Capcom Hates You - Breath of Fire VI In Development as a Phone/Tablet Game

Alongside a little under a dozen other titles revealed during a Network Game Conference by Capcom, focusing on mobile and social games, there's one that stands out quite a bit for several reasons.  That title is Breath of Fire 6 and though the title of this post has already spoiled it, this is the same Conference where Monster Hunter Frontier G was announced for the PS3 and Wii U, so there was some modicum of hope interspersed amongst the original few to learn of this.  It was for naught, as Breath of Fire 6 is basically being saddled with everything we don't want out of a game these days - It's going to have an online element, if not an outright online/social focus, it's being made specifically for Smartphones/Tablets and PC as a browser-based game and it's designed specifically for a touch interface.  Plus, it looks like the above screenshot that contains what I can only imagine is the main character, maybe.  You will notice that he does not have blue hair, nor is he currently a dragon.

There has obviously already been feedback because of this and none of it is positive in the least, but, well, I don't think Capcom much cares.  This isn't the first time they've gone full-steam into an unfavorable decision about a much-loved franchise and it likely won't be the last.  A lot of the outrage is much of the same, directed at the expectations and thoughts of the platform as a whole that they're taking this to, and they're not exactly unfounded.  I can't find concrete evidence as to -how- this is going to work (if there's going to be a single-player mode at all, if it's going to be an MMO or an MMO-like, if it's going to be microtransaction-based) but there really aren't a whole lot of examples of Tablet/Phone RPGs with online/social aspects working out well an intuitively to the player's direct benefit, and nobody's willing to give Capcom the benefit of the doubt on their attempt.  Least of all me, really.  I, like most others, can feel my eyes glaze over when I hear "browser-based", because....there's just not a lot of faith there when you don't have anything tangible of the game itself.  Even a download, when it comes to your PC, isn't present because of it being played via your browser if you're not playing it on a tablet or phone.

This won't be the first major departure that the Breath of Fire series has seen, as the last instance in the series was exceptionally polarizing - to the point where people took offense to calling it Breath of Fire 5 in the first place.  I haven't played it myself, but I've heard it likened to a Roguelike which is....interesting, but certainly not a classic Breath of Fire gameplay style.  Still, regardless of the opinion of that, I think everyone is more or less united in the opinion that it was at least a proper try, given its platform and the effort behind it (as well as carrying over BoF-specific things) which is hilariously a little bit of a unifying factor for the community for that game against this new one.  While this could be another case of history repeating itself in regards to we people who play games being afraid of change, it's also important to discuss whether or not there's merit.  There's definitely merit here as much as there was merit to question Dragon Quarter - after all, you can't turn Legend of Zelda into a Third-Person Shooter where Link exclusively uses slingshots, bows and crossbows and not expect people to say that it's not a Legend of Zelda game anymore.  There are certain 'requirements' placed on everything that necessitate their design and deviating too far from those sparks things like these.

According to a Eurogamer update, it's still up in the air as to whether or not the game will come to Western shores, and it's no surprise that people are of a mind to wish that it simply wouldn't.  Regardless, Capcom has done something they honestly can't take back - whether or not we like it, this game, however it turns out, is Breath of Fire 6.  Well, I suppose they could cancel it, they're good at that after all, but I highly doubt they're going to do that, nor are they going to drastically change its scope and platform, nor are they going to simply rename it to something else, -completely- divorcing it from the series in all ways and not just stylistic, gameplay-centric and traditional as it stands now.  Maybe.  To be honest, there's very little information about the game, and even less of it is reliable at this point, but at the very least, this was definitely not a good foot to put forward, and as we know from recent experience, that's all it takes sometimes.

I always like making "Capcom Hates You" posts, they're hilarious in a sad way

Deus Ex: The Fall - Tripping Out of the Gate

Ever since Deus Ex: The Fall was announced as a phone/tablet-exclusive game (as part of Squeenix's questionable business reform methods that basically boil down to "MORE TABLET/PHONE GAMES"), it's been seen as something of a bad idea from every angle that was thought possible.  Anyone with a little sense in their head at least wrinkled their nose in confusion at the prospect of controlling a First-Person Shooter (that wasn't on rails) on a device which only has an input method of a touchscreen if they didn't outright denounce it on principle alone.  Others pointed to the efforts made with Human Revolution which, while mostly good, they did leave a little bit to be desired here and there (which is a known quantity, what with the Director's Cut coming out to fix those bits) as a reason to be wary of this game.  And still others didn't find a problem with the game itself, to the point where they just wanted it on other platforms as well.  With all those, there was one angle that nobody thought of because why would you think of this angle?

When The Fall released last night, people were quick to find out a little quirk that the developers had implemented in the game: If you were playing it on a jail broken device, you couldn't fire a gun.  Of course, the non-skippable tutorial at the start of the game requires you to shoot a gun at least once, so several people were left at a sort of impasse.  They had the game, but they couldn't play it because it requires something that they're not allowed to do.

For the uninitiated, 'jail breaking' your phone basically allows you to toy directly with the workings of the device in ways that makes Apple and everyone else all angry and such.  It is something that has a variety of uses, from simply modifying a thing or two here for purely cosmetic or ease-of-use reasons to, of course, simply pirating the shit out of whatever games you like.  As with simply modifying a device, you have all sorts of people doing it for varieties of reasons - it's the same thing as folks who used to soft-mod Wii's and PS2 to play imported games; they bought the games legally, they had a device that, in theory, was able to play it and simply had to make it so, instead of buying a whole new device that was the exact same thing, but coded to a different region.  Of course, there were also people that modified consoles to play burnt disks, that's just the sort of thing that happens whenever it comes to a simple modification level.

This was of course just an attempt at a sort of 'indirect' anti-piracy measure as we've seen in the past, but the problem was that it very obviously affected people who didn't pirate the game in any way or fashion.  The official App page for the game does say "** Please be aware, the Deus Ex: The Fall play experience is currently restricted on jail broken devices. Do not purchase if you have voided your warranty and have Jail broken your device.", but I cannot definitively say that it -always- said that, even if I am under the impression that it did.  Even if it did, however, it's still pretty much the greyest area one could murk around in at the moment.  Jail breaking, depending on who you ask and in what context, is perfectly legal, even if that does open avenues that are not quite so much.  Denying you the ability to play the game on a device that has been modified, but not denying you the ability to purchase it is the very definition of suspect, and while I don't know piracy rates on Mobile games (though I believe I've heard they're absurdly high), I imagine this sort of thing ended up affecting far more legitimate buyers than pirates.

I personally liken it to people who go into their computers and modify things for performance reasons, perhaps even going so far as to "overclock" certain aspects of it, usually for gaming means.  It's generally not advisable, I'm sure and it voids the warranty (though whether that's technically supposed to be enforceable is up in the air), but it's not an exclusionary matter.  It's not the best example, of course, since it doesn't do anything to the ability to pirate games, but just...roll with me here.  Just imagine a scenario where a game released on Steam, people bought it, and it said "We're sorry, this game isn't playable on PCs with overclocked components." perhaps for the bullshit reason of "This game was designed with X specs in mind" or something like that.  People would lose their shit and rightly so.  There would be no reason for it, just as there's basically no reason for The Fall to be unplayable on jail broken devices, since it doesn't automatically mean anything by that alone.

Thankfully, there's going to be an update coming up soon that will make the game playable for all, but it's a weird bump in the road considering it was completely unnecessary.  It certainly doesn't do Squeenix any favors, either, and they're a company that really needs to have some favors going around at this point in time.  I can't imagine they're the first developer to put this restriction on a game, and they're definitely not going to be the last, but the real issue at hand is whether or not they're going to try it again after this.  They pretty much only focused on the fact that they didn't state clearly enough (read: with big bold letters that you can't miss) that the game could not be played on Jail broken devices, so perhaps they're simply going to make that change next time around?  That wouldn't be the smart move, of course, but when is the smart move ever the Squeenix move?

now just port the damn game to Vita, somebody, anybody

A Very Nintendo News Dump

So, there've been a few Nintendo-centric things thrown out in the last couple days, and while they're not noteworthy enough to warrant a full big post, all three things are kind of enough of a deal that they warrant mentioning.  I kind of have a thing just for this type of occasion as we know, so I won't be very coy about it here.  I'm just going to bring up all three points, have my little opinion on them as I do, and just sort of put that out there as a thing.  I say that, because I know my ideas and opinions are very, er, counter to the general ideas and such I see on the places in the internet that I frequent.  What with being slightly critical and whatnot - apparently that's not a popular thing.  Who knew?

Anyways, the first bit of news is that that little thing Nintendo mentioned about being able to use two of the Wii U Gamepads, pictured above, was....well, it's -true-, but not so much immediately so.  In layman's terms, the Wii U games will only support one Gamepad at launch, which I think is different than saying the Wii U -itself- won't support two at launch.  Because I think it -is- expected to support two in itself, just that any of the shiny games you'll want to pick up alongside the console won't.  Which won't lead to any confusion in the household at all, no siree.  Actually, I suppose it won't if Nintendo has the foresight to -not- print that on the launch-shipping boxes so that anyone who would want to buy more than one Gamepad will either A.) Be in-the-know enough to know they can't effectively use it yet or B.) Someone who completely has no idea and decides to buy multiple Gamepads and will, again hopefully, be instructed that such a thing is unnecessary.  But I think something like "Supports Two Gamepads" will make it on the box regardless because who really cares right?

What the problem here is that this smacks of something that people would (and likely have) mocked Sony quite openly for in the past, yet there doesn't seem to be quite so much of that going around.  As usual with what could be said as a 'negative' story for Nintendo, the bulk of the opinion out there seems to be a lot of hand-waving and "bah, who needs it at launch anyways?"  While that mindset isn't wrong at all, even though there could be the argument that "Since they announced it, it needs to be usable in -some- fashion at start (which could still be possible with Nintendoland), I have to wonder where this popular opinion is when the company involved is -not- Nintendo.  This kind of level-headed thing is not exclusive to dealings with just one company, you realize, because we could honestly just take a look at everything like that and everything would be so much nicer.  Radical thinking, I know, but there it is.

Regardless of the fact that it's not going to happen, it's pretty -obvious- as to why it's not.  A lot of these games have been in development alongside the final tweaks of the system itself, meaning that they've worked the games from bottom to top to work with just what they were given - one Gamepad.  I would suggest that sending as much information as is needed to the Gamepad is not a simple process, so suggesting that it's possible for -two- seems to border on madness, and I can only see the games itself suffering for the attempt.  This may be unfounded, but I have heard that using two Gamepads caused a drastic FPS loss when shown off at E3, likely on the floor.  Granted, it's new, it's not anywhere near done and it's not going to be fine-tuned for a while post-launch (The Gamepad and its usage, I mean) but if that's true then it's...well, it's not a very positive suggestion for the future.  Certainly something to worry about regardless of something that I cannot found with proof at this time, since that screen is meant to hold a -lot- of data.

Something else that seems to have been said before...well, thought went into it is the idea that the Wii U will be designed to support free-to-play games, which is kind of a thing that has been happening.  FarmVille is only pictured because I imagine that's what comes to a lot of minds when the term 'free-to-play' is thrown out.  Personally, I think of Phantasy Star Online 2 because of recent conditioning but just that right there, I think, is something that shows the absolute scale of the term.  Of course, neither type of game is instantly what is going to be on the console, if anything, because it was just mentioned as a statement of the Wii U's infrastructure.  Notably, it mentions the 3DS' recent ability to add updates, patches and DLC as a contributing factor, since the whole layout is probably similar on the console being that the 3DS can (now) apparently do the same thing, should any developer decide the 3DS is -just- the place for their new game that they don't want to charge for anything beyond cosmetic items and such.

It's worth mentioning, in my opinion, because it's actually not worth mentioning.  It's such a non-issue that I have to wonder exactly why it was mentioned in the first place and why it was important in any facet.  I mean, maybe I'm a little under-excited because I've been exposed to this sort of thing for, uh....years with my time years ago with Maple Story, and then my time in Playstation Home as well as watching FreeRealms from afar, but I just thought it was sort of a given that that type of thing was going to happen henceforth.  I didn't realize that 'infrastructure' and 'online architecture' had to be put in place specifically to allow free-to-play and/or micro-transaction games.  But it is apparently a thing there, and it was a big enough deal that it had to be mentioned by Joystiq, so there it is.

I don't see how this is going to be used whatsoever.  One of the comments suggests Maple Story and/or Nexon's other properties which is quite possible, but there isn't a whole lot of other ground out there.  I don't see Nintendo rolling out their own version of Home (despite really wanting to so I could see the massive amount of hand-waving) nor do I see many MMOs jumping on the Wii U just because they -can- for the whole free-to-play thing.  The only 'child-friendly' ones out there that I know about are FreeRealms (which is understandably not going anywhere near it, being a Sony property) and Wizard 101 which I literally know nothing else about than the name and that I see commercials for it all the time and doubt it's free-to-play.  Given how Iwata has somewhat of a distaste for the model, I doubt anything wholly Nintendo will come out of it, so this one is a little unnecessary.  Which is totally why it was necessary to mention.

The last piece of information is possibly the biggest, hence why I held it for last.  On the subject of the Legend of Zelda, there are quite obviously many potentials including a game for the upcoming Wii U as well as the 'next' game for it on the 3DS.  Of course what that 'next' game could be is up in the air, considering the last one was a remake of the Nintendo 64's Ocarina of Time.  The logical progression would state that, given there were two Zelda games on the N64, Nintendo and ports/remakes go together like that, and the fact that it would make more than a little bit of money would point to Majora's Mask seeing a 3DS remake.  And that is certainly an option that's up in the air, apparently, however it's being contested with two other ideas.  It basically boils down to whether or not Nintendo wants to remake MM or A Link to the Past first.  That is most certainly a thing, but I can't claim that it's wholly positive.

Now, I'm not going to pretend you're dumb or anything and just state the simple conclusion one could draw from Occam's Razor is that, with the resources used to port Ocarina of Time still kicking around, and Majora's Mask mostly using the same resources as Ocarina of Time, it would be rather simple to make Majora's Mask for 3DS.  That is why I believe this is the course they're going to take since it is simply easy money in various quantities.  Despite what and how we like to romanticize it, Nintendo is a company that wants as much of your money as possible.  That's why the 3DS launched at $250 - because they knew people would buy it at that price despite everything else.  And for as much as people like to say that it kicked off with slow sales, they were certainly -sales- and I have to suggest that had the Vita not been launched at $250, the price would have stayed constant for a while longer.  That they launched it 'at a premium' (using other companies talk) and essentially bragged about it is something that would incriminate most other companies, but again, it's Nintendo and everyone can afford to be level-headed with them, whatever.

What bothers me about the whole situation when I initially skimmed it is that Nintendo is basically saying "Hey, we don't know which game to put minimal effort into and sell for max profits, but one of them is gonna happen soonish" which is something that would get Sony and/or Microsoft verbally reamed all over the internet.  It's rather annoying that Nintendo gets away with it simply because we're all supposed to really like everything Nintendo and first party there.  After reading about the same situation elsewhere, however, I do have to admit that a third option is present:  something new-ish involving LttP, as in something (most likely a sequel) that involves A Link to the Past, but isn't simply a copy and paste 3DS playable version with bells and whistles.  With these three options on the table, I can forgive two of them being remakes for the simple fact that the third is -not-, even if it is the least-likely outcome, with Majora's Mask 3D being the most likely.  Were I a betting man, I would bet on it, but I am simply a person who is bad at predictions, so there's that.

I sort of wish something a little more news-worthy had been out there, but, well, them's the breaks.  The Wii U is still big news since everything at E3 more or less fell flat (including the Wii U stuff at E3) and Nintendo always gets mentions for the tiniest things, so given that I don't have anything else I -can- talk about at the moment (for a reason), that's what I could figure on eeking out a post about.  I'd say I did what I set out to do, of course, and if nothing else, I have something to point out when I'm proven right or wrong about the whole Zelda 3DS thing.  As well as getting to be a little bitter about Nintendo since I simply don't see enough people applying realistic talk to them out there.  Not saying it doesn't get done, simply that I don't see it at the places that I frequent.  Still, these are some things that could amount to something in the future, so I figured it was worth bringing up and discussing now, if just to see how different or similar it all ends up to how I thought it might.

Wii U Controller Gets a New Look

Ever since the Wii U......'s Controller was shown off at E3, completely overshadowing the actual Wii U console itself, there's been quite a bit of wonder for it, at least from me.  There's really been no specs to speak of, nor has there been any real news about it at all lately, aside from a recent patent idea that is....certainly a thing.  The only thing we've gotten recently is the above picture from a twitter account of a QA guy for TT Games, who have their hands in the various Lego franchise games.  People who have a good eye might notice that that controller looks a mite different from the one that was in all the glamor shots around E3-time, and from that we might be able to extrapolate a few things.  Of course, the information we might glean from such a manner is pretty minute, but we'll pretty much take anything at this point.

The biggest thing here to note is that the sticks, plural, on the thing are different in a very clear way.  Where the first pad had little analog slide-nubs that we were all apparently sick off back when the PSP was new (yet we don't complain about them for the 3DS...), the new design has something that resembles -actual- analog sticks.  As in the kind the Vita has, or perhaps some that can even be used as buttons themselves with a push-in, ala 360 and PS3 controllers.  The latter would certainly be a sign of jumping in whole-hog, but I'm not quite sure they can actually swing it.  Still, actual sticks, no matter what range you can use them, are better than not, I think we can all agree on that front.  Will it make the Wii U more tantalizing just on that alone?  Certainly not.

The next thing that I noticed is that the entire bottom section of the controller tablet (I'm calling it a tablet not because, come on, it's a friggin' tablet) has been shifted about and rethought out.  From left to right, the Wii U logo is there, the Select and Start buttons are no longer there,  there's a power ring around the Home Button, and between the battery light and power button, there is a strange new button.  The circle around the Home button is fairly standard nowadays, of course, so that's not really something to throw up arms about, and the logo is whatever, but the other stuff is pretty interesting to talk about in a way.  Thankfully the select and start buttons are where they are now, as they just seemed to be fairly awkward before (Much like the 3DS' awkward placement that unfortunately made it through), so there's another plus for the tablet.  Now, the last, unmarked button between the battery light and the power button is the weird outlier here if just for the fact that it is unmarked when it clearly looks like a button.

You'll notice that a similar thing is located beneath the D-Pad of the tablet, but, and I don't know if this is just a perspective thing or what, but it doesn't look like a button like the other one does.  Of course they could both be buttons, they could be not (though if not buttons, I haven't the faintest on just what they'd be) or one could be where the other isn't.  Aside from that, the overall shape might have changed a slight in the whole depth department, and there might be a few new things here and there, but that's about it unfortunately.  Overall, I still don't know what to think of the thing as we haven't seen a whole lot of anything substantial regarding the Wii U, but it is certainly still a thing.  I do kind of wonder how it feels to actually play with, however, but that's something we'll all find out eventually.

Of course, we won't be finding out much more from the guy who tweeted the above image, giving us a little look into Nintendo's closest guarded secret, apparently.  The tweet is gone (well, as gone as something on the internet can be, which is not much) and I -believe- he's taken down his twitter account even (but am too lazy to check), probably in an attempt to keep his job.  Not that Nintendo can directly do anything to him for just taking a picture of the thing, but I imagine it might violate this and that which can make Nintendo mad at TT Games which can in turn, turn all of that on this guy.  I hope not, of course, but I doubt we'll be hearing much about him.  In the meantime, I guess we can all just wonder just what we're going to see come E3, since Nintendo'll likely be going full-boar with this thing to try and 'win' the event.  And, given the, uh, Nintendo faithful opinion through the internet, I'm sure many will claim that they will.  But, as we all know, it's about time for some hard numbers, a price, release dates and such, which can all turn the public against them if it's outrageous enough.  (Moreso than $250 for a 3DS anyway.)

Wait, What? GameStop Tablet?

As if there weren't enough things to give and get from GameStop, it's been announced that, not only will you be able to sell GameStop your Phones and Tablets, but apparently they will eventually be making their own tablet to sell you.  I guess....well, I guess this isn't a surprise to a lot of people, but honestly I wouldn't have seen this coming.  I probably would have expected the glut of GameStop-centric software these tablets are going to come loaded with, but not a GameStop-branded thing.  They just haven't seemed that...er...that permeated into things yet, I guess.

Still, it's supposed to be out next year, and is supposed to be an actual 'Gaming Tablet', as opposed to the current "Tablets what can play games" and is going the extra mile to accentuate this by making a (probably optional) controller peripheral.  I wonder how that'll work.  Maybe it'll be like a thing that clicks onto the bottom of the tablet (held horizontally) and has a stick or two and some buttons.  I would hope that the controller -attaches- to the tablet, or else it wouldn't be a very mobile device.

It's also possible that it'll be able to stream games from their recent online gaming acquisition, and something they're looking into, but no real confirmation on that.  Not to mention that the system already has a veritable glut of games to be played on it via Kongregate, which is already owned by GameStop and has been for some time.  It's hard to say the level of...er.....'quality' in the flash games at Kongregate isn't around the same level of all those cheap games you can buy from all the App Stores, honestly.  Granted, with real, actually meaty games coming to these devices (Final Fantasy Tactics:  War of the Lions for iPhone/Pad) it'll be hard to say that for much longer.  This isn't to say the fun little cheap, flash-games you can buy aren't 'real games', of course, but....well, you know what I'm getting at.

I'm surprising even myself in saying this, but I'm looking forward to new information about this thing with the barest hints of interest, hoping that they don't really screw the pooch on this.  I don't have a tablet currently, don't plan on getting one soon, but something gaming-centric is bound to get my interest roused of course, and while I harbor no real ill will to GameStop, I can hope there'll be some sort of parity there to make shopping there a bit easier.  Perhaps being able to pre-order a game through the tablet rather than going to the actual store (Which might just be a thing that can't happen), or having a credit calculator or something to waste time with.  (Seeing as I won't be selling my games to GAmeStop, but I know people who do and might be able to help them out with it.)  Something other than pure bloatware designed to just advertise new games coming out and to 'entice' you into the store proper.

Nintendo Announces the Wii U.....'s controller.

So, for everyone that was awake and watching Nintendo's conference at whatever ungodly hour it was on (I'm kidding, of course, 9 AM PDT isn't bad), you got the first look at the new controller for Project Cafe', revealed today to be the "Wii U".  The idea behind the name is that "we" got our chance to play together at parties and such, and this next one is just for "you".  Or something to that effect.  Anyways, Nintendo went around this in a bit of an odd way, as they really did only show off the controller.  And while that's all well and good, when we see This, and are told it's actually the console behind the controller, we're only left to wonder why.  Is it not finished?  It certainly looks a little sterile and....not 'generic', but you know what I'm driving at here, which, let's face it, that's how the Wii looked as well, so it could very well be the final design. 

But that's not really important.  What's important is what the Wii U can do and, by proxy, what the controller can do.  Because apparently the controller's screen is capable of outputting the exact same images as the Wii U can put on the TV.  Because a main selling point is that when someone else wants to use the TV, you get to say, "SURE, OKAY, LET ME JUST SWITCH THIS AND" BAM, you're playing your game, but on the controller.  Like...not only -with- the controller, but -on- it.  Like Remote Play, but Nintendo has assured us it will have no latency issues.  Pardon me if I'm a bit skeptical on that, though, Nintendo.

While the Wii U touts complete backwards compatibility with the Wii, I can't help but be left wondering how.  Especially using the controller.  Will you even be able to?  Like, are you going to be able to play a Wii game on the controller?  If so, are you expected to replace the Wiimote's pointing with the stylus? What does this say for the controller style of the Wii U; have they abandoned the Wiimote as a pointer, or will some games still default to Mote-Chucking?

None of these questions were answered.  None of any of the questions were answered, for that matter.  Releases sometime in 2012.  No price.  No specs given (in the keynote, there is a site up now) and nothing much else beyond "Here's what this looks like.  Cool, right?  Alright, see you next year."  Which is a little disappointing, considering how good it honestly could be.  So what we're left with is a good step forward, rather than a leap into the now, and the 'better-than'.

Nintendo pushed a lot of good buttons with this one, and while I'm excited for it, I'm nowhere near as excited as I should be.  So while this wasn't, by far, Nintendo's entire E3 show, this should have been the thing that put it in writing that Nintendo had the best E3 showing, and it didn't.  Still good, but only second place good, for me.

People like some Tablet computers, apparently.

So right after Sony officially announced a Tablet, (as well as saying, perhaps prematurely now, that the NGP might not meet release this year), it seems GameStop wants in on the action too.  Which, part of me thinks is pretty great.  I'm not a big fan of Apple products (said as someone who carries around a four year old or so iPod video, with a version of iTunes several versions out-of-date because the updater actually breaks my internet) so competition against them can, possibly, end with Apple getting less than the absolute majority of the world buying into their shit.  Of course, it won't, but it could.

But the rest of me, rather, the logical part of me, isn't enthused whatsoever.  From Sony Ericsson's batshit insane pricing, to GameStop's....well, GameStop pricing, I'm not expecting anything wallet-friendly, nor am I expecting a lot of people jumping onto it as they have with the Apple App Store, in terms of actual gaming.  I imagine GameStop's a little ahead in that they've purchased Impulse and Kongregate to allow for both free mini-games, and paid 'fuller' games, not to mention Sony Ericsson has access to the Playstation Suite, (Honestly, the Tablet will probably be the touchscreen of the Xperia Play, but bigger, and you can sync a PS3 controller to it if you don't want touch controls, though I could be wrong) and such.

I think this is a mock-up.  I'm pretty sure.  As in, I'd hope the real thing would be....smoother.

Also not to mention that Sony's been sort of in the tablet market already with their series of e-readers (which, will probably be phased out of the market in favor of the tablets which will likely have, well, an e-reader in it.) and the blanket of the unified Playstation Network theory will likely make the transition fairly smooth for those involved (or, at least, we can hope), so there is a chance that even with an almost inevitable stupid price, it might just be a viable item out of the box.

I'm a bit all over the place on these right now, honestly.  I've never really though of getting a tablet thing outside of for the simple "This is the future" feeling of having one.  I mean, some of these look straight out of Star Trek, and I know I'm not the only one seeing this, which does lend it a little weight in terms of nerd-cool, but in terms of practicality, they're just not really there yet.  At least, not as far as I know.  I can almost guarantee I won't be getting either of them unless they prove to be amazing, since there are more important things for me to look at, but in terms of pure gadgetry fun, well, I guess we can always use more.