Grazza

The Beast Below... I just don't know what I think about Season 5 so far. I know I didn't love it and I didn't hate it. I spent most of the episode not enjoying it, but I have to admit, I did find the "twist" and the moral choices interesting. So yeah, "interesting", but not fun and entertaining, especially when compared to one of the other 2nd episodes like The Shakespeare Code. Maybe I shouldn't compare, but when the 1st episode wasn't as good as other 1st episodes, and the 2nd episode wasn't as good as previous 2nd episodes, I see a pattern setting. BUT it's not as bad as the truly bad episodes over the past few years and I do like the theme tune now. Looking forward to the Daleks.

Arguably (and I'm not knocking Prime) putting a game, any game, entirely in 1st-person perspective is an odd idea anyway. It's not so bad if the franchise was invented as an FPS, but people are used to Metroid and Zelda being in 3rd-person. Whilst Prime adapted the Metroid gameplay into 1st-person brilliantly, Metroid was always going to need to be at least partially 3rd-person in future games. It's like Zelda: the gameplay should be mainly 3rd-person, with the ability to switch into 1st-person when the technology allows it. I can't imagine Other M is the perfect solution, but I hope both franchises will be switchable between 1st- and 3rd-person next gen, with the player able to move whilst in either.

Oh come on, how could you not love Season 1 and 2's finales? He only started fluffing them in Season 3, when he turned the Doctor into a little imp and everyone chanting his name gave him super powers! BUT, part 1 of that was good and Utopia is my favourite episode of all-time. Derek Jacobi showed what a true master thespian can do for a programme! Wasn't too keen on Season 4's finale either, but I loved Tennant's very final episode. As for Season openers, 1 and 2 were good, but 3 and 4's were masterful comedy capers. I'm not too sad Russell T Davies has left (after all, he wrote a lot), but I don't think anyone will match his best work.

No, it's because he did many of them spectacularly well.

Thanks. That's the first level I haven't got an A-Rank for, so I definitely need to spend some more time with that (I got an S-Rank for the Griffin level!) That's brilliant, can't wait to wear the Metal King Armour and Spear! This should be standard from now on, it's so appealing.

Midnight was experimental, original and quite creepy, I admit. I can see why some people would like that one. It felt to me though a bit like an amateur dramatics experiment (people arguing in just one room, lots of repetition). Not terrible, I just prefer the camp, sci-fi stuff, and I didn't think the dialogue really went anywhere. The Waters of Mars (co-written by Phil Ford) to me felt like there wasn't much to it - just one long chase - apart from the bit where the Doctor turned arrogant, which I loved. Russell T Davies wrote the best episodes, but the only one with a 100% good record (in my opinion) is Gareth Roberts, who wrote The Shakespeare Code and The Unicorn and the Wasp, and co-wrote Planet of the Dead.

Both Russell T Davies' and Steven Moffat's best episodes were excellent, but Steven Moffat had a whole season to focus on one epsiode, whereas RTD wrote about five and trimmed everyone else's. I would say Russell T Davies understands entertainment a lot more. Now personally, I don't "get" Moffat's creepy monsters, as I've never been scared of shadows or the corner of my eye. Not that I want scares anyway, just entertainment. The statues were a great idea though, I admit that. Russell T Davies may have used the Daleks, but he did so magnificently in Season 1 and 2. He also invented the Judoon, whose first episode was like a perfect version of this (the "alien fugitive" idea was done in Men in Black and Smith & Jones, which was an astounding, fast-paced episode). This wasn't a "bad" episode at all like The Waters of Mars, Midnight or Planet of the Ood. It's just that it had the makings of being brilliant and didn't quite get there.

I thought it was alright, but it just made me think of the film Men in Black and Moffat's own "Girl in the Fireplace" episode. The house set-up was also a tad "Blink". Was very impressed with Karen Gillan and thought Matt Smith was fine, exactly what I expected. Incidentally, I consider both Tennant and Eccelstone to be truly excellent Doctors, so there's no shame on Matt if he doesn't match them. The one thing I was disappointed by was the writing. OK, the jokes were as good as usual (Patrick Moore, the laptop etc), but where was the pacing? I didn't think this was as good as any of Russell T Davies' four season openers, Season 3 and 4's were particularly phenomenal. Steven Moffat's good, but The Girl in the Fireplace was the only one of his I thought was as good as the hype. Blink was a little bit flat and overrated. The library one was not exceptional at all. But... gorgeous visual style and I look forward to the rest. I hope there's a comedy one from the guy who wrote The Shakespeare Code and The Unicorn and the Wasp.

You and darksnowman are making me feel very inadequate! In my defence a) I was rushing because I had to leave for work, b) I don't think I actually ran out of health, I just turned the game off with low health on the boss's 2nd form (it doesn't help that he has no health bar - grr) and C) I hadn't forged a 3rd-tier elemental sword because I thought I had to use the one the statue gave me. But yeah, I'm rubbish! I blinkin' love wearing all the armour from the series, such as the Dragon Mail. It's comforting like an old pair of slippers! Of course, you can't see yourself wearing it, as it's 1st-person, but I really hope you can see all the armour and items in any future Dragon Quest games. In Dragon Quest VIII there is one visible "set" for Hero and a few for Jessica, but I'd love to see them all. I want to stomp about in full "Metal King" garb.

Yeah, I know, pathetic isn't it? I'm ashamed at myself for seeing that!

Gargh, this is really childish, and it feels wrong to type it on Easter Sunday, but since the "w" and "k" are more prominent, you can fill in the blanks to make a rude word! I also thought the last bit might have been "fan boy". But no, really good.

I picked this up about a week ago. To be perfectly honest, I forgot it existed. Then I saw nando was playing it and I got a sudden urge to buy it. When it was released, I was snobbish about it, ie "just a spin-off". However, when I thought how much I like Dragon Quest VIII, it seemed crazy not to play it. Anyway, I'm pleased to say the style of localisation is intact from DQVIII, with eloquent dialogue and many of the same voice actors. It even has Michael from Alan Partridge! The trademark Dragon Quest humour is there too. I was absolutely in stitches at "Stiletto", the man who runs the mini-games, and was very surprised when the blacksmith made me a sword and said "Ah yes, that looks the dog's on you!" This is still the only DQ game that has been on a machine more powerful than the PS2, and so it's a great thrill for me to see all the monsters upgraded. Same goes for all the sound effects and items. It's bliss! I think the world of Dragon Quest releases loads of endorphins in me, because nothing else makes me feel quite that way! When I saw you can forge the Dragovian King Sword from Dragon Quest VIII, I was even more excited! The gameplay is good and thrilling, although I hit a low point when I failed on Chapter 8. It's too long, making it very frustrating if you fail on the final boss. It is also a massive grind getting all the items for the forging. You have to replay the same areas far more times than you would in a normal RPG. Still, I'll go back to it and forge all those swords eventually!

They're really good Retro. Are you trained in graphic design? I think that's what I want to get into. I love the colours, and something else about them is very pleasing - not sure if it's the "composition" as such, but I like the fullness. Is the 2nd one meant to be cheeky/smutty or is it just my dirty mind? No offence intended - it probably is just me!!

Whoa, is that a lenticular popster? I like it!

I don't doubt it, Daft, I'm not knocking any of the machines. What I was getting at, and this link today has confirmed what I thought, is that the current gen is limited in its 3D abilities, whereas next gen machines will be built to do it in their stride: http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=241190

I think it's just an old label. I just got mine today for £20, so thanks very much for that, Owen.

Good thread, MCJ. My attitude to this (and this is where I disagree with Microsoft) is that discs will definitely still be needed for the next-gen consoles. For me, it's not an "ownership" issue, it's just that the reality is that developers are beginning to take advantage of BluRay. Plus, top notch games will always need more storage space than downloadable titles. Even quite simple games like Punch Out apparently use a whole DVD. It doesn't matter how long a game is; if a developer wants to push the graphics and sound to the max, they need a disc. When you think how small (file size) WiiWare games are compared to BluRay, I just can't see next-gen games being 100% downloadable, as the likelihood is that they'll be even bigger than BluRay allows. Hopefully games will be exactly the right length, with a more flexible pricing structure, so developers don't feel they have to pad it out. Hopefully there will always be single player. The issue generally with online is that they still can't assume every player has it. BT is just starting to offer fibre-optic broadband, and that will by no means be standard anytime soon. Plus (and I think this is very important), people play consoles in bedrooms, so if they don't want to pay for an extra socket or leave the Wi-Fi on overnight, they can barely use the online features. Online offers a great deal, but it's not as standard as a lot of gamers think it is. Oh, I hope so. Games seem very adolescent to me at the moment. Imagine all the experiences we could have in games, and yet most of the time it's just war and shooting. Hopefully Heavy Rain has proved people want more interesting games, and that sometimes does mean cutting-edge graphics, not just unusual games like World of Goo. There's no need. I sense a great apathy towards films, actually. Much more accepted. Gamers are very defensive about games being attacked, but I remember the '90s and there was great controversy over the films Reservoir Dogs and Trainspotting. Now we can have Saw and very few people object. The masses will accept gaming very, very soon. Yes! Motion controls, whilst OK, do not actually make gaming any more fun! How could anyone think motion controls are better than good processing power and dual analogue? I don't get it. Optional 3D as standard (with glasses). In fact, I'm sure that'll be the main hook of the PS4 and Xbox 3. It all relies on when 3DTVs become £1,000-ish. They're "only" £3,000 now, whereas I seem to recall SD plasmas were £40,000 when they were new, so maybe they'll be emerging by 2012 like HD was in 2005. There are three other things to consider, though: 1) With multi-core as standard, developers might move onto better graphics techniques, like ray-tracing. 2) This wouldn't happen until a generation after 3D, but HD standards higher than 1080p are emerging. Maybe something for the PlayStation 5? 3) Lenticular 3D screens might improve and become popular for the PS5 generation, but I don't think we'll have glasses-free 3D before then (on home consoles). Yeah, Super Guide is a big step forward. There needs to be more intelligent game design, with things like infinite lives, good checkpoints and a sophisticated hint system. The challenge should be easy to attempt, even if it's difficult to master. Why should we be punished for failing something by being put back to the start of the level (or worse)? If you think about it, it makes no sense.

Gah, I just searched for "Cosmic Luigi, Honeyhive" on YouTube and accidentally found a complete cheat for that race. I don't mind watching how others do it properly, but I'd feel a cheat if I used that. Must resist...

I was thinking about the next Nintendo console... Sony and Microsoft are very keen on 3D, so it's likely their next consoles will be built to render all the games as such (incidentally, this is the first indication that the PS3 and Xbox 360 are slightly "outdated"). Nintendo do not like 3D glasses so, as consoles use TVs, it is highly unlikely the "Wii 2" will have 3D capabilities as standard. Therefore, could Nintendo use this as an opportunity to catch up technically? If the Wii 2 had the same processing power as the PS4 and Xbox 3, it could have better graphics because it would only be in 2D. The other day I was in PC World and a Pixar film was playing on a large HD screen (it was one of the "Cars" films, don't know if there's more than one). The main car was racing along at night and there was a railway track with a train approaching. If Nintendo could research graphics like that instead of 3D (maybe ray-tracing), then I feel we could have a big jump like the N64 again.

I've completed Worlds 1, 2 and 3 100%, didn't have a problem with any of them. Visually, World 1 was my favourite, but World 3 was for gameplay. If there's ever been anything more fun in a 2D platformer than flying on the rocket, I don't think I've played it! It could even teach Mario a thing or two. World 3-10 Challenge is the ultimate rocket course, very thrilling! I'm not enjoying World 4 as much, although the shield is very good and I'd be very surprised if this doesn't end up as my No.2 Wii game. I'm finding World 4-2 Challenge (with the cannons) the first really frustrating bit, which is a shame.

I'm going to buy it, but I just don't have time to play it right now. By the time I do get round to playing it, it'll likely be £20, so the sad reality is it just makes sense for me to get it later.

What if... the next Nintendo console and games were 1080p, 3D and as good as a Pixar film? That'd do it for me! I'm not being facetious either, I'm genuinely trying to think of what could better that "wow". As good as the N64 was, we had played polygon games before, like Star Fox on the SNES. As for getting Luigi's Stars before Galaxy 2 is out, I'm thinking of doing that too. The problem is, whereas I thought it'd be as easy as with Mario, the Cosmic Luigi races at least are far harder. I would say getting Luigi's Stars is harder than completing Mario Sunshine 100% (making Galaxy the hardest 3D Mario game).

I feel like I agree with you, and yet I played through Dragon Quest VIII twice (a very long game) and want to play it again! Arguably RPGs need a certain amount of journey. Zero Mission is certainly a good example of a short, high-quality game though. I've completed it on Normal and Hard (Easy as well, I think, just for fun) and I've kept it so I can play it again. If it had filler in it, I wouldn't be so fond of it. Probably the secret is to make a game 100% fun. If it's boring or tedious, it's not worth putting in. If that means it's more suitable as a download or as an (intended) £20 packaged product, then so be it. Sometimes I just want to play a simple 2D game, although good graphics are important to me. No. There are only two series that I will buy on release, and they are Zelda and Dragon Quest (main series only and excluding remakes). Mario is a "£30" affair, because I know it will come down to that, but likely no cheaper.

I agree, although I have a massive penchant for Delfino Plaza. The map worlds in New Super Mario Bros would be better if they were based on Super Mario World rather than Super Mario 3.

Femininity, surely? It's Samus!