I’d let you know my opinion of the engaging Ghostbusters (gave it away a bit there), but I’m sure Greg will let you know his feelings about that game once he’s gotten through it, so I’ll throw in my opinion of a game he’ll be unlikely to comment on instead…

It’s easy to take the gains we’ve made in computer games for granted.  After reading some reviews of the newly released Fight Night Round 4, I believe some are making that mistake.

I’ve been a fan of the series since the first Fight Night.  From the beginning, the realistic environments and engaging control scheme have set it far ahead of any other boxing game.  Now, for this version, we have Mike Tyson (I’ll put him first for my health), a vastly improved physics engine, a large stable of recognized fighters, and many other features.

When some say that the title is “held back” by “limitations” of its training system’s difficulty and very long road to top rank status, I think they’ve missed the value of an excellent title.  If you have a game that’s a pleasure to play, why not make it take some time to achieve great things in?  If you are going to emulate the “sweet science” as they call it, why not have the player go through a bit of work to accomplish true greatness?  It does not keep the player from choosing fights that are at his level or easier.  It simply gives the player long term goals and training that takes effort.

I would encourage sports gamers or gamers that enjoy high quality games that actually evolve from year to year to give this one a try and see if they like it.  Especially those that never tried a Fight Night title.