Quotation forthcoming.

It might even be considered a pretty decent RTS of usual sort, but taken as a historically accurate simulation; it's utterly disappointing and comes nowhere close to challenging the Total War series.

Romancing SaGa will please those gamers who want a very long game. There are many locations to discover and explore, and each is delightfully designed, although the tedium of fighting the same kinds of monsters may get in the way of leveling up.

Undeniably dated and simple, and the action is a bit plodding and straightforward. Fortunately, the underlying gameplay is good enough that it won't betray the fond nostalgia of older fans.

The game is a fun time-eater that can be finished in one cross-country flight -- although some battles feel artificially lengthened by seemingly never-ending waves of soldiers that have as much tactical sense as headless chickens. But with the great voice acting, graphics, and audio, first-person shooter fans on the go should definitely give this a look.

If you're a patient gamer who can ignore the tedious aspects, you'll find COTN a good city building game with several original ideas. For the rest of us, the good background music and pleasing graphics make it feel like a very good interactive screensaver.

FlatOut basically feels like a slightly more frustrating successor to the original "Destruction Derby" series on the PlayStation 1 (well, the first two games).

The main problem with Maelstrom's design: Tons of options don't equal tons of useful options. You can rip off every successful RTS convention in the known universe (and developer KDV Games obviously tried), but the final product won't necessarily add up to the sum of those parts. That's not to say Maelstrom is a bad game - just one with a pie-full of flaws.

The graphics are almost painfully cute, and the pseudo-physics system that causes enemies, objects, and heroes to ping-pong around the screen with abandon can make combat entertainingly chaotic. It's good, clean, dumb fun. There's just not much to it, or of it.

For fans of the series, you'll feel like the developers ordered the series to "hold its position" because it hasn't gone that far from the previous SOCOM. And unfortunately for us, unlike your teammates in the game, it actually obeys every order.

The extra ten bucks buys you much better looking planes and light effects, no slowdown during particularly busy fights, and access to your 360 Live list.

What's in question here isn't whether this or that technology is hooey -- it's impoverished, store-brand imagination.

Nothing else holds up to the visuals -- not the music, not the script, not the gameplay. Seriously, it's like you've managed to combine the worst bits of your own games along with the most annoying excesses of Japanese RPGs and came up with something so indescribably bland as to defy logic.

If you like a strict challenge and don't mind fighting the camera, by all means have at Aeon Flux. Just remember that your good friends here at 1UP warned you.

It's hard to argue that the minor tweaks to FFII -- though improvements they may be -- really justify its being sold individually when it's previously been packed together with the original Final Fantasy so many times.

If you can stomach the somewhat random difficulty during the single-player campaign, you'll be treated to a mostly exhilarating trip through the different battles of Europe, including a virtual take on the Battle of the Bulge.

The true strength of Nowhere to Run is built into its pick-up-and-play nature. It gets straight to the action, wasting no time indulging in slow-motion cinematic cut-scenes during battle sequences.

Sure, it's cool that you'll find references to some of the more popular third-person action titles, such as Prince of Persia's balance-beam act and hand-over-hand wall crawling, but nothing in here screams innovation.

All of a sudden, instead of dealing with urban sprawl and water rights, you're tasked with using a bunch of poorly controlled, dim-bulb A.I. legionnaires to defend against invading hordes. Battles have nothing to do with tactics, being determined only by who has the bigger, better-equipped force.

A potentially great game with flawed execution. Still, the Inside Edge scouting reports are the best addition to any sports franchise ever; they should drive sim fans wild.

So it's not going to win any awards. And the lack of multiplayer plus the linear gameplay means minimal replay value. But Infernal is just clever enough to warrant a mild recommendation to shooter fans looking for a fix. Just don't expect any miracles.

If framerate problems doesn't annoy you, then the stupidity of the A.I. may force you to say, "that sh*t is wow, bananas." Enemies are stricken by stupidity, as they'll simply stand there and allow you shoot the living daylights out of them.

No, the Punisher believes in planning ahead and has come prepared with an infinite supply of ammo—his clips might run out, but you never need to find more.

The game has positives, they're just away from the 5-on-5 parquet.

It's a great game for a younger DS audience who will be thrilled simply by seeing their creations run around the screen and get wrapped up in the narrative (and maybe even trade creations with their friends), but older gamers will find disappointment around every turn in the creative freedom that it hints at but never truly delivers on.

The artificial intelligence is also AWOL. The alertness of each unit is figured individually, and not shared even amongst a group.

Sure, it's cool that you'll find references to some of the more popular third-person action titles, such as Prince of Persia's balance-beam act and hand-over-hand wall crawling, but nothing in here screams innovation.

The inconsistencies and haphazardly-borrowed elements keep Headhunter from ever realizing its potential and drag it down to mere "mediocre" status. It has a certain underdog charm... if only it were content to be <I>good</I> instead of clumsily striving for <I>cool</I>.