Yeah, instead of X-Box 360... after that stuff about how great the 360 was, etc?
I think, as the article suggests, someone ... convinced ... them that the PS3 is better...
After all, $$$$ is better than $$, right? :)
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=9145
Really, it's sad that we won't be getting any more Rogue Squadron games for Nintendo consoles...
The good news is, we dont get any Lucasarts games either!
Revenge of the Sith is on every system, including incarnations on GBA, DS and PSP. GC gets nothing. What in the hell is going on, why go out of your way to exclude a platform?
They, like a lot of other third parties, obviously beleive that the GC will not make them enough money to make it worth releasing games for it...
At this point, all we can hope for is for things to change with the Revolution. But I'm not holding my breath.
It's a shame that Nintendo lost Factor 5. They were great at using the power of a console to their advantage and I'd imagine that wouldn't have changed with the Revolution. It is funny to see them spurn MS, though, and I'm sure it had a lot to do with money.
The Rogue Squadron games are pretty good... very simple, but fun. Definitely worth getting. And yeah, they really show off how good Factor 5 is with graphics, especially on the Cube... but they've got good solid gameplay backing up those graphics, as well. The best combonation. :)
I paid $15 for RSII.
It was worth it alone just for the first mission.
Yeah, but isn't RSIII a pile of suck?
I paid $50 for RSII and $20 for RSIII... RSIII might not have been worth $50, but for $20 it was definitely worth it. Sure, the on-foot parts are simplistic to the extreme, and really not all that great, but the flying, AT-ST, and speederbike parts are just as good as anything in the other RS games (or BfN), so it's hardly all bad... and it's got that awesome two-player version of the RSII campaign, and some other nice 2-player modes, and the three original Star Wars arcade games hidden in it (the first two being vector graphics...)... so yeah, it was definitely worth the money. Mediocre on-foot parts (I will not say "ground parts" because the walker and speederbike parts (and especially the walker parts) are great...) don't completely ruin the game.
I also like how it's got missions from the films, and how finally they've actually got movie clips in them... I thought that was really cool. :)
What the hell does "spurn" mean?
RSIII was a decent game. The missions weren't as cohesive as they were in RSII. The missions were kind of taken from all over the place and there was no specific story path through them so you didn't get that same sense of accomplishment when beating them. However, the space levels were still incredible and the speeder and walker levels were great as well. The on foot stuff kind of sucked, but there weren't too many of those levels. The cooperative mode for RSII was the best feature of RSIII and easily made it worth the $10 I spent for it.
Private Hudson Wrote:What the hell does "spurn" mean?
A spurn is a body of coal left to sustain an overhanding mass.
Quote:RSIII was a decent game. The missions weren't as cohesive as they were in RSII. The missions were kind of taken from all over the place and there was no specific story path through them so you didn't get that same sense of accomplishment when beating them. However, the space levels were still incredible and the speeder and walker levels were great as well. The on foot stuff kind of sucked, but there weren't too many of those levels. The cooperative mode for RSII was the best feature of RSIII and easily made it worth the $10 I spent for it.
It helps that I love Star Wars... so I loved stuff like the movies before and after some of the missions, and even stuff like some of the on-foot parts because it's stuff out of the movies... :D I mean yeah, it was a bit dissapointing, and the camera was bad, and all you do is mash A a lot and hope you don't get hit much, but... you're going through the first Death Star with Luke! :)
As for cohesiveness of the story, I don't think that the RS games have ever been very good with that. RS1 kind of felt like a series of about 15 disconnected missions, same with the second game... there is some sense of progression, but it's very loose. Honestly, I didn't think it felt very different in the third game...