System 3
Another Retro Classic Announced
You may recall, some time ago, we ran a story about System 3 and the fact that they were going to release Epyx classic Impossible Mission for not only the DS but also the Wii.
Word has reached us that they are raiding the Epyx archives yet again to bring California Games to the Nintendo platforms. We don't have any screens or information yet but as soon as we do, we'll let you know.




Home
News
Comments
I've been following DS-x2 for a while now and I've always respected you as a site, but this is a joke. The game was announced in 2006 for the Wii (though it's not certain whether it's a VC or Wii game), as was Impossible Mission. Also, I'm finding it increasingly harder to believe your stories and take them seriously because they never seem to use sources.
This was from the PR guy at System 3. What 'sources' would you like us to use?
Tellyn: please inform me on whichever article you find hard to believe. As 80% of all newsposts come from me, I should be able to give you the answers you desire. Back on topic, California Games was mentioned once before: back in August 2006 (http://www.ds-x2.com/news/System+3+Revives+Classics,5594), but that was based on an article in a UK magazine, which didn't mention any sources. Then again, 3 out of the four titles are officially confirm now. Official confirmation by a publisher or developer deserves the attention such as this one. Many other sites report anything that is written as facts. We don't. To be honest, a fair share of the stories covered by colleagues from other sites never make it to DS-x2, simply because the statements are questionable or we can't find any ground on which the statements are based. Our policy on sourcing is the following: we don't explicitly mention a source in the case where we get the information or assets straight from a developer, publisher or distributor. In case we can't get our hands on the original PR, we mention the source.
Sorry about my comment, I realise that I was being extremely harsh without need to be. I'm not actually sure why I said that, but I was in the wrong. Sorry Andrew and Dennis.
Post a new comment
Register or log in.