Pwning Noobs: How to Fix PSN and LIVE

Yes, I think they're both broken. Just in very different ways. I'm not going to address Nintendo's online system for the Wii because it is so far beyond broken I don't have the time or the energy to describe all the issues, much less how to fix them. So, let's get on to my issues with the applicable services, shall we?

First, LIVE and PSN are very different beasts and take very different approaches to online console gaming. LIVE is Microsoft's house. They hold the reins, they call the shots, every company that wants their game on LIVE has to report to the big M and dance however they are told. This has a lot of benefits for the gamers. Performance has a universal standard it must live up to and all games have to support a certain feature set. This kind of uniformity makes navigating all of LIVE and using it's features from a games familiar and intuitive regardless of the game you're playing.

PSN, on the other hand, is a free-for-all. With the exception of certain quality standards, game developers are free to make their online setup work however they see fit. Trophy support wasn't even required for generous span of time after it was first implemented. This "anything goes" type of system does mean freedom for developers to make things work however they want, but it also means a lot less stability for gamers when compared to LIVE. But then, being an open platform is also the reason that PS3 is the only system on which you will be able to access Steamworks and play Portal 2 Co-op alongside PC players. (Side question for Gabe Newell: How's that crow tasting?)

However, both of these systems have serious errors. The PSN issues mostly come down to performance such as instability, slow download speeds as well as lacking some of the popular features of LIVE like the oft-mentioned cross-game voice chat and game-agnostic parties (not needing to be playing the same game to be in a party with someone). While the main issue with LIVE is that you are charged for the basic functionality of being able to play your games online. This is much more insulting when one considers the fact that games on 360 and PS3 cost the same, but on 360 you can only play the single player half of the game unless you hand over another $60 a year to Microsoft. This looks especially bad when PS3, PC and even the Wii offer players the ability to play online without any charge whatsoever. The features advantage that LIVE holds are relatively minimal and certainly don't equate to a $60 price tag. Even worse, this was recently increased from $50 without the addition of any new features in an attempt to justify the increase.

That seems to be the way of things with Microsoft's products though. Whether it's the PC world with the absurdly inflated price of a Windows OS or Office bundle or the cost of a new hard drive for your 360. Let's look at that hard drive example a little closer, to really drive the point home. A 250GB HD for the Xbox 360 costs $130, I kid you not. For that money, I could buy a 1 TERABYTE drive (that's 4x as big) for my PS3 and still have enough left over to buy a game. Microsoft customers are far too willing to simply smile and say "Thank you sir, may I have another?" so there's no reason for the big M to stop screwing consumers on the price.

What Microsoft should be doing, in a world where Microsoft is fair to its customers, is have the ability to play games online included in the free LIVE membership, but save all the other perks for paid, Gold members. Keep all the exclusive demos, and parties and cross-game voice chat, and even premium download bandwidth for Gold members, but don't rob your customers of some of the basic functionality included in a game that they already paid full price for. Especially when the online component comprises such a large part of some of your biggest titles. Where would Halo, Call of Duty or Gears of War be without their online multiplayer? Charging customers $60 for a game and then telling them they can only play half of it until they fork over another $60 is the type of fine print switcharoo that normally gets companies in trouble. So why do gamers keep letting LIVE not only get away with it, but convince themselves that it is a superior service for doing so?

PSN, in a somewhat similar fashion, needs to change up how their paid vs. free services are structured. While the paid service, PSN+, is still more or less in its infancy and as such has some excuse, why not get things going in the right direction early on? As it stands, unless you buy a lot of downloadable titles or the free game offered that month (if there is one) is something you really want to play, there's just not enough to the service to warrant paying for it. Sony is starting in the right direction with the background updates, where your PS3 will check for software updates, download and install them all by itself, and the upcoming cloud game saves, allowing you to save your game to a server instead of your system so that you never have to worry about losing them and can access them from any PlayStation 3 you sign in on. There needs to be more though, and that means addressing the issues PSN has had from the beginning. Download speeds for everything from PlayStation Store games and movies to title updates are horrendous. A file that may take a few minutes on my PC can take more than half an hour on my PS3. That's pretty damn unacceptable. There's also the features people have been asking for since launch. Mainly features that have been available to LIVE users since their service launched. Features like cross-game voice chat, so you can talk to your friend and ask him if he wants to play something without have to A) be in the same game already or B) be willing to type out your message for 20 minutes using the onscreen keyboard and being able to create and join a party with friends that might be playing a different game. Personally, I've only run into a handful of occasions when I thought those features would be useful, but I'm only one man and the masses see them as a necessity. And again, like LIVE, PSN+ should allocate some extra bandwidth to it's customers so that those paying for the service don't spend the same 30 minutes waiting for Uncharted 2 to update that the free members do. In the same way that a LIVE Gold membership doesn't have enough features to justify charging for what PSN (mostly) does for free, PSN+ doesn't have enough features to warrant paying for little "extras."

PSN certainly has a laundry list of issues to work out, but its customers put up with them because they can still play games online for free. And while being able to play your games online is certainly a justifiable purchase to most gamers (why else do you think we pay for internet?) there's something to be said about the fact that LIVE is the only platform anywhere to charge an additional fee for access to features in a game that was already bought and paid for once. I enjoyed playing Halo: Reach online during the free trial offered on LIVE this past weekend, but with only a handful of exclusive titles on 360 there's not enough reason to purchase a LIVE membership when that money could buy me Dead Space 2 or Killzone 3 on my PS3, where I can play the multiplayer for free. And while I'm playing it over PSN, I'm still going to complain about the various issues and lacking features that everyone else has been complaining about for nearly 4 years now.

With an online component essentially being mandatory in modern games and replacing splitscreen play, both of these companies need to work on perfecting their online platform because they both need it in equal amounts. As for Nintendo...well they still don't think people want to play games online. And with the Wii and various DS iterations continuing to print money, there's really no reason for them to stop living in that fantasy world.

Bulletstorm: Everything Old is New Again...Maybe

Ahhh Bulletstorm, from unknown, to potential sleeper hit to regular guest star on Cliffy B's Twitter feed, the game's momentum just seems to keep growing. My enthusiasm, on the other hand, maxes out at "curious" at best. While the game does seem to have the potential for some serious fun, I have some issues with the "kill with skill" combat system at the core of most of the hype that ranges from serious potential for fun-killing repetitiveness to the fact that it's not as original as the parties involved would like you to think.

The main bullet point amidst this storm is that the game isn't just about killing enemies and moving on, it's about killing them with creative and potentially hilarious combos in order to be awarded the maximum number of points for that kill. More points lead to more power-ups lead to more ways to kill enemies.

In order to do this your character is equipped with an energy whip and a time-slowing kick in addition to it's more traditional FPS arsenal. Have a look at this summarizing video, courtesy of IGN, to see what I mean.

More Bulletstorm Videos

Where I start having issues is that I have yet to ready about anything besides the energy whip and boot appearing in your combo-making arsenal. How many times/ways can you pull an enemy towards you, kick it away then shoot it? Or kick an enemy away then pull it towards you and THEN shoot it? Or...erm just eliminate one of those steps and do that. See my problem? I can see the gameplay being really fun...for an hour or two. After that they better have something in store to shake things up a little or the average player is going to get bored long before the end credits roll.

This actually brings me to my other point, MadWorld. "What? That crazy, over-the-top-violence Wii game?" Yup. For those that missed this one, MadWorld is about killing your enemies with the most violent combos possible. You still get points for just chopping a guy in half, but you get a lot more if you jam a tire down over his head, ram a street sign through his skull and THEN chop him in half. Sound familiar? Have a look. (Warning, don't let the cartoony black-and-white graphics fool you, this game is VERY violent)

More MadWorld Videos

It almost seems like someone at People Can Fly (the people behind the game) played MadWorld and said "Hey, we should do this with guns!" After all, Bulletstorm was originally a 3rd person game. The additional problem here is that MadWorld seemed to run out of ideas for combos by the end, and the game was only about 4 hours long. When such a short play time will never fly (see what I did there?) with gamers on the "hardcore" consoles (360 and PS3) can Bulletstorm avoid running into the same, potentially disastrous shortcoming? It's still pretty early to tell, but without some really creative weapons, lots of environmental kills or something besides the whip and boot I can't honestly say that I'm holding out much hope. Their latest PR stunt was pretty entertaining though...

Beyond Good & Evil HD. It's Not a 2, But I'll Take It.

The good folks over at Joystiq have posted a trailer for the forthcoming LIVE and PSN HD re-release of (sorely underappreciated) cult hit Beyond Good & Evil. Since I played the original on PC, the addition of HD resolutions means little to me, but I can get excited about anything that encourages new gamers to discover this little gem and possibly renew interest in a sequel. Now if only someone could post a release date...

Return of the Western: Red Dead Redemption

The promise of the western making a cinematic comeback following the strong showing that was 3:10 to Yuma may have fizzled out, but the long-dormant genre may find new life in video games. That is if Red Dead Redemption, and Rockstar games, have anything to say about it.

The game is receiving absolutely universal acclaim thus far. Game informer recently awarded Redemption a stellar score of 9.75/10. To add some perspective to that, in this same issue Super Mario Galaxy 2 received a 9.25/10. To "perspectify" even further, Galaxy 2 managed a perfect 10/10 from Edge Magazine. Allow me to use this information to blow your mind mathematically: Red Dead Redemption > Super Mario Galaxy 2 > nearly everything else. Cue Keanu: "Whoa."

Yes, the accolades are quite astounding and may be in danger of creating unreachable expectations. Before wallowing in premature disappointment however, one should consider the pedigree behind the game however. This is the company - even if not the exact studio (Rockstar San Diego rather than Rockstar North) - that brought us Grand Theft Auto IV; which is still one of the best reviewed games of all time. For those that fear this means Red Dead Redemption is simply GTA IV: Wild West, all the reviewers seem quick to assure everyone that this is a wholly unique and fully realized game that simply builds off a very basic framework. It is not Grand Theft Cowboys in the same way that Assassin's Creed II is not Grand Theft Renaissance.

This particular parallel is especially interesting when one considers Redemption's predecessor: Red Dead Revolver. A game that, much like the original Assassin's Creed, was largely considered a "good try" and was eventually followed by a jaw-droppingly improved sequel. But I digress...

Red Dead Redemption ships today, May 17th, and should be available at retail tomorrow. In the meantime, check out a video review, courtesy of IGN, and try to ignore the "I'm really bored and reading this off a sheet of paper" tone of the narrator. (NOTE: the video is age restricted, but then you should be old enough to watch it if you're planning to get the game)

More Red Dead Redemption Info

Now if you'll excuse me, GameFly just informed me that Red Dead Redemption is on it's way, so I'll be sitting by my mailbox until further notice...

We Need More Giant Robot Games. Also: Yes Kojima, You Really Should Retire Snake.

First I'd like to say, if you already know exactly what giant robot game I'm going to talk about, congratulations on your acceptance into my personal "You're Cool" club.

Close your eyes and just think to yourself, "When was the last time a good giant robot game came out?" Depressing, isn't it? Considering the we're closing in on what would normally be the twilight of a console generation, having to look to the previous generation for any worthwhile entries into the genre leaves any gamer that grew up on Voltron,Transformers or Power Rangers quite blue.

The Armored Core series has been pretty downhill since the second game; and Chromehounds did not help From Software, who developed both series, to reclaim any credibility within the genre. Applying the Dynasty Warriors formula to the Gundam Universe also disappointed quite thoroughly. There have been a few other attempts this generation...but all of them failed to impress. Some hope still exists for Activision's Transformers:War For Cybertron, but I'm not going to hold my breath. Especially with the average pedigree of developer High Moon Studios. Fingers crossed though...

Sure, we occasionally get some decent giant robot action thrown into our other games. Lost Planet, FEAR 2, Red Faction: Guerrilla and Killzone 2 (you know, that one part). In the end though, a giant robot game is just not the same as a game with giant robots. Porting Virtual-On to LIVE Arcade doesn't count either.

So what happened? I don't believe there's anything noteworthy, if anything at all, on the horizon for some giant robot-on-robot, city-smashing, love. We came from Armored Core, MechAssault, Zone of the Enders, Steel Batallion (assuming you could afford it and find a place for the controller) to a complete vacuum. I'm not even picky! Give me the slow, plodding T-A-N-K-! style play of Mechassault or the fast-paced, anime-flavored combat of a Z.O.E. game and I'll be thrilled.

The technology currently on the table, or rather entertainment center, is particularly good at rendering metal armor, stones, and the accompanying lighting effects (according to Cliff "not Cliffy B" Bleszinski anyway). Hmm, good at rendering metal, stone, lighting ef-GIANT ROBOTS! You know how they say some formulas just scream out the answer? Like graham crackers, marshmallows and chocolate screams...? Exactly. Well that's one of them.

Am I to believe that Activision, Transformers, and whatever re-skinned Armored Core From Software decides to poop out are all I have to choose from? What happened to all the people making these games? Will people abandon their WWII soldiers, modern day soldiers, and futuristic soldiers to shoot bad guys with a giant robot instead? I think they just might, especially if it's pretty.

Which brings me to Kojima. Leave Snake alone. you've said you were going to do it every game for nearly a decade, just do it. The story of Solid Snake has been as neatly tied up as once could expect from the trip through "WTF"-land that was the Metal Gear Solid series. The stealth genre is changing drastically to accommodate a market that, by and large, wants to shoot things, not hide from them. You're halfway there with letting another team take Metal Gear: Rising in another direction (assuming he stays "hands-off" as a producer). A huge "thank you" for that, by the way because, as I've mentioned twice before, I have to see how Raiden went from whiny wanna-be to kick-ass cybernetic ninja. Then, however, you cheated by creating the Naked Snake storyline to continue on with an almost identical character to Solid Snake acting out almost identical gameplay.

Just leave them all alone. You've go other series to work on. Give us another Zone of the Enders, because the world needs giant robot games. Kojima's name on a giant robot game could bring out quite the audience with the accolades MGS4 managed to capture. With one successful giant robot game comes others. With other giant robot games comes competition. With competition comes awesome giant robot games. And that's what we're working for here, folks.

Just let Snake die, he's old. Move on to some other series, or even give us a whole new one. Let the stealth genre settle down a little bit, not even Sam Fisher just sneaks around guys anymore. If technology evolves or you come up with an entirely new, truly revolutionary game mechanic feel free to do a reboot. In chronological order would be nice, since MGS3 managed to take place before MG, MG2, MGS, and MGS2. For the uninitiated, that means the 5th game (called the 3rd) in the series took place, chronologically, before the first game, which was made over 20 years ago. A modern take on the earliest games in the series (Metal Gear and Metal Gear 2) would be quite the moment for long-time fans too.

In the meantime, give us back our giant robot games. Oh, and Kojima-san? While we're talking about reboots and reviving franchises and what-not, remember Snatcher...?

The Box Art May be Bad But the Game Is Pretty Rad. God of War III Review.

Seriously, who was it that decided close-ups of characters' faces would make good box art this generation? GoW III is probably the worst example; it's not even his face, just one scowl-y eyeball! But I digress, on with the review.

I'm going to try and keep this review as spoiler-free as possible, but in order to discuss the full range of Kratos' weapons and attacks I'm going to give some stuff away. My recommendation, if you wish to keep every aspect of the game a complete surprise, is to either skip this review altogether or jump to the summary and score at the end.

The game picks up exactly where 2 left off, with Kratos hitching a ride on the titan Gaia while she ascends mount Olympus to put an end to Zeus. You'll get a few minutes, and a handful of bad guys/blade-fodder, to re-acclimated yourself to the controls before hitting your first boss fight. This entire opening sequence is quite the site to behold as nearly all of it takes place while riding a titan that would make any Colossus say "daaaaaayyyuuuummm."

Although you don't spend the entire game riding, or otherwise interacting, with titans of various types as most early information on the game hinted, the more limited appearances of the titans keeps their gargantuan size and the spectacle of the fights they are part of from getting to the point of "yeah, seen it."

For those of you that have been wondering, yes, Kratos will lose all of his powers and have to start from scratch, just like God of War II and any Metroid game. Although I would have liked to see a game where I don't have to regain all the powers and abilities I gained twice already, I also understand the need to not start out with a sizable library of moves that would be hard to expand upon without becoming absurd. In short, I'll let it slide. Rebuilding Kratos offensive arsenal is also important as there are some significant changes to his moveset. The L1+O special attack has been replaced with a "combat grapple" that pulls Kratos to his enemies, allowing you to close distances quickly and thus keep the combos flowing. This is also one of two moves that are universal through all your weapons, a good thing as you will be picking up 4 different weapons for Kratos before the game is over. I use the term "different" lightly, however, as two of those weapons are nearly identical to your standard blades. It's hard to fault Sony Santa Monica for this misfire too much, considering the challenge inherent in making weapons that are different but still familiar and I suppose it's better to have weapons that aren't all that different rather than completely different ones no one wants to use. (*cough* God of War 1, Blade of Artemis *cough*) Still, seeing what was accomplished with the Nemean Cestus, the carbon-copy Claws of Hades and Nemesis Whip are a disappointment.

There are a few other changes in regards to the weapons. You no longer have separate magical attacks to upgrade, all magic attacks are tied directly to specific weapons. The Blades of Exile (which are exactly like the Blades of Chaos/Athena from the last two games) have a Spartan Phalanx magic attack that anyone who has seen 300 should be familiar with. The Claws of Hades will summon various spectres who will fire off some of their own attacks before disappearing. The Nemean Cestus has a ground-pounding are effect attack that will knock most enemies of their feet. The Nemesis Whip has an electrical attack very similar to Crono's Rage form God of War II. This works fairly well since the other move all weapons have in common is a L1+X combination that switches to, and attacks with, the next weapon in your possession.
Also a significant change for magic use is that, since these attacks are now directly linked to weapons, they upgrade along with the weapons and require no extra expenditure of red orbs. In general, every other level will increase the power of a weapon's magic attack, up to 3 levels. Upgrading the Claws of Hades increases the variety of souls Kratos can summon rather than your standard "More Powah!" type upgrade. There's even a trophy for those that use every type of soul in battle.

It is especially good that you no longer need to spend orbs upgrading both weapons and magic as Kratos has an entirely new edition to his arsenal: items. While magic is fired with the R2 button and depends on the currently equipped weapon, items are equipped with L2 and switched/fired with the face buttons. These items have their own, recharging, energy bar and can be used for combat as well as puzzle solving such as burning away obstructing bramble or running up certain walls. Like the weapons, these items can be upgraded with the key difference being that item upgrades are cheaper and only go up one level.

Even with these noticeable changes to the overall God of War combat, it remains as fast, fluid and brutal as ever. The controls, however, do make a stumble or two. For one, it's a little too easy to mix up doing a counterattack with Kratos damage-reflecting Golden Fleece (still with him from GoW II) since the button presses are identical to certain special attacks and the only difference being a fraction of a second on the timing. Secondly, the double-jumping and gliding seems to have some problems I dont' remember popping up in the previous entries. All too often I found myself looking at "You Are Dead" simply because the second jump didn't initialize or my holding X didn't result in an Icarus glide for some reason. From what I've seen, this results from a change to when you can make that second jump. Before you could jump once, and then throw a little mid-air hop into that anytime before Kratos hit the ground. In III, you have to hit that second jump immediately or nothing will happen when you press X. Stumbles, yes, but not something that's impossible to overcome.
Going back to the brutality, it has definitely been turned up a notch or two since the last game. There are entirely new ways to spill blood and organs that even have their own trophies (disembowel 3 centaurs, for example) but I'll let you discover those on your own. Suffice to say that God of War III absolutely earns it's M rating and probably isn't something you want your younger brother, or son, playing.

Also contributing to the M rating are the numerous bare breasts. True to the style of Greek mythology, any mythological enemy that is female in nature, be it medusa or harpy, will be completely bare-chested. You will also come across a young woman that, for some reason, decided to wear a shirt that only covers her shoulders. Much like the three females Kratos encounters in the highly-publicized "foursome" minigame. While an obvious attempt at attracting the horny teenage boys that populate the market and the unspoken part of most grown men, God of War III at least displays a sense of humor about the gratuitous nudity that falls somewhere along the lines of sitting in study hall and saying "Hey look, I drew boobs, hahahah."

Speaking of visuals, those found in God of War III can be absolutely stunning. It's often hard to believe that everything you're seeing is rendered in real-time by the game engine. From the opening moments to the roll of the credits, there are many acts of absolute graphical wizardry that Sony Santa Monica managed to pull off. The textures, for the most part, are super-high resolution, loaded with detail and special lighting effects and even outdo the almighty Uncharted 2 on multiple occasions. There are also some lighting effects so gorgeous to behold you may find yourself crying involuntarily. Best of all more than once I noticed that the framerate climbed beyond 30fps and seemed to reach a silky 60fps or at least close, so it's not only more detailed than the majority of games on any console but also just...buttah.

On the flip side, however, there are some places where the graphics seem to falter slightly. You'll occasionally see a low resolution texture or a really obvious polygon seam. Hephaestus comes to mind; of course, he's ugly in other ways. No wonder his wife was so...excited to see Kratos. However, these failings are far outweighed by the number of "Holy crap! That looks so amazing I think my eyes are bleeding!" moments. In fact, if the rest of the game wasn't so damn pretty, these occasional missteps would hardly be noticeable.

There are a few glitches worth mentioning as well. All too often I found myself running into, out of and around save points trying to get the "R1" prompt to appear so I could actually save my game. This also happened a few times with chests and other grabbable things that require the player to hit R1. It doesn't seem to be a matter of standing in just the right position as the game just not catching on to the the fact that you're supposed to be able to grab/open the object. There was also a particularly irritating glitch during the final boss fight where Kratos was supposed to land in a "cave" to continue the fight, but he just never appeared on the screen for me. I just sat there for a minute or two with my HUD fully displayed and no Kratos onscreen before I heard him grunt, was told "You Are Dead" and had to redo the entire fight that preceded this part.

Speaking of the final boss fight, I felt it was a little disappointing for a game, and especially trilogy, ending fight. It was just a little too easy and lacked that "epic" feel of several boss fights that took place earlier in the game, which I attribute to the cramped arena most of the fight takes place in. There is one notable stage of the battle, however, that will only feel cool to people that spent some time playing Street Fighter II, Cammy's stage in particular.

The rest of the game's level of challenge is right in line with what series fans have come to expect. I recommend veterans play on Titan (Hard) and everyone avoid Spartan (Easy). Chaos is the new Titan difficulty (just as Titan was the new God difficulty in GoW II) and is as expletive inspiring, controller smashingly difficult as Titan was. Spartan, on the other hand, is insultingly easy. I tried it for my attempts to claim the Platinum Trophy (a suprisingly easy task in GoW III) and found that there's no real reason to ever need block or dodge with how little damage enemy attacks do. Anyone that actually needs Easy mode probably isn't old enough to be playing the bare-handed-decapitation-including game anyway. Just steer clear, trust me.

The storyline that ties all of this sex and violence together is exactly what one should expect after the first two games. Lots of Kratos being angry and one character selfishly betraying another and/or changing sides for no real reason and so on. There are some philosophical, and likely controversial, bits towards the end that tie directly in to the final boss fight and also manage to show some growth in Kratos as a character. And I have to applaud the creators for finally giving Kratos some depth beyond "You pissed me off, now DIE!" The ending, however, is probably going to irritate you. It's very abrupt and manages to create a few questions right then and only answer about 3/4 of them. Despite multiple claims to the contrary, this may not be the last time we help, or at least see, Kratos rip someone's head of.

Overall, the game is absolutely outstanding, a definite reason to buy Playstation 3 and a worthy "conclusion" to the story of Kratos and his angry, blood-filled quest.

Score
Graphics - 9.5/10 - Most of the time the best looking game on any system with ridiculously detailed models, superlative lighting effects and butter-smooth framerates. Other times...not so much
Story - 8/10 - Exactly what you'd expect from God of War: a reason you're decapitating all these people. With a little dash of depth added to Kratos and a "Really!?" ending.
Gameplay - 10/10 - Fast, fluid and ferociously violent, this is the combat that made God of War the powerhouse franchise that it is. The few puzzles scattered throughout don't quite reach the scale or complexity of the previous game, but it's unlikely you'll even notice.
Replay/Extras - 8.5/10 - There are some really cool videos that are unlocked after you beat the game. I thought the one focusing on Quality Assurance was particularly good since most people still think those guys "just sit around and play games all day." There's also the unlockable bonus costumes and "Godly Posession" items that can be used on repeat playthroughs as well as the Challenge of Olympus and Arena options to mess around with. The game box claims there will be "add-on content," but we'll have to wait and see on that one.
Overall - 9/10 - Go buy it, you know you want to.

Peace Walker Sneaks Away from PSP Go

As further evidence to how poorly the PSP Go is doing, the newly announced Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker bundle will contain a PSP - 3000 rather than it's diminutive, and (inexplicably) more expensive, cousin: the PSP Go.

As detailed by the Playstation Blog, the new "Limited Edition Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker PSP Entertainment Pack" will launch on June 8th, alongside the standalone game, and include a "Spirited Green" PSP system, Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker (on UMD, hmmm...) PSN voucher for free DLC, PSn voucher for free movie download, and a 2gig memory stick pro duo for a retail price of $199. For those of you that don't feel like doing math, that whole bundle clocks in at $50 less than a standalone PSP Go. Maybe the fact that you can get a system, game, extra content, movie and 2GB memory stick for $50 less has something to do with the fact that the Go has been dropped by several retailers. You think? Sony? Hello? Oh take your fingers out of your ears...