To my much missed pal, Adam

First off, I'm sorry that I didn't get to come to philly on new years... It has been quite a while.

Now for my rant. This goes for anyone else who has funded m$ via purchasing 360. You should have held out.

Considering that all the games worth playing (it's arguable that any of them actually are) right now are available on other platforms with slightly lower resolutions, you may have rushed to a rash judgment when you decided to plunk down $500+ for the Microsoft brand of next generation gaming. Excluding cod2, because I can play it at higher resolutions on my 2 1/2 year old computer (which happens to be a 32bit 2.1ghz processor, with a slightly weaker videocard than the 360) with less lag and more players on the multiplayer server.

If u waited, you could have probably saved the $70 you paid extra, plus however much they will reduce the price, when actually compelling games(read: not BS sports, fps, racing, fighting rehashes) are released and the competition readies their systems. By the way, Gears of war is totally crossplatform (ie: PS3,PC,360,and probably revolution) not to mention it's most likely going to turn out to be just a transparent vehicle for the licensing of their game engine. (just like their last games - "unreal" 1 and 2 and id's doom and quake games... Excluding doom1 and wolfenstein they were actually games and not sales pitches)

Yes I am a videogame enthusiast, it makes up a huge part of who I am. But I may be one of the most critical and discerning enthusiasts you might ever meet.

There was only so many Tony hawk games I could play, and thoroughly enjoy. That goes the same with console first person shooters, action rpgs, sidescrollers, madden football's, gran turismos, grand theft autos, fighters. Everytime I play a game that's just a graphical update and tweaking of an older game I spent hundreds of hours playing, it entertains me less. I can't even tell you how many hours we spent in my basement den, playing goldeneye. It was sickening, I almost never want to see it again.

When someone fires up Halo, I can't play for more than a handful of rounds before I'm bored, because it's such a clone of goldeneye that it's retarded. Madden came out in 1992 on genesis, it was incredibly fun. Every iteration was less fun, until it got the 3D treatment on the psx and n64. It was exciting again, because it once again felt fresh. Alas, then the process started over, everytime you spend your hard-earned cash on the next madden it gets played less and hence has lost some of its value.

There has been a pattern that's worked so far. NES -> SNES/Genesis was the first era of successful home console systems. Then there was the 3D revolution to usher in the second era, N64/saturn/psx -> dreamcast/gamecube/xbox/ps2. The pattern is alternating between revolution and evolution. The SNES generation was just an evolution of the 2D formula. There was a significant increase in pixel pumping power and addition of more buttons to refine the existing gameplay. The PSX generation was a 3D revolution. This generation saw the addition of the 3D processor which totally changed the way games were viewed, and the reintroducing of the analog stick (n64) gave a drastic change in the way the games were controlled. The PS2 generation was an evolution of the 3D formula. Simply an addition of buttons and significant increase in polygon pushing power, which refined the new 3d gameplay. Games were mostly made in 640x480 resolution now (instead of 320x200 which was standard on n64 and psx) and game worlds were larger and more involved (ie. Grand theft auto 3) But right about now, we should be at a juncture awaiting the next extensive change in our videogames.

Well according to Microsoft and to a lesser extent Sony we are about to witness a revolution, the HD Revolution! I have news for everyone... It's not a revolution, its just evolution. This time we're not even getting more buttons. All they want to give us is an increase in resolution and bigger worlds, but they propose that this is a revolution?! Prettier graphics, and larger landscapes. That was the selling points for the PS2. They want me to shell out $400 now, $100 more than last time (BTW, my gamecube was only $199 the first day of sale) AS IF!

I want a real change, and it looks that this time the only option for something actually new is Nintendo. I guess its fitting, Nintendo was the first company to make home videogames a profitable enterprise in the first place. Right after the gamecube was released Nintendo promoted Iwata (the game programmer responsible for super smash brothers) to their acting CEO/President. Since then Nintendo has been talking about how videogames need a kickstart, he knows that games are getting stale. They have proved that they are willing to make systems and games that stray very far from the norm, to attempt to reinvigorate the market (ie: Nintendo DS, pikmin, nintendogs, electroplankton). So when they say that this next generation is to be a revolution, I'm on their wagon.

Adam I don't think less of you or anyone who doesn't have the same jaded outlook as me. I realize I have a pretty unique point of view when it comes to this kind of thing. But god help me, if these companies keep rehashing tired shit that only the Johnny come lately's can stand to play, because they are afraid to risk their bottom lines on actual revolutionary game ideas. All the while they refer to halo and gta3 players as "hardcore gamers". If they were "hardcore"(I am assuming "hardcore gamers" refers to people who spend a serious amount of time playing videogames) they would be so tired of these run of the mill 3d games, because they overplayed that formula... Like me.

Bring me my virtual reality. Bring me my holographic displays. Bring me motion sensing controls. I want the gaming future today. Viva la revolution!