R&C aren't driving platformers forward but they are building a franchise step by step one step at a time. It's not quite necessary to reinvent a game in its every iteration just for the sake of innovation. If something still works like a dream then why fix it? As long as it doesn't end up like Mario Party. Now THAT is bad.

And I am an optimist by default

@Andir - you go look at the Simpsons game and come back and tell me EA sucks.

Anyway, I've already decided that I'm going to be trading in some games to put towards the preorder of this game. (Hopefull CoD3 (ps3) + Sims 2 + University Pack (PC) + Haven (PS2) and King Kong (PS2) whacks about £15 off the price).

I've already posted this, but: GT "It's the best in a series of incredible games" clearly shows that Insomniac is pushing this franchise in the direction it should be going.

Insomniac have proven to be one of the best developers this gen, this is their second, AAA game in a year. Within another year they will have another AAA game in RFOM:2.

In agreeing with shams (who is also a mod): "My biggest criticism of the game, is that it still "feels" last gen"

He is also saying the same.

Edit: I'm talking about critisism of in a general term. Just because you want to put me on a pillar of some sort of defamatory cruade for quoting him doesn't make you right.

Also, your getting off topic.  From the forum rules: "It's very simple - use the thread title to sum up or describe what you are saying in your post. Do not use the title as a deceptive hook to lure people in."  (Which you are doing by pulling me out and nit picking my statements.)

Another review from GamesRadar

GamesRadar Reviews Rachet & Clank and gives it a 9.0 with the following closing comments:

"For all its next-gen brilliance, however, Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction doesn't really tamper much with the formula that made its PS2 predecessors great, and that's at once a relief and a disappointment. Ratchet & Clank Future isn't a revolution, but it is a marvelously kickass game that'll keep you entertained for hours as you plumb the depths of its huge levels, find creative ways to blow up its monsters and try to ferret out all its dozens of cleverly hidden items. This is the best the series has to offer, and that makes it a must-buy."

If it's any comfort to you, note that I have bought way more Nintendo game consoles than Playstation consoles and Mario 64 and Super Mario World are two of my all time favourite games.

My enthusiasm for the PS3 has more to do with my weakspot for technologically impressive ahead of their time products. It's not the first time I dislike redone sequels compared to the original success formulas. I liked the original Monkey Island (1&2) and Simon the Sorceror (1&2) games better than what came afterwards. Similarly I didn't like 3D pacman clones that much, but I loved Edgar M Vigdal's Deluxe Pacman (/Deluxe Pocmon) remake which still offered the familiar gameplay but extended the concept with tons of new ideas and much improved 2D graphics or his remake of Galaga (Deluxe Galaga / Warblade). I greatly disliked the Sonic The Hedgehog 3D remakes I've played, the original Lemmings was IMO the best and part II with new ideas was pretty good as well, but 3D lemmings, I didn't like at all, etc, etc.

JUST what I excpected from Insomniac

PS3's FIRST HYPED game that LIVES UP TO IT

Actually 1UP hasn't posted their score yet (as of the time of this writing).  The 3 scores you have typed out are from EGM.  EGM is a North American gaming magazine in which the average of the three review scores is taken when they're handing out awards for games.  For example Ratchet & Clank Future received a gold award from them (a game where the average of the reviews is 90% - 99%).  Since they do that in their magazine their scores if someone wants to give "one final score" should be the average of the three scores.