Sovereign37 asks, I heard a rumor about EA, AKI, and Def Jam records

getting together and making a wrestling game. If this is true, I would like

confirmation. If it's not, please break it to me gently. Coming off of playing

and promptly returning WrestleMania X8 because it wasn't AKI that developed it,

this news if true, and even if it doesn't have WWE characters in it, would make

me very happy and hopefully teach THQ a lesson for breaking what didn't need to

be fixed.

Mike H. Says: For what it's worth, I agree about the

WrestleMania X8. After being trained and spoiled with the AKI engine for so

long, X8 was completely foreign and I couldn't play it for long periods.

The AKI engine is alive and well, and the rumors are true about the Def Jam

wrestling game that will feature a number of artists under Def Jam contract. In

fact, we know that filming of said artists happened as recently as 2 months ago

to get their body language and movement recorded. We don't have any kind of

release schedule at this point.

Mike O. Says: As I MAY have mentioned in my review of

WrestleMania X8, I too have sorely longed for the AKI engine, and thankfully

it's coming back to the GameCube (and PS2). As far as release, I originally

heard November/December, but I'm getting the feeling it'll get pushed back to

early 2003, considering they still haven't really unveiled it, short of giving

the Official PlayStation Magazine one screenshot to work with. But thank Jebus

it is coming.

Jonathan Says: Should be a good game if they take the obvious

approach and make it funny as hell.

DDT asks, I remember some time ago that Iwata made a statement about

Nintendo's commitment to only focusing on games and not on hardware. Now a

friend of mine seems to have recently heard of this statement and now thinks

that Nintendo will like Sega go third party in the next round of the "Console

Wars." I remember from somewhere not exactly sure where, but some said that this

may result with Nintendo giving Game Cube a longer life span. What was your

impression of the statement that Iwata made?

Rick Says: Nintendo said they were going to focus on software,

and not hardware. While it's easy to misinterpret this to mean that they are

abandoning the console market and will only make games, this isn't the meaning.

The quote was taken out of context.

What he meant is that while Sony is pushing ahead with PS3, and Microsoft is

presumably prepping XBOX 2, Nintendo is happy to let the GameCube enjoy it's

normal lifespan. There will be a new Nintendo console when the time is right,

but they aren't going to obsolete their own hardware like Sony plans to.

Mike H. Says: This is a bit of an old issue by this point, but

Iwata's statement was overblown. The comment was referring to the competition's

focuses on technology and hardware, instead of spending that same money on

games, which Nintendo believes is the real bread and butter of the industry.

Would Nintendo EVER go 3rd party? It's easy to say Hell no, but nobody's

psychic. Anyone that's been watching them the last couple years know that

they're been anything but predictable. That said, I don't think it would

actually happen in the short term, and I don't think GameCube is Nintendo's last

platform. The GameCube would have to be an utter failure by the time of its

death before Nintendo would actually go that path, and sales forecasts simply

aren't showing that to be the case, particularly over the next year with an

expected 16 million to be sold by end of March.

Rize Says: As long as it's more profitable for Nintendo to have

their own platform, they're going to have a new one ready for the next

generation. Nintendo sells so many copies of their own hit games that I don't

see them ever being a third party. As a third party, Nintendo would have to

share a large part of what is normally their own profits with the consoles that

the games appear on. And that says nothing of the profits Nintendo gets from all

the third party games that are sold.

Mike O. Says: Hehe, every generation we hear stuff like this

from Nintendo, so this is nothing new. Hearing statements from people like

Yamauchi and Miyamoto (and now Iwata) saying they're not going to release a new

console for 10 years, that their new console will feature the GameCube

controller, etc, is something I personally just chuckle at. There's no way in

hell keeping the GameCube alive until 2010, while the Xbox 2 and PS3 are out,

would be a viable business decision, but we still hear Iwata saying they want to

do that. I don't know why they say stuff like this, perhaps to boost their image

as a gaming company in Japan, because it really doesn't make much sense over

here.

TYP Says: I agree with Mr. Orlando. If Sony can say the PS3

will be 1000x more powerful than the PS2 or something, Nintendo can say the

GameCube will be Nintendo's standard for the next ten years. Boasting is

boasting. It's all to reassure consumers and investors that they've made the

"right choice." Of course, deep down everyone knows it's all bullshit warped

into some sort of confusing tradition reminiscent of 500-year-old biblical

figures and the like.

Jonathan Says: It's silly to compare Sega and Nintendo. Sega

suffered three system failures in a row (Sega CD, 32X, Saturn outside of Japan),

and their follow-up with the Dreamcast was only moderately successful, not

enough to pull them out of the hole. The only unsuccessful stand-alone system

Nintendo has ever had is the Virtual Boy, and they didn't throw enough weight

behind that thing to have lost much money on it. Some of their add-ons haven't

taken off, like the 64DD, but they've taken such a cautious approach with such

experiments that they never took on much financial risk.

In other words, Sega had money problems for years, and their fan base dwindled

down to a small hardcore group that wasn't enough to support their business

model anymore. Regardless of its third-party problems, Nintendo made a fortune

off the N64, and the GameCube is already looking to be considerably more

successful than that system. Plus, Nintendo is so filthy rich that they could

withstand several major failures before having to resort to what Sega did. All

that gossip you hear is really just wishful thinking from OXM and other

trash-talkers who don't base their comments on facts.

Chris says, I've seen on various websites how reviewers refer to cel-shading

as a passing fad, or as a peaking fad. One person even complained that it was

done to death, which struck me as ironic, considering that what's really done to

death, if anything, is the rather odd concept of making realistic 3D worlds and

putting 3D rendered cartoon characters into them, which if you think about it is

rather strange. It sometimes makes the characters look like claymation or as

though they are made out of plastic.

People however are pretty horrible at predicting the future. It was once

believed that all 3D games would play like first-person shooters, since it was

difficult to control your character accurately in a 3D world. Then there were

games like Super Mario 64. It was once believed that FMV games such as Dragon's

Lair, in which you merely watched video clips and had little actual control,

were the future of video games. It was believed that 2D was dead. In short,

people

really don't know what they're talking about. Have games with first-person

shooter controls (push up to move forward, left and right to turn) gone away?

No. Have FMV games gone away? No. Have 2D games gone away? The runaway success

of the two Super Smash Bros games don't point to that conclusion. These types of

games aren't extinct, nor do they dominate the future of video games.

And so it likely is with cel-shading. Consider that the average person (and I

mean average PERSON, not average heavily-obsessed gamer who knows all the

systems, terms, and technology) has no idea of how powerful game systems. They

assume they can render anything. "Impressive" realistic graphics are not

impressive - they are assumed to be easily possible. Therefore, why would the

average person freak out if a game looks like, say, a painting (Super Mario

Sunshine), or a hand-drawn cartoon (Tales of Phantasia, or Dragon's Lair 3D)?

They might well welcome the new look as a nice change of pace, as something new.

Or at least accept it easily. They won't complain that it "doesn't show off the

power of the system", because they don't know what that power is, and likely

don't care.

New looks are something games can use to stand out from the crowd. Now I admit,

I do enjoy a good looking cartoon appearance, or an artsy painting, such as you

would find on the cover of a fantasy novel. I like art, and therefore am more

open-minded toward new graphic styles. But in the "me too" world of video games,

in which nearly every game is 3D, has no cooperative mode, and looks like a

realistic world with oddly clay-ish looking 3D characters, unusual graphic

styles (and more) can really add a breath of fresh air.

Rize Says: So what's the question?

I agree with you on most points, but I disagree that the average gamer has

ignorant about technology. When I was young, particularly in the 16 bit era, I

knew that my SNES was a "more powerful" system than the Sega Genesis (whether it

was completely true or not). I also knew that there was a limit to the power of

that generation, and that in about five years something would come and blow away

the 16 bit technology in the same way that the 16 bit did to the 8 bit. I'm sure

that anyone who's moved up from a PSX or N64 to a PS2, GameCube, or Xbox (or

even a Dreamcast) is acutely aware that the old systems are graphically

inferior.

As for cel-shading, I think people will see good cel-shading as good graphics.

Since the technology will have been used to accomplish something completely

foreign in look to the usual graphics, they won't have any way to compare the

two. So people will either like the cartoon look, or they won't.

And I'm certain that the runaway success of Zelda will only increase the number

of cel-shaded games that are released in the future.

Mike O. Says: Cel-Shading is definitely not going to go away,

at least not until a new technique comes along that is more appealing and easier

to develop (cel-shading isn't conceived with the touch of a button). Though

developers like Nintendo and Sega will take risks by creating unique games like

Jet Set Radio and Zelda GC using the technique, cel-shading allows developers

who have licenses like Looney Toons, Disney films, or anything that's meant to

replicate a cartoon an easy was to exploit the visual style.

So to answer your question, yes, Blast Processing is here to stay.

Jonathan Says: "Why go to the next level, when you can go

light-years beyond?"

No, cel-shading is not a fad. However, I think the term itself will probably go

out of style soon, because it's too general. What Jet Set Radio pioneered is

quickly becoming a new visual standard, or to be more exact, a new visual

template. Pretty much any game these days that doesn't try to make extremely

realistic graphics is called "cel-shaded", and it's becoming obvious that the

term is being used for games it doesn't really apply to in its original sense.

The truth is that there are many, many variations to the cel-shading technique

that can result in quite disparate results. We're even seeing cel-shaded horror

games (House of the Dead 3). You can use techniques to make a game look like a

cartoon, or a comic book, or a CG film, or a painting, yet these are all lumped

together under the "cel-shading" banner. Well, I don't think games that look

like cartoons or comics or that other stuff are just part of a fad.

Mike Suzuki Says: As much as I'd like to offer a contrary

viewpoint, I can't honestly say that I think cel-shading is going to go away. I

like the look and think it's certainly got a place in gaming. Of course, I also

think it's only a matter of time before some new game comes out with a unique

new graphic approach that becomes the new rage. Once this happens, though, cel-shading

will still be around but people will be hopping on to a new bandwagon and

critics will claim it to be a passing fad. (Rinse and repeat as necessary).

Lots of readers ask, The words out that Nintendo has split ties from Rare.

I just wanted to know your thoughts and opinions on the situation. Do you think

Nintendo made a bad move by letting Rare go? I personally don't mind since Star

Fox is the only Rare game that has been made (and delayed three or four times)

for awhile. What do you think?

Speaking of Rare, what's the status on the Kameo and Killer Instinct licenses?

Mike H. Says: Foremost, I find it silly that fans keep bad

mouthing Rare when Nintendo made the first move. They could have purchased the

company whole, but CHOSE to sell their 49% share back to Rare (and downplay

their value to the media), making the 100% sale to Microsoft possible. Nintendo

did not technically sell their shares to MS. There are 2 different transactions

taking place.

I'm personally going to miss Conker sequels, but that is just about it.

Therefore, I don't see it as a huge loss. Nintendo's own franchises will

obviously live on, and I never became a big fan of Perfect Dark (which belongs

to Rare/MS).

Both Killer Instinct and Kameo, as original Rare creations, are staying with

Rare.

Rize Says: The only thing I'm really worried about in all this

mess is Banjo Kazooie. If Nintendo "steals" this franchise from Rare, I'll be

very angry. I don't believe anyone but the original creators at Rare could do

this franchise justice. As for Perfect Dark, Free Radical's Time Splitters 2

(which is just about ready to hit shelves) will fill that void very nicely

judging by what I played at E3. The game plays exactly as you'd expect a

next-generation sequel to GoldenEye or Perfect Dark to play. I never got to

attached to the Perfect Dark theme or characters.

I'll miss Rare, but then again, maybe I won't. Perhaps I'll just have to buy an

Xbox.

Mike O. Says: It's a very, VERY unique situation that's more

complicated than it may first appear to be. Here's the basic rundown of events.

First, the Stamper Bros. wanted to sell their majority (51%) of the company, and

offered it to Nintendo, whom owned 49% at the time, which would basically

officially make Rare an internal developer, much like NST or Retro. Of course it

seems Nintendo declined the offer, most likely because they felt it would not be

a smart business decision to do so.

The fact is/was, Rare had not released one GameCube or Game Boy Advance game to

this date. Some people would cite the reason for that being Nintendo wanting to

delay Dino Planet and transfer it to the GameCube, and then slap the Star Fox

license slapped onto the game. Others would point out the size of the studio,

and say that's not a valid excuse. Whatever your opinion is on the above,

Nintendo felt Rare just wouldn't be worth spending however much (rumored to be

anywhere from $350-$250 million) to buy the Stamper's shares AND not sell their

own (which would net them $150-$250 million) shares of the company.

And now Microsoft has bought the company fully. Since you're asking my opinion

on the matter, I'd say the deciding factor REALLY boils down to what Nintendo

does with the money. Since Microsoft has secured the Banjo Kazooie, Conker, and

most importantly Perfect Dark (Xbox owners like myself are going to eat that up

if Halo is any indication), Nintendo's really going to need to spend that extra

cash. Yes, they've got a 7 billion dollar war chest, or however much, but with a

label like Rare and a game like Perfect Dark not only leaving your system, but

exclusively appearing for one you're in direct competition in, you've got to

make that money worth something.

With Nintendo recently placing an ad in a Japanese magazine citing a big

announcement in December, rumors of Dragon Quest 8 hitting the system

exclusively would definitely be a HUGE coup for the system (in Japan). If this

is true, then it raises the question of what is more important - Nintendo

striving to be a force in Japan (at least larger than they are now) or Microsoft

beefing up their image in Europe and North America. In my opinion, Microsoft

getting the Perfect Dark license is big, as it will perfectly cater to that

audience, and gamers who are on the fence on whether or not they want the

console, so Nintendo really does have to strike back, and I'm not talking

getting some Japanese third party to develop a new game using one of Nintendo's

licenses/franchises.

TYP Says: Making a fair judgment would require me to know what

Nintendo plans to do with the acquired money. I'm upset to see Rare go, but

perhaps more upset because it won't benefit from Nintendo's small suggestions

that helped make their games legendary. Well, that and the sudden destruction of

the finished Sabrewulf GBA game.

I believe Rare's later N64 games weren't quite as amazing as its earlier efforts

(save for Conker, which sold poorly), but those suddenly proclaiming Rare to be

an average developer are mindless fanboys, either for holding their tongue when

under Nintendo's wing or suddenly changing their opinion. I personally plan to

wait for Rare's games before buying an Xbox. If all I see is Kameo and Perfect

Dark, I may get that PS2 instead after all.

Billy Says: I don't think Nintendo did anything wrong here.

Rare's games weren't bringing in the cash that Nintendo was looking for.

Remember, Nintendo is a business that wants to make money, not just make fanboys

happy.

I'd also like to clarify that I'm not just some "poopy-pants-sour-grapes" fanboy

bitching because Nintendo decided to continue without Rare. I wasn't happy with

Rare games lately either, and obviously...either was the public.

Rare's games were dwindling in quality after Diddy Kong Racing in my opinion. I

enjoyed Conker, Golden Eye, Diddy Kong Racing, and Blast Corps...but that was

about it. Collect-a-thons are not my style of games (and a crap way to make a

game seem longer), so DK64, and BK/BT just made me sick to my stomach.

The majority of team members of what made GoldenEye good has left the company,

and we're getting the fruits of that labor later.

So all in all, I think Nintendo did the right thing. Nintendo has decided to

move on with out Rare. So be it. Looking at what companies like Capcom can do

with Nintendo licenses is remarkable. What Nintendo needs to do is secure some

exclusive big games and/or companies with that money in the next couple of

months and get them cranking out GameCube titles.

If you're so bent out of shape on losing Perfect Dark, Kameo, or the Banjo

series, get an Xbox. It's that simple.

WindyMan Says: Rare is gone. That means Nintendo will be losing

out on one AAA title every year or so. This is not a big loss.

What has Nintendo done lately? How about complete Resident Evil exclusivity?

Sega making the next F-Zero? Namco (who, if you can remember, swore it wouldn't

be making Nintendo games up until about the time Ridge Racer 64 came out) making

the next Star Fox? Both in the arcades? And yeah, there's also the matter of

Square making games for Nintendo as well.

All of you that are saying the loss of Rare is the end of Nintendo are blind

fanboys. Losing Rare is a bit awkward, yes (not as dramatic as losing Square

last time around), but this time, Nintendo went out and got in bed with a lot of

the other elite developers in Japan. Look at the big picture, and Nintendo's way

out in front.

Personally, I really couldn't care less about Rare leaving. I'm getting Star

Fox, I have GoldenEye and Perfect Dark, and I've got plenty of friends with

Xboxes, if I ever see the need to really play some of their new titles. Buying a

system just because of one developer who turns out one game a year is

lunacy...unless, of course, the developer in question is Nintendo.

Jonathan Says: I'll be interested to see if Microsoft lets Rare

be Rare. I'm betting that MS has very specific plans for Rare, and that those

plans will include specific game titles that Rare employees may not really want

to make, plus a plan to speed up development times.

Mike S. Says: I personally am not going to shed one tear over

the "loss" or Rare. They have been getting worse every year. Sure GoldenEye and

Perfect Dark were great. But they also made two Banjo-Kazooie games and Donkey

Kong 64. In my opinion all of those games are trash. There's nothing worse than

the tired collect-a-thon gameplay in Rare's recent platform titles. Conker was

good though. Honestly, I won't miss them at all. They weren't that special.

Anybody can make a boring platform game, and Nintendo has Retro if they need

another blockbuster FPS after Metroid.

Mike Suzuki Says: Like many others, I'm kind of mixed on the

whole Rare situation. On one hand, I'll be sad to see the makers of Blast Corps,

GoldenEye, and Conker go over to the Xbox. On the other hand, it's been over a

year since I've played a new game from Rare and I can't say I've missed them too

much. It's certainly odd thinking that Star Fox Adventures will likely be Rare's

only game for the GameCube. I doubt anyone would've seriously thought this a

year ago when the GameCube debuted.

Overall, I hope Nintendo uses the money well so it can fill the void created by

Rare's departure. I think this should help Microsoft's long term outlook in the

console market, and I'm that much more likely to finally pick up Mr. Bill's big

box...once it goes down to $150.

Rick Says: Since no one seemed to mention them by name, both Kameo and Killer Instinct are both now Microsoft properties.

We have another round of game release updates, since so many people ask about

them. Without further ado, we'll make like a release calendar doesn't exist on

PGC, and share what we know:

1st Party Black GameCube/GBA-Hookup: Don't hold your breath.

What's Factor 5 working on: Something big that won't be release for a

while. Remember who their publisher is.

GameCube Keyboard: The Keyboard Controller should be released along

with PSO Episodes I & II, although we don't think anything has been announced

officially yet, as well as cost. If all else fails, you could import from Japan.

We're pretty sure that one uses the standard QWERTY format. If not, there was a

QWERTY model at E3 this year, so that would further suggest an overseas release.

Hunter: The Reckoning: The current release date is November 19.

Mario Kart: Mario Kart will be at the next E3, probably as Nintendo's

biggest title unless Zelda is delayed beyond May.

GameShark: Interact has been teasing the public for a long time with

screenshots and videos of the GameShark in action on a number of games, but have

delayed the device multiple times. The ETA this time around is for sometime in

November.

NHL 2K3: Slated for a mid November release.