Ben-DutkaBeing a die-hard fan of the turn-based RPG since the early PlayStation days, if you had told me the best such title of the current generation would be on the Xbox 360 – and exclusively on the 360 – I would've laughed. Really, really hard.
But in looking back, I have to say it might be possible. Traditional turn-based has mostly died out on consoles (even if it still exists in the smaller downloadable realm), and maybe the last great pure turn-based RPG was Lost Odyssey . I was thinking about it today, and I recalled a great many unbelievable memories.
In addition to a good story, decent characters, great pacing, and a combat mechanic that absolutely never go told, I'd say the game shined in another area: The writing of the dream sequences. Such writing is almost nonexistent in the video game realm; it's clear that a professional penned them, and I kept thinking the publisher should release all those stories in book form. They'd only qualify as very short stories but even so, they were amazing for the interactive entertainment world.
And I have to say, the game proved that a turn-based system can and does work in this brave new world of flashier graphics and faster-paced gameplay. There's an accessibility to it that's combined with significant depth and a fair amount of strategy, and this is the main reason why turn-based remains superior in my opinion. You can throw any quasi-turn-based or deep real-time system at me, and I can show you at least a half-dozen reasons why traditional turn-based has it all beat. Having played nearly 50 RPGs in my day, I'll give a whole lot of compare-and-contrast examples.
And Lost Odyssey really vindicated those thoughts, I think. It had a great atmosphere and it kept me coming back for more, in a way that no RPG has done since. Honestly, it's weird to say, but if you're a hardcore old-school RPG fan like me, you might almost want to buy a 360 for this game. Yes, I'm quite serious.
I loved and play the crap out of Lost Odyssey. I think I only missed like 2 achievements. Anybody that hasn't played it should. I would probably say yes it is the best turn-based RPG this gen.
Possibly. I'd say it's a tie between this and Dragon Quest lX.
Dragon Quest lX probably takes the cake by a tad because of the traditional world map, TLO only had a semi-free and semi-traditional world map.
However, TLO definitely has story over Dragon Quest lX. So i guess if you prefer total tradition of turned based battling, free world map etc then DQ JX. If you want a good story to go with that turned based battling, then TLO.
That's my take.
But there has hardly been any turned based JRPGs this gen, so there isn't much competition.
I've been playing Dragon Quest IX recently, how they managed to produce such a high quality game on a DS is beyond me. I have found the story to be a little flat so far, each area with a Fygg seems to have it's own story, I prefer my RPG's to have one big story with twists and turns. I just got all the Fygg's so I am hoping the story will pick up now.
Are all the Dragon Quest games like IX, in having the main story in the background and new little stories arising or is it only in IX due to nature of the MMO. Also are the protagonists always none talking once again I can see why in IX for is MMO route, but I also played a bit of VIII and it was the same.
Yep. DQ is all about the straight out traditional. It's remained as traditional as an RPG can get since the 1st on the NES. They were never about great plots. Not all are as good as Vlll or lX. Those two were made by Level 5 to much success, the others were done by multiple different developers (but with the same key personnel) such as ArtePiazza, Chunsoft, Heartbeat and now S-Enix have their hands on it and surprise, surprise are upsetting fans by turning it into a strict MMO exclusive to Wii, killing most of it's traditional hook.
I'd say DQVll was the best non-Level 5 installment.
A game like DQ but with a hugely deep plot that has been described as the best an RPG has seen in a very long time is coming soon, exclusive to PS3 called Ni No Kuni – developed by Level 5. However, a traditional turned based battle system is not used in this game, it is an active turned based.
Anyway, try TLO if you get hold of a 360, i think it'll be completely for you.
Ah right, thanks for explaining, see I have also bought IV, V & VI for the DS (We never got VII in the UK). Which I look forward to tucking into.
I have been looking into Ni No Kuni and yes it looks gorgeous, the battle system with creatures instead of characters has me in doubt, but I enjoyed Pokemon and that aspect of XIII-2 so I am sure I will get into it.
I have played Lost Odyssey, a fantastic game no doubt, possibly the only 360 game I wish we had on the PS3.
DQVIII has just about everything beat. Didn't play DQIX…I just refuse to play it on a handheld.
@Ultima
I'm UK too, i got an import copy of DQVll.
I've read many people's accounts of the Ni No Kuni battle system who were initially in doubt, whilst i'm always going to be sure it won't work for everyone, every doubters account i have read has come back a believer. I'd prefer a traditional turned based system definitely, but i'm also up for something new as long as strategy is involved and what i've read and seen has me very much assured.
Based on what i know of Ni No Kuni, it'll be the best Jrpg of the generation. It has all the makings of that genius we all miss…..besides…..STUDIO GHIBLI!!
I agree, i think Mistwalker are so overdue on a PS3 game.
@Ben
Well, i prefer console too….but there's no way i'm passing up a DQ game. Thankfully, the game turned out almost on par with mighty Vlll making it one of the best of the gen and an RPG among the classics of all time.
Last edited by Lotusflow3r on 8/1/2012 7:47:06 PM
A book based on A Thousand Years of Dreams sequence is released in Japan. Maybe a translated version can be found in the internet.
YES! I love Lost Odyssey I never thought it would best either I thought it was a the beginning of many more to come. The story,characters, and gameplay LO had it all. I still don't understand why turn-based has died out. I keep wondering if Atlus has abandon it in P5.
I always wanted to try Lost Odyssey, but just never got around to it. I will try to get to it sometime. I'm sure it's going for pretty cheap nowadays.
I know it's sad, but I don't think I've played one turn based RPG this gen.
Yep, Lost Odyseey is good stuff. I'm pretty far into disc 2. Well, I think I'm pretty far into it. I have my boat and stuff. Anyway, it's great. I absolutely agree with Ben about the memory sequences. They're really well written. I think what makes them so special is that they're very eastern in theme with their cultural religious/ethical views and the person who handled the translation managed to make it masterfully read to our native language but still excellently delivered the soul of it's meaning. It doesn't feel like Final Fantasy The Spirits Within, where the dialogue and screen play felt very western but the plot had this buried eastern design that felt forced to me. Can't say I've read stuff quite like it before and I do think it;s the game's most defining quality. Everything else is good, some things better than others, like the voice acting is sub-par, sometimes poor, but the game play is excellent. The turn-based combat is excellent and another real strong element of it's design.
Sorry if this reads like crap, I'm half watching women's diving 😉
Turn based RPG's were always popular. Just not as popular as Call of Duty. Developers want CoD levels of sales, so they abandon old fans to try and entice the CoD crowd. Sadly, Turn-based RPG's were ditched in the process.
The fans of those old games are still here, and we're still waiting for a game worthy of Lost Odyssey, Xenoblade Chronicles and Final Fantasy's VI – X.
Sales of Rainbow Moon should be a pretty decent indicator of demand for turn based strategy RPG's. If sales are good, a promising future. If sales are poor, goodbye beloved gaming genre.
Rainbow Moon is a srpg so that gives it an even smaller group. I want the game but have just stopped buying PSN games because I'm tired of getting games from Plus and owning most of them.
I have a feeling I would buy it and then a month later it would be given away in Plus.
White Knight Chronicles.
Forget the common wisdom, and give the game a chance. WKC2 is turn based and those that play it, love it. Those that hate it, will hate it whether they eve play it or not. Much like the PS3 itself, WKC2 has come in for some extremely harsh criticism that is unmerited, and is subject to a negative spin that guarantees prejudice against it.
It has a decent story (no better nor worse that a typical JRPG), a deep skills system, a synthesis system that allows the creation of many hundreds of different items. Turn based combat with a more fluid active time flow in battle. You can explore, go back to old locations, there are NPCs galore, many errands and other side missions. You can great your own town, there is online questing with parties of up to 6 questing with each other, there are online guilds, and a whole raft of additional items that came in a wave of new quests along with the guild system. You can easily sink several hundred hours into this game, and still find more to do.
It not Final Fantasy, nor does it ever try to be. The character creator has great depth, and you can choose whatever class you want for your avatar. At the end of the day, you can make the game whatever you want it to be. Once the story is over, the online begins and that is where the game shines.
You all can lament Lost Odyssey all you like. I'm very happy with WKC, and I suspect many more JRPG fans would be, if they could actually give it a fair chance. Kind of late in the day now though…
I have to admit I was really watching the original game closely as it approached it's release. I remember downloading japanese trailers for the game off of the Jap PSN store well before it's US release. I really thought it'd be better received by critics after I saw the cool CG scenes and great sounding music but alas few gave it praise and it sort of suppressed my desire. I do still plan to snag WKC2 when I can find it cheap and have the spare money for it. I'm not one to get involved in online RPG style play, but I'd be satisfied if the core adventures were strong enough.
WKC and WKC2 are good, but I really think Lost Odyssey is just more polished, with a much better story and better characters. I also think it's more traditional.
Have you played it? It's pretty amazing. I do agree that both WKC games were unfairly judged by most critics, though.
Sadly not Ben, I would love to have played Lost Odyssey, but I have no 360 to play it with, and never have had one.
Highlander has put more time into the WKC series than anyone else, it's all I see him playing.
WKC and WKC2 were absolutely fantastic RPG's. When I got WKC2 I started from the beginning of WKC on the disc, even though I had already played through it. I played those games for absolutely ever. WKC series is up there on my favorite RPG's of all time list.
Last edited by Evil Incarnate on 8/1/2012 9:03:16 AM
I played WKC and I didn't like it but I do agree the critics were harsh their hard on all jrpgs.
Yea i think Lost Odyssey asthe bet turned based RPG i'e payed this gen nd WK is a lose 2nd… I think Blue Dragon was pretty good too
LV, I'm a guild leader, I lead by example. My guild made the top 10 of WKC2 guilds outside Japan, and continues to grow and build. Yeah, I play the game a lot, but I get a lot out of it too.
Highlander, I didn't mean it in a negative way. I've been putting in 20hrs of SC2 a week. I was just pointing out that you're getting the most out of your purchase of WKC2.
Also congrats, I've heard about your greatness in the game from others.
White knight chronicles? The guild rank grinding the materials needed to flourish a town you pay simple cash for? your kidding right?
And I'm talking about wkc 1. Not 1 of the major gaming site reviewed wkc2. Ign, gamespot, g4's xplay. You had to go on this site or youtube to see reviews for wkc2. And there were no advertisements for the game period. Really? an exclusive soe game.
What? Did we get the game 1 year and a half after japan got theirs? It's funny and sad because it seem to have all of the elements of an mmo?
The storyline in wkc1 is cheesy. People go on and on about ff7. Blue dragon plays just like ff7 to a t? But, there are no random less battles. You actually see the enemies in this turn based game.
Now, the kicker to this game, is that there are 6 to 8 classes you can put each character in. Aren't typical japanese rpg's game characters have their strengths and weaknesses in dps, magic, healing etc.? That rule is almost thrown out entirely. And the game is gorgeous to boot.
Hey, if you like wkc good for you, take care.
Im not trying to rag on you or anything, but it was difficult to make sence of your post. After you type out your post, take a deep breath and read over it again before you send it. You were barely able to put together a sentence there.
Last edited by Jed on 8/1/2012 1:17:36 AM
Lost odyssey is one of the handful of games on 360 I would really like to play, but I can't justify spending that kind of money for what would no doubt be less than 10 games that I would ever own for the system. I'm a freak about having multiple saves due to experience with corrupt saves, so I'd have to have a hard drive, but there is now way I'm spending $300 on a system for so few games.
Last time I counted all the exclusive games on 360 I wanted to play I think it was only 5 games, they were all rpgs, but it just isn't enough. Maybe some day I'll figure out a way to get one cheap, but it doesn't seem likely.
I haven't played LO, so for me Valkyria Chronicles was the best turn base RPG. I think this game is top ten games this Gen no question…
Valkyria Chronicles was better than most games this gen, not just JRPG's/SRPG's. God I wish they would have brought the sequels to the PS3. Valkyria Chronicles was definitely the best RPG this gen!
"but if you're a hardcore old-school RPG fan like me, you might almost want to buy a 360 for this game. Yes, I'm quite serious ".
What you mean ALMOST , it was nt the only reason i bought a 360 but it was the game i wanted the most and the one that probably sealed the deal .
My only complain was that there was nt any flashy move unique to each character .There was nt much i was looking forward too in that department and that always a – for me .
I like Lost Odyssey a lot, it is the one 360 game I would love to cross over to the PS3. But I honestly think you might be overselling it Ben.
The story was good, but nothing to match the quality of FF's prime. I cannot be the only one who found it very cheesy at times.
The battle system is good, but I have to admit I disliked having to select all the parties attacks in a row first then watch it intermix with the enemies attacks. Much prefer FF's active time battles.
But the thing I dislike about Lost Odyssey the most is the the dream sequences. It's just an incorrect use for a visual medium. I wouldn't mind a page or two but each sequence could go on for over half an hour if you really gave them the time. I find this as bad as Final Fantasy XIII hiding it's depth in those Logs. a story in a game/movie should be to experience not read up on.
They're my main gripes with the game other than that I really like it, It caught a great atmosphere, a real sense of adventure which in my eye is key for RPG's. It has plenty of towns mini-games, secret dungeons and a world map even though it was a ship & not to run on
I was still mighty impressed.
I like Lost Odyssey a lot, it would probably be in my top 10 games this gen, but I have to say I liked Final Fantasy XIII, Nier & The Last Story more. But in my eye they're all fantastic games so thee is nothing wrong with that.
Hey Ultima, I know you loved XIII like I do,but have you already read the Episode 0 and Episode 1 novel of FFXIII? If not here's a link (http://dilly-shilly.blogspot.com/search/label/Final%20Fantasy%20XIII)
Final Fantasy was hardly in its prime this generation, so I'm not sure why you're using that as a comparison. Especially because I'm only referring to this generation as per the title.
Also, the title says "turn-based." Nier doesn't qualify and FFXIII doesn't, either, from a traditional standpoint.
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 8/1/2012 10:10:33 AM
one thing ill never understand.
M$ paid shedloads to have this game, and many more made exclusive for the system because they wanted to break into the japanese market.
and they are held in such high regard, why were there not more of them?
why is M$ the only ones trying to push them!?
its funny, M$ are the only ones who realise there are gamers in japan who like distinct styled of games!
a american company can make a japanese game, but a japanese developer cant.
sigh.
M$ teaching $E how its done, now theres on thing i thought id never say!
🙁
The fact that this is not only a discussion but most likely true shows how badly this generation has been to us RPG fans.
I added you on steam I think…are you PixyStyx? Its the same picture as you have on here.
By the way my steam ID is not Xenris it is Pulse with a black background and a green pulse running through it. I'll add you again in case its messing up.
As for the topic….most of my friends are on board with Lost Odyssey being the best RPG this generation if you like the pure old school feel. I didnt get to play it before my xbox decided to explode on me.
Yup that's me. I will check for your friend request when I get on Steam later today.
Sadly, even though the game itself may have been great it's sales weren't. The same seems to have also been true for Tales of Vesperia and Blue Dragon. It looks like the Xbox 360 isn't a favorable platform for JRPGs. On the other hand many of the PS3 exclusive JRPGs have been successful. I'm convinced that the lion's share of the JRPG supporters are in the PS3's camp (which might explain why the PS3 version of FFXIII sold significantly more copies) and now the PS3 has more JRPGs on the way while the same isn't true for the Xbox 360 as far as I know.
If Lost Odyssey had been released as a PS3 exclusive and after the release of the PS3 Slim then I think things would have turned out much better for it. Sadly that's not what happened.
Last edited by Looking Glass on 8/1/2012 6:50:04 AM
Heck, if they just released in for PC… I played it on the 360 and it's absolutely brilliant. But going for one console only wasn't the best idea.
Of course, since it was massively funded by Microsoft, the situation is basically the same as the original Mass Effect. So a PS3 version was out of the question from the get go. Which is unfortunate, since this is the console where lies the biggest concentration of classic style RPG gamers.
This is why I don't like platform exclusivity. it's not in the best interest of us gamers. Had this been a wrpg and I had to buy a x360 to enjoy it I'd be straight up pissed.
Last edited by Beamboom on 8/1/2012 9:24:27 AM
I don't have a problem with platform exclusive games. When done right they elevate the game in every way possible, something the PS3 exclusives have certainly been able to do. One of the negative byproducts is sometimes there are games I don't get to play since I don't own the system they're on but thankfully it's seldom the case.
Yeah, it's cool as long as the titles are released for your platform of choice of course, but I'd much rather play a slightly lesser version of a game than not be able to play the game at all, or be forced to buy a dedicated hardware for that title.
Like I said, if this were a wrpg I'd be mighty pissed.
Last edited by Beamboom on 8/1/2012 10:17:04 AM
Beamboom: You're going to be more pissed when I tell you that Lost Odyssey doesn't necessarily embody every element that makes it a "JRPG." It's not anime and in my eyes, it actually has more of a Western accent and flair.
The art style is actually unique, I think, and not distinctly Japanese at all.
As for platform exclusivity, like LV, I'm all for it. There's a reason why exclusives are simply the best games of the generation; if a developer only has to focus on one platform, invariably and logically, the result will be something special. See: Uncharted. 😉
I would NOT want a "lesser version" of Uncharted just so it could squeeze onto the 360 somehow. I want the full groundbreaking vision of Naughty Dog and if that requires only one console (as it did with Heavy Rain), I'll stick with that. Exclusives push this industry, I say.
EDIT: I will add, however, that Lost Odyssey most certainly could've been on the PS3.
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 8/1/2012 10:36:28 AM
"Yeah, it's cool as long as the titles are released for your platform of choice of course"
No it's cool regardless since I have the option to own more than one console. I can count the number of 360 exclusives I've done without on one hand while the number of PS3 exclusives I've had the pleasure of enjoying would take more limbs than I have to count.
"but I'd much rather play a slightly lesser version of a game than not be able to play the game at all"
You're treating this topic as though it's one or the other. I'd much rather have the option to play the best version of a game rather than a watered down experience for those that would rather only own one gaming platform. Again you're inability to play an exclusive is your choice.
LV, you see this from a practical perspective while for me it's the principle here. In practical terms we agree – but more about that at the end here.
A different but related topic I'd like to mention in these respects is the goal that multiplat titles have to be as equal across the platforms as possible. What kind of rubbish is that? Why can't the developers instead go for making the best possible version on the individual platforms? Like with blu-ray: Why not use the advantage of extra storage capacity on their ps3 version of the software? It's silly!
You're a PC gamer too. How silly wouldn't it be if all games were written to appear equal across all different hardware specs? It would be ridiculous, right? I think the same in regards to the consoles. Make them the best you can on each individual consoles, instead of striving for equality!
Technically there's nothing keeping Naughty Dog from making a X360 or PC version of their games. It would not need to have any impact on the PS3 version at all. There would be *plenty* of reusable components that would benefit the development of the other versions.
But I am now talking theoretical and technical, not practical. I do of course realize that platform exclusivity is a tool in order to sell your hardware platform. Of course it is. And without the budgets made possible for the sole purpose of being platform exclusive we would quite possibly never have seen some of those games at all, at least not with the same production values.
So yeah, in practical terms I agree, the platform exclusives is a part of the console game. I just don't like that particular side of the console business. I guess I'm just not used to it. 🙂
Last edited by Beamboom on 8/1/2012 2:25:35 PM
Beam,
You're starting to argue about this like a politician would… 🙂
Multiplatform games tend to not be equal, there is usually a better version between the platforms. Just look at Bayonetta as an example.
Comparing the way PC games are developed in order to utilize a broad range of hardware with PS3/360 multiplatform development is an error on your part. The architecture between the 360/PS3 as well as their being consoles does not allow for the type of harmony you see between different PC specs. The 360 is basically a poor man's PC while the PS3 is a unique beast. This is why not only do you see a lot of so called 360 "exclusives" appearing on PCs but the development time not taking nearly as long as one might expect.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make in regards to ND being able to make a game for the 360 or PC. This argument isn't about the ability of the developer to make multiplatform games but rather the importance 1st party developers play in creating AAA titles thanks to exclusive support.
I'm surprised you're not used to there being exclusives, they've been around since the start of videogames.
Hehe!
You take care of the practical views while I try to make a principal point here. 🙂
In practical terms it is of course a completely different challenge to develop a game for the PC platform. That wasn't my point.
And I too say that the 1st party developers are obviously an important tool for the hardware platform they represent, especially for Sony.
But take the Bayonetta example: Don't you think they *tried* to make them equal? It's not like they wanted to make longer loading times, sluggish controls and unstable framerate on the ps3 version. It just ended up that way, due to whatever reasons.
Notice all the PR guys from the different companies, what are they all talking about when it comes to their ps3 versus their x360 versions? They insist on them being *equal*! It's the first thing they say! And that's how it goes from *all* executives.
And then you got the console gaming websites, also with a focus on the question "are the versions equal?". Do our version have the same framerate? How are the graphic… Are they equal? Can we sense a slight difference in the colours? How are the shadows? Equal?
In regards to me not being used to the exclusives: The thing is that up until the PS3 I never owned any consoles! I did all my gaming on PCs so the console exclusives simply did not exist. I never knew about them, never cared about console games at all.
So back then, to me the idea of a new game coming out that I could not play on my machine were unthinkable, with the rare exceptions of some Mac games that popped up now and then, but they were all crap anyway.
Last edited by Beamboom on 8/1/2012 2:59:36 PM
"But take the Bayonetta example: Don't you think they *tried* to make them equal? It's not like they wanted to make longer loading times, sluggish controls and unstable framerate on the ps3 version. It just ended up that way, due to whatever reasons."
I'm sure they put some effort into both games but they certainly dropped the ball in regards to the PS3 port. The "whatever reasons" are examples of what happens when someone is doing a multiplatform game. I hope by now you realize this.
"Notice all the PR guys from the different companies, what are they all talking about when it comes to their ps3 versus their x360 versions? They insist on them being *equal*! It's the first thing they say! And that's how it goes from *all* executives."
Not sure your point with this. Of course the PR is going to spin information in whatever way its been predetermined to help their game sell on each system.
"In regards to me not being used to the exclusives: The thing is that up until the PS3 I never owned any consoles! I did all my gaming on PCs so the console exclusives simply did not exist. I never knew about them, never cared about console games at all."
I find it hard to believe you didn't hear/know about game series like MGS,Final Fantasy, Mario, Halo. Whether or not you owned a console doesn't mean you live in a bubble free from outside exposure.
"So back then, to me the idea of a new game coming out that I could not play on my machine were unthinkable, with the rare exceptions of some Mac games that popped up now and then, but they were all crap anyway."
Again I find it hard to believe you were unaware of some of the console games you were missing out on. I'd say the position you chose (only owning a PC) is far worse than the type of situation you're attempting to describe with console multiplatform. There are far more games released among the top three consoles than for PC so by your own admission you've missed out on a majority of what gaming has had to offer up till this generation.
Of course I've missed out on a lot – but I didn't know that back then!
And believe it or not (and I see you don't 😉 ) but Final Fantasy – to me – was primarily a mediocre animated movie that I knew were based on a game, but knew nothing about the game(s) other than the name.
Metal Gear Solid were *completely* unknown for me. I might have heard the name somewhere sometime, but nothing I took notice of.
Mario I knew of course – my *mother* know of him. But I have never played a Mario game. I knew Halo was a shooter but that's all.
Ben too got very surprised back when I first told him about this. Back then I tried to explain it something like this:
If you are not a mobile gamer, you probably don't know about great games like Uniwar, Great Big War Game, Apparatus or Osmos. And why would you have any interest in hearing about them? You don't play mobile games anyway! Why should you care?
And now that you've heard me mention those titles; if someone in 3-4 months time ask if you've heard about Osmos you'll probably say no cause you don't remember me mentioning that title here now.
It's the same with me: I could not care less about console games cause I could not play them anyway. They were just as interesting to me as mobile games are to you (I now presume they are of no interest to you – I'm not aware if you do). If you catch my drift?
Last edited by Beamboom on 8/1/2012 4:02:12 PM
I just came to think of something: I'm really not unique in these regards! Cause at my work pretty much everyone are gamers (I work for a software development company: Ergo a bunch of geeks) and although some also own a console it's a clear preference for PC gaming.
And I am so often surprised by how little they are aware of console titles. When they ask what I did in the weekend and I say I played for instance Infamous 2 they all look like question marks, "never heard of it…".
And if I say I played Battlefield 3 they go like, "ah, so you've finally got yourself a gaming rig?! Awesome!".
But I can totally understand them. You basically only care about things that are of value to yourself. It's usually like that, isn't it?
Last edited by Beamboom on 8/1/2012 4:32:33 PM
Beam you keep using examples that are either way off base or have little to no relevance in this argument. You're suggesting my knowledge of mobile gaming in comparison to your knowledge on console gaming is absurd. It would be like my asking you about your knowledge of Bollywood movies in comparison to Hollywood movies. Besides mobile gaming is a rather new form of media, console gaming has been around longer than I've been alive and I'm 30.
Console gaming have been the most popular form of gaming for several decades so your repeated point of being blind to them does not help your argument. In fact you've continued to move away from the original argument!
I'd like to know where you live (country) and how old you are because I'm baffled that you're a gamer yet unaware of rather common things in regards to the gaming community.
BTW I mean no disrespect.
Last edited by LimitedVertigo on 8/1/2012 4:46:15 PM