Answer: so a lame but good humored taunt (which probably didn't even deserve a reply) based on a series of commercials for a game, elicits a pat, unimaginative, and wrongheaded response that reeks of the usual system advocacy. "Ha Ha, what a moron", John Tisch imperiously replies, then he proceeds to dash off more moronic drivel of his own. In my opinion, Crash Bandicoot is an enjoyable platform game with plenty of eye candy, goofy humor, and yes, quite a bit of challenging gameplay: this is acknowledged by even critical reviewers who mainly knock the game's lack of originality and the amount of hype it's getting. A number of people I know who favor Sega or Nintendo still find Crash an extremely fun game after having tried it for a while. But this isn't even the point with a ludicrous response like yours, which chooses to dismiss the game based on a tired and largely irrelevant smear of the developer: the only thing this illustrates that however smarter and more articulate you feel you are compared to the original poster, you're capable of demonstrating even more pernicious ignorance. All too often, semi-literacy is worse than illiteracy. Did it ever occur to you that this might be a reasonable game? It's obvious you didn't even bother to play Crash, or your idea of playing was to pick up the controller for 30 seconds, jump on a couple of boxes, fall down a hole, and then mutter to yourself, "this sucks". Now no one has to like Crash (or any of the other heavily hyped system mascots), but most people appreciate good arguments for and against games rather than the usual warmed over tripe that dominates the system advocacy rants. Clearly, you prefer to be part of the cancer that makes so much of the websites a barren, bile-filled wasteland, rather than contribute anything that might actually demonstrate independent thinking.