveness of the these two to create a better online community.  I haven't met a single person through raptr yet, and while the Facebook stuff on the 360 will reveal a few more people who I can hop on Live with, I strongly doubt that either will foster the same sense of community as a forum or blog site.  It is the lack of commitment required to use these services that will hold them back.  In either a forum or blog, you are committing at a minimum some of your time and more likely some of your personality (unless it's NeoGAF) that increases the risk/reward to keep you coming back much like actual friendship at a greatly reduced level.  These same things will not be provided by either raptr or Facebook on Live.

I don't mean to dog either of these services as they are great tools, but I do question their significance and lasting appeal.  For me, the best part of raptr is that it tracks the amount of time I'm spending playing games to help with accountability, and as stated previously I'm sure I'll pick up a few extra friends on Live because of the Facebook integration.  But neither tool can currently be used adequately to foster the same sense of community that a simple forum or blog site can provide.

So where does social gaming go from here?  Can there ever be an integrator of gaming or are individual games' community sites the way to go? Are "core" games already socially behind the times because of Facebook games? Is community even important or relevant to gaming? What are your thoughts?

  Sacred 2 is huge.

It's beyond huge.  It's essentially 5 or 6 World of Warcraft zones stitched together seamlessly.  There are a seemingly endless number of side quests that you can perform and you can even do all of this with friends.  It will probably take you three hundred (yes, a three and two zeroes) hours to complete if you want to do everything between the two different campaign types.  

The problem is that none of the content is interesting or even fun.

Combat is fairly bland.  On harder difficulties the closeness of death can be a motivator, but there's no real punishment for death besides loosing a chance at an achievement.  There are too few abilities and cooldowns between their use are excessive.  The side quests have boring non-spoken dialogue and fall under the classic three RPG types.  If you do read the text, it can even be boringly derivative.  For example, in one town there are four side quests all related to weddings.

I destroy this game to make the following point using hyperbole.  If you believe that the length of game is important to the quality of the title, then this is the game for you.  That's $.20 per hour of play, incredibly cheap compared to Call of Duty 4 with it's price of entry of $10 per hour.  Basically, if the length of the game is important to you, this is your game of the century.  

Of course the problem is that there is more excitement and fun in 5 minutes of CoD4 that the entirety of Sacred 2.  In fact, Sacred 2 winds up being complete inert to me, I have no reaction whatsoever to it.  It's about as fun as plucking your eyebrows or doing laundry.  But if you think that the length of the game is important, then certainly Sacred 2 is your game of the year.

 It's no big secret that Tim Schafer has always had a slightly tragic side to his games.  Grim Fandango and Psychonauts are two of the great adventure games of all time, but you probably didn't play them (if you did, good for you).
 
Now Brutal Legend is up against Uncharted 2, the game that Jesus descended from the heavens to produce glorious reviews only to ascend again and whip the gaming populace into a frenzy.  No matter how much marketing EA throws behind the title, it ain't going to get the same buzz amongst the "enthusiast" gamers.
 
So should we feel sorry for Timmy?

At my future brother-in-laws place I got to spend some time with HAWX and was surprisingly impressed.  While the combat was extremely arcade-ish, it was also very enjoyable.  Though it's been a few months since I played Ace Combat 6 last, I feel it compares quite favorably.  Instead of a convoluted story-line with goofy cinematics that make about as much sense as planes made out of badger fur, HAWX uses the Tom Clancy's license well to create an interesting story.  Definitely picking it up off Amazon soon.