One thing’s certain: the person who wrote the screenplay should be shot.  Literally.  How anyone could screw up writing a screenplay based on this novel is just beyond me.  I have a written list of what’s wrong with the screenplay, but it’s so damn long I’m too upset to write it here (yeah, even to *cut and paste*…leave me alone).  Not even Kubrick could have saved this trainwreck.

There are only two things good about this movie: the opening credits (i liked the calligraphy-style lettering), and
Shaun Toub’s superb acting (the rest of the actors could have been replaced with wooden planks).

This movie needs to be re-done.

Now, let me do a rebuttal on the common complaints with the naysayers of this game:

• It’s pretty much a “Gears of War” copycat. OK, so what? I would see it as a negative if it has worse controls than GOW…but the funny thing is, I’d go out on a limb and say that DS has better controls than GOW. With GOW
• Graphics is nice but not much better than anything that’s out there. DS IMO is so much better than any Unreal Engine game out there? Why? I got two words for that: consistent framerate. And while it also suffers with the “everything blue or brown” just like most Unreal-Engine-powered games, it has better textures and particle effects (for the most parts)…
• …and one other thing I have noticed: weapons physics is frighteningly accurate. Shooting with a rifle has lag and recoil that’s very similar to a real rifle, shooting with a gatling gun is so much different than shooting an uzi. And the best part: controlling the mech-like thing called the “Jackal.” Controlling that thing has never been satisfying since…Chronicles of Riddick (controlling the mech towards the end of the game)…NO! forget about that POS “Lost Planet”…not even close.
• They say there’s a “lack of compelling story.” Holy crap. This isn’t “Indigo Prophecy.” If this was an adventure game, I’d whine about that. But it’s not. GOW doesn’t have a compelling story, either…but I didn’t hear anybody bitching about that.

Negatives? Of course, there is…but not enough to keep you from thoroughly enjoying the game.

• Yes, I *somewhat* agree that there are some parts of the game that all you do is kill zombies and soldiers. But with the glaive, each kill is satisfying. I nit about this is that there’s not much animation for decapitations and finishers.
• It’s short.
• Boring multiplayer.

There you have it. It’s a very good game, but it’s a bit short of making it to “great game” status. At least it should keep you busy while waiting for GTA4, MGS4, and GT5P.

Score: 9 out of 10.

 A few of the many questions that you may be asking as you read this review is “Why the D2x?  Why now?  Why even bother?”  I’m not going to lie: I was set on buying the D300 when I thought about casually browsing that famous auction site for the prices of the D2X and its slightly improved sibling, the D2Xs.  Lo, and behold!  I found auctions ending with prices lower than a new D300!

Then I realized that I need to reevaluate if I really need the new features of the D300.  As you read through the review, I would be outlining my frustrations with the D200 and as you get to the end, choosing the D2X over the D300 may make sense… 

Or maybe not.  At the least, you’ll be entertained…

Or maybe not.

“Upgrading” From the D200…Wait.  What?

I’ve been a long-time user of the venerable D200.  I have amassed more than 10,000 shutter clicks with it and while it has been my first camera that has actually helped me earn money from my photography, I still don’t consider myself a true D200 guru…BUT…I have the experience with it long enough to bitch about its quirks and praise its true strengths.

Lighter Doesn’t Always Mean Better

Yes, the D200 innards is housed by a lightweight Magnesium-alloy that was said to be designed by aliens from Neptune.  The material is strong enough to withstand abuse, and the body can probably be used a self-defense weapon if necessary.

Note the keyword: lightweight.  It is true that on weight reduction is an advantage for portability and such, but as one really uses the camera, this light weight actually pose as a disadvantage; the body does not balance well with heavy lenses like the 17-55 and the 70-200.  The setup with the heavy lenses makes it front-heavy, thus making ergonomics of the camera frustrating at times.  I’m not a fan of the optional grip because the material is plastic and adds a weak point on the wholes setup especially when holding the camera on the grip itself.

This reduction of weight done by Nikon for the D200 has also introduced a related problem:

It’s Hard To Ignore Thy Mirror Slapeth

The D200′s mirror slap is not as well-dampened as I would like.  It’s too loud and creates unwanted vibration on the body itself to the point that it affects shooting, especially in slow shutter speeds.  It also affects its operation on a tripod and you will see its effects on lightweight tripods, especially the el-cheapo ones bought from your local drugstore.

Compare this to the D2X: It’s almost impossible to detect the vibrations from the mirror slap, and the sound itself is very refined compared to the annoying “KA-PLAK!” from the D200.

I Need More Than One Cross-Type AF Point

I am probably one of the few people who doesn’t use the D200′s AF points except the center one.  To be quite honest, I found the other points next-to-useless because of two things: the sensitivity is so much worse than the center AF point; and ONLY the center point is cross-type.  This not so much of an issue with the expensive f2.8 expensive zooms, apparently.  It is, however, an issue with older, screw-drive lenses–even high-speed (wide aperture) prime lenses.  I have a constant struggle with the 85/1.4 when using the D200′s AF-point other than the center one.

I don’t even want to talk about its Dynamic Focus.  Yes, I know how it works, but even with the uber-lens 70-200 VR there’s a awful ration between in-focus and out-of-focus shots.

The D2X, on the other hand, has 9 cross-type AF points, and almost all of them has the same level of sensitivity.  The focus points are a little wider than the D200, though.  In my relatively short time with the camera, though, I have not encountered any AF issues that I have with the D200.

Magenta Isn’t My Favorite Color

I have dedicated almost a full section of the D200 review about this: The Nikon D200 colors are far from neutral; it almost always bias to magenta.  This issue rears its ugly more on incorrect white balance or underexposed images.  Only one other review in the intarwebs has pointed out this issue.  It’s interesting to note most other Nikon DLSRs I have tried (D70 and D40) have this issue.  So I have come to the realization that Nikon has deliberately designed the imaging sensor and processor to output such colors.

Upon firing up the D2X for the first time and uploading the RAW files to my computer–to my surprise–I saw something I never thought existed in a Nikon DSLR: neutral colors!

Is it a CMOS vs. CCD thing?  I don’t know, but in my opinion, this is reason enough to buy the D2X! 

I Almost Sold My 70-200 VR

Whenever I use my 70-200 VR lens with the D200, I almost always need to set the exposure compensation an average -2/3 stops (sometimes to a full -1 stop!) when using matrix metering.  My D200 tends to overexpose with the lens for some reason…a problem I have never seen with the D2X.

Any Warts?

I can enumerate two glaring warts: The INACCURATE LCD display and the stupid Auto White Balance System. 

The LCD has narrow angle of view and biased to cool temperature: Yes, everything in the LCD is blue when the histogram tells you that the colors are perfectly fine.

The AWB is probably the most annoying.  The AWB system relies on an external sensor sitting atop the Nikon logo for refinement of the AWB.  Unfortunately, it’s impractical in most situations…especially in mixed lighting condition.  Nikon ditched the thing when they designed the D3…go figure.

The Nikon D300: The Nice Features I Don’t Need  (Sour Grapes)

The New 50+ Point AF Thingamajig

Honestly, at first I was stoked by the number of AF points and its claimed faster auto-focus.  I rarely shoot sports and fast critters.  Do I really need this when the the D2X AF is already outstanding?

Focus Correction

This is indeed a nice feature.  Those who has had “focus problems” with any Nikon cameras prior to the D300/D3, please raise your hands…

Better JPEGs

D300 having “Better JPEGs” is, of course, debatabe.  Even if it does (for argument’s sake), it has no value to me.  I shoot RAW. 

Automatic Chromatic Aberration Correction

Nice feature…but a feature I could live without.

High ISO Capability

I started learning photography with good ol’ film (Yes, I’m old).  When I was using film, ISO 400 slide film is considered high-speed has grain the size of golf balls.  Looking back with the D200, I barely go above ISO 400.  In my recent wedding gig, i use ISO 800 without problems in a venue that is almost total darkness.

And call me old-fashioned (or retarded), but I actually LIKE a little noise/grain in my high-ISO images.  I don’t use noise reduction AT ALL.  It adds character to the image.  I actually find it funny when I see Photoshop plugins and/or workflow that ADDS GRAIN to an image.

The Nice LCD Display

I must admit, this one’s a REAAALLLYY nice feature.  I cannot fault this.  I WANT it.  Especially with the D2X’s HORRIBLE LCD.  But in the end you don’t rely on your LCD 100% for proper exposure, that’s why the histogram still exists. 

FOURTEEEEEEN BITS!

Honestly, I don’t have much information about this.  I heard my barber yappin’ that 14-bits will provide more accurate colors and wider dynamic range.  I’ve seen the sample images from the D300 and for the life of me I cannot see any perceptible advantage. 

Note that we are still in the era of Bayer-pattern imaging sensors, so there is still interpolation of colors.  Until Nikon can provide “true-color” image recording a la Foveon sensor, I don’t care about how many bits they cram in that sensor.  12 bits suits me fine, thank you very much.

Conclusion

Depending on your photography needs, buying the D2X over the newer D300 isn’t as insane as one might think.  The old classic has enough features to hold its own against the popular newcomer.  And again, I’m not saying that the D2X is better than the D300…one being better than the other will depend on the needs of the person behind the camera.

As of this writing, you can buy a D2X with as little as $1,500 depending on the condition.  I bought mine for $1,670 in near-mint condition and less than 9,000 actuations and extra OEM battery!

• The song selection.  The sub-title of the game is “Legends of Rock.”  The song list is laughable.  Some of the bands…never even heard of.  The game becomes increasingly difficult very quickly.  I’m playing this game on Medium…and I’m telling you this is HARD.  There’s no way a casual user can finish that battle with Lou on MEDIUM on less than TEN TRIES.
• Graphics suck.  I’m not a graphics whore…but there’s just no reason for these developers NOT to go 1080p with those simplistic polygonal characters.
• The Guitar controller suck.  There’s always a delay no matter how many times you calibrate it; the tilt is overly sensitive.  It gets VERY ANNOYING when doing battles…you will find yourself screaming “OMGWTFBBQ!!  I DID NOT WANT TO EXECUTE THAT BATTLE ATTACK YET!”
• Sound.  It’s not on all songs…but sometimes there’s no STRUM SOUND!  WHAT THE HELL?
• It’s TOO EXPENSIVE.  OK, so they made the thing wireless. BFD.  It’s not even Bluetooth on the PS3; you have to use some stupid dongle…and they packed AA batteries instead of rechargeables…what a bunch of cheap bastards.  Compare this with Rock Band that will sell for about $160.  Yeah, I know…HUGE RIP-OFF.

I’m so glad I pre-ordered Rock Band.  I should have never bought this game.

Score: 4 out of 10.