the Wii and XBOX360 is more of a rip off than PS3, because PS3 is actually worth about $40 MORE than it costs. Sony is not making money on the system, they just want to expand the install base so they can make money on the games. also to maintain console sales until the cost to make PS3 comes below what it cost at retails.

anyone asking for a PS3 price cut is not thinking straight.

i think no one is going to lose with the PSP GO apart from sony.

if the price tag is too dear for consumers to embrace, sony will have a pretty awkward launch campaign; retailers don't lose much because the PSP brand is not their main soruce of profit anyway; consumer don't lose anthing because PSP GO is not a brand new console, the only thing new it brings to the table is bluetooth, which let's be honest, isn't the deciding factor for consumers to make a purchase.

£200-£230 is simply asking too much, Pachter didn't need to regret his choice of words in my opinioin because what he said was true, Sony is ripping off the consumers.

TOO FUCKING TIME CONSUMING... games are for the players' entertainment, not addiction. get that right or i'll curse WoW as long as i live.

how did they miss that?

i want to point out that i strongly disagree with the content of the Kill Zone 2 review, not the score.

i think 7/10 is a solid score and here are my reasons:
Kill Zone 2 is a FPS, therefore it's not reinventing anything, thus no way it's getting a 10 (it's off topic, but i think Halo 3 and GTA 4 don't deserve full socre for the same reason);
Kill Zone 2 is a conventional FPS, it doesn't reinvent anything within the genre, thus i don't think it deserves a 9 either;

so i think a 7 or a 8 is a fair score for the title, we just have to accept that Edge was more dissapointed by the cons than they're pleased with the pros.

however, i do have mix feelings for Edge's review. Metal Gear Solid 4 gets 8/10 and GTA 4 and Halo 3 gets 10/10? i'd like to hear the review writer say it to me face to face, that GTA 4 and Halo 3 were better than MGS 4 in every single aspect (surely, if something gets a full score, it must better all that don't). i mean, com'on, MGS 4 better any game in presentation.

PS. i'm not complaining about MGS 4 getting an 8, again, i think that's a solid score. i just can't accept it while other games, which clearly are way behind MGS 4 in certain aspects, get full scores.

they all have the same last name, they brothers?