Cuz... you kill lots of stuff in the game. Killz-on. It... nevermind.
This game is a delight for many reasons. We all know I strongly disapprove of the COD series as a complete gaming value. It's a multiplayer game with an extended single player training level. *bash*bash*bash*
Killzone was a different beast all together. "Killzone was a different beast"
Way back in the PS2 shooter days there were slim pickins, but those games all showed potential in one way or another. I still own Killzone 1 and Black. For some reason they've always struck me as important games to the system. Killzone was released just a few years before the PS3 came onto the scene, so most of the PS2 games were worried about their future, and the gaming companies were showing off their mad graphic skills, which were considerably impressive at the time, at least in Killzone and Black's way.
Killzone 1 had online play, a good storyline, decent characters and enough of a varied level environment so the whole thing didn't feel too repetitive. Although I did feel like I was in that drainage warehouse for ever.
This ain't a Killzone review of all the games, but a commentary on the new one. Killzone 2 was a benchmark game for the PS3. But what better way to show off the swag of a new system than by a nice looking, decently made shooter. The Killzone series doesn't do anything better than anyone else, but it also doesn't screw anything up. I wish "PC Shooter" was a title you could give something, a game that was a nice stable shooter that you enjoyed playing one time through, had some multiplay, but was decent overall. Nothing impressive, just more of what you love. Or- PC Shooter.
The new Killzone does more of the same, but it's enjoyable. Let's see.... there's an evil planet of people who are basically cast-off and they start to build their own army and fight the earth forces, blah blah blah.
Come to think of it, it's strange but you sort of feel for both sides. The Helghast (the outcasts) were sort of cast aside unjustly and are simply fighting to survive, although they're taking it a bit too far, and the earth forces always seem to be the ones invading.
You know.... this makes me seriously consider the storylines of video games, and possibly a review of good storyline games.....
At any rate, you play the earth forces, and a generic BJ Blazkowicz of sorts, bent on being the best he can be. Buh.
For most of Killzone it's you and your also tough latin-american partner who both don't give two claps about their commanders, they're just getting the job done. So you and Dom, wait no, you and Cole Train, wait wait no no, you and Soap. Ok got it, you and Price are.... no wait... you're Sev, and your partner is Rico.
Ok, now's the touchy subject.... I was playing Killzone 3, and enjoying it. When I had a sneaking mission come up, you and another character start to sneak into enemy areas.
Your partner, I'm not making this up, has a fullbeard, sunglasses, and a backwards hat. He leads you through the enemy lines and helps you take headshots.
Did I just describe Medal Of Honor or Killzone 3? Dammit.... Killzone....
In their defense, it's a shooter, so who honestly cares. COD, GOW, and MOH aren't the first games to have these stock characters, and if it helps the story to progress and the developers to work on a better game, have at it.
Is the game any good? Yeah. Yeah.... it's I mean, a game you'll get through in a long weekend. The storyline is stock, characters are stock, theres a jetpack level, a few rail shooter levels, a nice mix of the same stuff we all enjoy.
But here's where Killzone 3 is doing what others is done and they done it right. There's a Co-Op mode, there's a multiplayer mode, there's a bot mode. The multiplay, ooooh the multiplay. I love me some FPS games where each side has an objective, not just "shoot everything". UT2K4 had a ton of those, there were waypoints to get, areas to defend, all the good stuff.
Killzone 3 has those as well. You basically play through a mission with your team. Blow up a door to open into a new area, defend that new area until a support weapon or vehicle arrives, use that vehicle to get control of another point. Controlling points sometimes allows for a better overhead map with enemy units, sometimes you have to defend a single player, sometimes that single player has to do all of the objectives, and everyone has to defend them.
It's all the same goodies that a good shooter should have, just with fancy Killzone 3 graphics and controls.
Which have to be last for a reason. The graphics and controls in Killzone are wonderful. The levels are huge, the particle effects are wonderful, the water looks like water, the snozberries... nevermind. The controls are a delight as well, the cover and shoot from cover system is something you won't use much, until you truly need it, then it'll come in handy. There are a few glitches here and there, some clipping, some audio repeats. But when there are maps that take 20 to 30 minutes to fight across, with no loading, beautiful atmospheres and environments (look up every so often in the game, you'll see what I mean, there's shit in space!!) You can forgive it. It's a good shooter for a system not known for it's good shooters. It shows off it can graphics better than the rest, and there's enough other stuff to keep you busy for a while. If you like shooters, love shooters, or want something different but familiar for your PS3. Get it.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Dark Dawn...by the books for 40 hours
Before I begin, let me ask if you have played Golden Sun for the GameBoy Advance or Golden Sun: The Lost Age. If you have and you are a fan of the small series, then your decision has already been made to buy this game and you want to hear my thoughts. If you have never played either game, then prepare for a bit of Star Wars Syndrome as I talk about this game.
First of all,ahem ***************PARTIAL SPOILER ALERT!********************
According to the developers, this game is meant to stand on it’s own and people new to the series are supposed to be able to pick up the game and appreciate it. Well, the game does introduce an in-game encyclopedia so you can follow along, but at the end of the day it’s still a fan-based game.
Lemme give a quick rundown of the first game so you can see where I am coming from, you play as some kids trying to prevent the seals of Alchemy from being released. You spend most of the game trying to stop the lighting of 2 of 4 Alchemy Lighthouses. Apparently, you are bad at your job since 2 of the 4 Alchemy lighthouses get light right before your eyes and queue ending leading to sequel. The second game is about you playing as the enemy, trying to release the remaining seals on Alchemy. It’s way more interesting than the first game and eventually you get to join forces with the cast from the first game, thus making the story complete.
Eventually, you decide it’s better to light the remaining lighthouse because the world of Weyard will die without Alchemy. After this is done, it causes the Golden Sun event, which releases Alchemy into the world and stops falling apart at the seams. Happy endings!
Golden Sun: Dark Dawn takes place 30 years after the events of GS:TLA and you play as the kids of the originals heroes. It’s not long before you embark on some quest to get a feather, and before you know it the feather quest becomes something much bigger. Without giving anything away, one thing I can say is, it’s a Golden Sun story, meaning you will be going to multiple places to complete multiple different puzzles using your “pysnergy” powers. This is basically the best part of the whole game and makes it worth playing. The use of pysnergy to solve puzzles isn’t a bad thing, as it leads to relative Zelda-like puzzles, but the bad thing that does stem from this is…it’s been done before. Everything about this game isn’t new except for the graphics. The combat is the same as the last game, the summons that can be found throughout the game are the same, that tactic of summon-rushing a difficult boss is the same (Dullahan, the toughest boss in the game, can be beaten in five minutes by summon rushing him), and the part at the end of the game which leads into an inevitable sequel is the same as the first game.
To say I am a fan is a severe understatement. You see, I have played the first game and completed it three times, and I have completed the second game twice. I actually hadn’t expected a third game because the second wrapped a nice bowtie around the series. Apparently, the developers said the first two games were prequels. So…why did the game take seven years to make? It’s not THAT technically impressive. I mean, I’m not saying it doesn’t look good, cause it does, but it should not have taken SEVEN years to make this game. I think, like most fns do, that the series was originally abandoned and so much pent up demand for a third game caused the developers to try and come up with an add-on to the series. I know this probably isn’t true, but it FEELS so true since after a while I just stopped caring about the story of this game.
As a matter of fact, 20 hours in I just stopped caring about this game. It basically became a task for me to complete. The story became just stale, the battles were WAY too easy, I beat the game at level 40-45 without having to grind at all (this was actually refreshing, IMHO), and the cutscenes..OH MY GOSH…just like in the last two games they are unskippable and they DON'T WANT TO END!
Seriously, at the beginning of the game a quest is discussed about getting this feather to fix some sort of glider one of the main characters breaks for no real reason, and it takes 20 minutes to explain! It’s ridiculous! The cutscene length needed to be fixed back at the second game and I can’t believe it’s a problem in the third game.
At the end of the day, there are much worse JRPGS you can buy and play, but there are also way better. The fans (like myself) looking for something new from Golden Sun: Dark Dawn will be disappointed, since it’s basically the same game as the second one with a new coat of paint. Even the boss structure is the same: there are two bad guys that you will eventually have to fight…probably twice...and then they will become some sort of end game monster.
Bottom line, if you are a fan, complete and maybe hold on to it to transfer your file to the next game, as was the case before. If you are new and are looking for a new RPG story, you could do worse.
First of all,ahem ***************PARTIAL SPOILER ALERT!********************
According to the developers, this game is meant to stand on it’s own and people new to the series are supposed to be able to pick up the game and appreciate it. Well, the game does introduce an in-game encyclopedia so you can follow along, but at the end of the day it’s still a fan-based game.
Lemme give a quick rundown of the first game so you can see where I am coming from, you play as some kids trying to prevent the seals of Alchemy from being released. You spend most of the game trying to stop the lighting of 2 of 4 Alchemy Lighthouses. Apparently, you are bad at your job since 2 of the 4 Alchemy lighthouses get light right before your eyes and queue ending leading to sequel. The second game is about you playing as the enemy, trying to release the remaining seals on Alchemy. It’s way more interesting than the first game and eventually you get to join forces with the cast from the first game, thus making the story complete.
Eventually, you decide it’s better to light the remaining lighthouse because the world of Weyard will die without Alchemy. After this is done, it causes the Golden Sun event, which releases Alchemy into the world and stops falling apart at the seams. Happy endings!
Golden Sun: Dark Dawn takes place 30 years after the events of GS:TLA and you play as the kids of the originals heroes. It’s not long before you embark on some quest to get a feather, and before you know it the feather quest becomes something much bigger. Without giving anything away, one thing I can say is, it’s a Golden Sun story, meaning you will be going to multiple places to complete multiple different puzzles using your “pysnergy” powers. This is basically the best part of the whole game and makes it worth playing. The use of pysnergy to solve puzzles isn’t a bad thing, as it leads to relative Zelda-like puzzles, but the bad thing that does stem from this is…it’s been done before. Everything about this game isn’t new except for the graphics. The combat is the same as the last game, the summons that can be found throughout the game are the same, that tactic of summon-rushing a difficult boss is the same (Dullahan, the toughest boss in the game, can be beaten in five minutes by summon rushing him), and the part at the end of the game which leads into an inevitable sequel is the same as the first game.
To say I am a fan is a severe understatement. You see, I have played the first game and completed it three times, and I have completed the second game twice. I actually hadn’t expected a third game because the second wrapped a nice bowtie around the series. Apparently, the developers said the first two games were prequels. So…why did the game take seven years to make? It’s not THAT technically impressive. I mean, I’m not saying it doesn’t look good, cause it does, but it should not have taken SEVEN years to make this game. I think, like most fns do, that the series was originally abandoned and so much pent up demand for a third game caused the developers to try and come up with an add-on to the series. I know this probably isn’t true, but it FEELS so true since after a while I just stopped caring about the story of this game.
As a matter of fact, 20 hours in I just stopped caring about this game. It basically became a task for me to complete. The story became just stale, the battles were WAY too easy, I beat the game at level 40-45 without having to grind at all (this was actually refreshing, IMHO), and the cutscenes..OH MY GOSH…just like in the last two games they are unskippable and they DON'T WANT TO END!
Seriously, at the beginning of the game a quest is discussed about getting this feather to fix some sort of glider one of the main characters breaks for no real reason, and it takes 20 minutes to explain! It’s ridiculous! The cutscene length needed to be fixed back at the second game and I can’t believe it’s a problem in the third game.
At the end of the day, there are much worse JRPGS you can buy and play, but there are also way better. The fans (like myself) looking for something new from Golden Sun: Dark Dawn will be disappointed, since it’s basically the same game as the second one with a new coat of paint. Even the boss structure is the same: there are two bad guys that you will eventually have to fight…probably twice...and then they will become some sort of end game monster.
Bottom line, if you are a fan, complete and maybe hold on to it to transfer your file to the next game, as was the case before. If you are new and are looking for a new RPG story, you could do worse.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
From the Casual to the Core.
Do you know what a hard core gamer is? Few people do. If you play Call of Duty games religiously, then you are not a hardcore gamer. If you buy a ton of sports games, even on the day they come out, then you most definitely are not a hardcore gamer, not even by a little bit.
Now that you may feel thoroughly insulted. , let me put you through a small test to see if you are a hardcore gamer. The true hardcore will recognize the following phrases/characters and identify what game they came from:
-“The cake is a lie.”
-It’s dangerous to go alone. Take this!”
-Ridley
-Jumpman
“Here is a crowbar, Freeman.”
Now relatively speaking, those were easy. If you didn’t recognize a single one of those, but still have/had a meaty video game collection, then congratulations, you are a mainstream or “core” gamer. This isn’t a bad thing. You and your demographic dump more money into the gaming industry than any other. If you looked at that list were surprised that games actually might have dialogue, then you might be a casual gamer. This isn’t bad either…well…it can be. Let’s hash out the differences.
Mainstream gamers, you all stand the possibility of being the most annoying types of gamers in the industry.. You are the same ones that brag about being “real good” at shooting games and Madden. Well, that’s fine and all, here’s the thing about shooting and sports games, they have a shelf life. For example, do you know anyone that still plays Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1? Wait, what about the people that were so good at it? How about Madden 07? Halo 2? Nope, nope, and nope. Reason is, these games are meant to grab your interest for at most a year. After that, you the core gamer are supposed to buy the updated version of that game when it comes out. Repeat, ad nauseam. The developer/publisher isn’t going to keep the server of the old game running if the new hotness is on the way? The industry as a whole loves mainstream gamers because you are reliable, and will year after year dump money into a slightly upgraded version of the same game, usually to play it’s multiplayer. Yahtzee from Zero Punctuation sums it up best by saying “multiplayer alone cannot sell a game, because once the servers go offline, the game is useless.”
If you play World of Warcraft, it’s a little up in the air. If you play this game and it’s the only game, you play then who cares if you have five level 80 avatars, you’re a mainstream gamer. You may be a hardcore WoW player, but your knowledge about video games is limited to Azeroth.
Let’s talk about casual gamers. Well, thanks to you guys we have the Kinect. Yay? Also, because of you, we have the Sony Move. Negative yays all around. You are the type of gamer that buys every iteration of Rock Band, thinks Wii Sports is the only game the Wii is made for, and/or can count the number of games you have completed on one hand. Some casual gamers have a favorite series and will see the game through to the end everytime, but it’s usually only one series.
The industry has lately been trying very hard to capture this audience, but I personally believe that if you convert the casual to mainstream games instead of pandering to the casual (I’m looking at you Kinectimals), one would produce more favorable results.
Ah, the hardcore. My brethren. Forgive my bias, but this demographic is the one the game industry has a certain love for. The mainstream may be the ones with the true power, but it’s the hardcore that wear the title of “Gamer” proudly. Unlike the mainstream we don’t get a celebrated game once a year. Zelda games take 4 to 5 years to come out (console versions, not portable). We are STILL waiting for Half-Life 3. I think the Star Fox series just died for no reason. A new 2D Metroid game is now a fleeting dream. Notice how most of the games I listed are single player. This is because a hardcore gamer doesn’t necessarily need to play with anyone. Playing a game can be like reading a book, the game case its cover and the disc/cartridge its pages. I don’t know about you, but when I read a book I do so privately. For instance, I played Fallout 3 only when my wife was at work so I may immerse in the Capital Wasteland.
We don’t need big boobs, giant guns, or even realism in our games (though it helps from time to time). What we want is a good game. From scaling a colossus and stabbing it in the weak point to telling Vivi to cast Flare, we want our games to spark our imagination, perhaps to inspire us. Call of Duty: Black Ops, is not inspiring. It inspires me to play a different game, but its never threw my mind into thoughts of grandeur.
The purpose of this blog? To finally tell mainstream gamers to get over themselves. If you’re a good sniper in Battlefield: Bad Company 2, who cares? If you’re good at Wii Bowling, then who really cares? If you can beat The Legend of Zelda (NES) without the sword, now you have my undivided attention. The skill you attain in any FPS or sports games is based upon the skill of everyone else playing the same particular multiplayer game. Once everyone stops playing that game, your only hope is a sequel of the game so your skills may progress. No additional cognitive-thinking or problem solving skills involved.
A hardcore gamer can switch from God of War 3, to Killzone 2, to Mass Effect 2, and then to Final Fantasy X and can appreciate the control nuisances of all those games. Also, one would probably agree that those listed are some of the best games made.
Long and short of it, a mainstream gamer wil say Halo 3 or Modern Warfare 2 was the best game ever made. A Hardcore gamer might say the Legend of Zelda: a Link to the Past or Portal was the best. My end point is we need more games like Portal, and less games like Halo. We have enough games like Halo, to which I could name like 20 right now. Frankly, I’m tired of games like Portal being a needle in a haystack.
Oh by the way, the answers were Portal, The Legend of Zelda(NES), any Metroid game expect Return of Samus, Donkey Kong, and any Half-Life game,
Now that you may feel thoroughly insulted. , let me put you through a small test to see if you are a hardcore gamer. The true hardcore will recognize the following phrases/characters and identify what game they came from:
-“The cake is a lie.”
-It’s dangerous to go alone. Take this!”
-Ridley
-Jumpman
“Here is a crowbar, Freeman.”
Now relatively speaking, those were easy. If you didn’t recognize a single one of those, but still have/had a meaty video game collection, then congratulations, you are a mainstream or “core” gamer. This isn’t a bad thing. You and your demographic dump more money into the gaming industry than any other. If you looked at that list were surprised that games actually might have dialogue, then you might be a casual gamer. This isn’t bad either…well…it can be. Let’s hash out the differences.
Mainstream gamers, you all stand the possibility of being the most annoying types of gamers in the industry.. You are the same ones that brag about being “real good” at shooting games and Madden. Well, that’s fine and all, here’s the thing about shooting and sports games, they have a shelf life. For example, do you know anyone that still plays Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1? Wait, what about the people that were so good at it? How about Madden 07? Halo 2? Nope, nope, and nope. Reason is, these games are meant to grab your interest for at most a year. After that, you the core gamer are supposed to buy the updated version of that game when it comes out. Repeat, ad nauseam. The developer/publisher isn’t going to keep the server of the old game running if the new hotness is on the way? The industry as a whole loves mainstream gamers because you are reliable, and will year after year dump money into a slightly upgraded version of the same game, usually to play it’s multiplayer. Yahtzee from Zero Punctuation sums it up best by saying “multiplayer alone cannot sell a game, because once the servers go offline, the game is useless.”
If you play World of Warcraft, it’s a little up in the air. If you play this game and it’s the only game, you play then who cares if you have five level 80 avatars, you’re a mainstream gamer. You may be a hardcore WoW player, but your knowledge about video games is limited to Azeroth.
Let’s talk about casual gamers. Well, thanks to you guys we have the Kinect. Yay? Also, because of you, we have the Sony Move. Negative yays all around. You are the type of gamer that buys every iteration of Rock Band, thinks Wii Sports is the only game the Wii is made for, and/or can count the number of games you have completed on one hand. Some casual gamers have a favorite series and will see the game through to the end everytime, but it’s usually only one series.
The industry has lately been trying very hard to capture this audience, but I personally believe that if you convert the casual to mainstream games instead of pandering to the casual (I’m looking at you Kinectimals), one would produce more favorable results.
Ah, the hardcore. My brethren. Forgive my bias, but this demographic is the one the game industry has a certain love for. The mainstream may be the ones with the true power, but it’s the hardcore that wear the title of “Gamer” proudly. Unlike the mainstream we don’t get a celebrated game once a year. Zelda games take 4 to 5 years to come out (console versions, not portable). We are STILL waiting for Half-Life 3. I think the Star Fox series just died for no reason. A new 2D Metroid game is now a fleeting dream. Notice how most of the games I listed are single player. This is because a hardcore gamer doesn’t necessarily need to play with anyone. Playing a game can be like reading a book, the game case its cover and the disc/cartridge its pages. I don’t know about you, but when I read a book I do so privately. For instance, I played Fallout 3 only when my wife was at work so I may immerse in the Capital Wasteland.
We don’t need big boobs, giant guns, or even realism in our games (though it helps from time to time). What we want is a good game. From scaling a colossus and stabbing it in the weak point to telling Vivi to cast Flare, we want our games to spark our imagination, perhaps to inspire us. Call of Duty: Black Ops, is not inspiring. It inspires me to play a different game, but its never threw my mind into thoughts of grandeur.
The purpose of this blog? To finally tell mainstream gamers to get over themselves. If you’re a good sniper in Battlefield: Bad Company 2, who cares? If you’re good at Wii Bowling, then who really cares? If you can beat The Legend of Zelda (NES) without the sword, now you have my undivided attention. The skill you attain in any FPS or sports games is based upon the skill of everyone else playing the same particular multiplayer game. Once everyone stops playing that game, your only hope is a sequel of the game so your skills may progress. No additional cognitive-thinking or problem solving skills involved.
A hardcore gamer can switch from God of War 3, to Killzone 2, to Mass Effect 2, and then to Final Fantasy X and can appreciate the control nuisances of all those games. Also, one would probably agree that those listed are some of the best games made.
Long and short of it, a mainstream gamer wil say Halo 3 or Modern Warfare 2 was the best game ever made. A Hardcore gamer might say the Legend of Zelda: a Link to the Past or Portal was the best. My end point is we need more games like Portal, and less games like Halo. We have enough games like Halo, to which I could name like 20 right now. Frankly, I’m tired of games like Portal being a needle in a haystack.
Oh by the way, the answers were Portal, The Legend of Zelda(NES), any Metroid game expect Return of Samus, Donkey Kong, and any Half-Life game,
Monday, February 7, 2011
Doug's Demands, and other fine things.
These are the things I want that will never be.
(Mildly off-topic but that's how I like to keep it, next week will be a how to roast a duck blog)
Number 1.
A legit D&D game that you can play alone.
Here me out.... you listening? It's text based. Not choose your own LAME-venture, but like.... you send a text message for your actions. You receive texts about what you encounter. Remember back in the day when playing the assassin game in real life wasn't illegal? Like that only completely through text. Right about know you're going "oooooh, ok that might be cool". Yeah, think of it.
"Oh, I got a text, my group is being attacked, lemme roll for a save *roll* (using your smart phones dice app).... hey I saved *text*text*text, there, saved.
What would keep people from lying about their rolls? Um... its D&D. If you're playing it, you won't lie about your rolls.
Number 2.
Netflix on my phone. I have it on the lappy, on the xbox, on the ipad, my phone can support streaming media... so why.... can't.... I have... Lookit. I'm not even asking for 3g netflix, just wi-fi supportable netflix would be stellar.
Number 3ish
I want.. and I don't even know if this is a thing.... a decent RPG on my phone. Something legit and fun to play. It's almost like 1, but #1 is a hefty demand, and might not happen. Hell, make number 1 be on a console even.
and don't gimmedat "WoW is like online D&D, so is Mass Effect and KOTOR", cuz it ain't. And neither is Temple of Elemental Evil or Neverwinter Nights. I had a lvl 7 fighter who forwent all his other skills and talents to be a master at the whip, and all he did was trip people, but he could trip them directionally. (It's possible, don't start bitchin, read your 3rd ed books closely). I want a game where it's sandbox, but unlimited sandbox style. (Put all that up with #1 if you must)
Number 4.
One controller to bind them all. It would play PS2 and PS3, Xboxs, GameCube, work as a classic controller, the whole schemagilla. I don't care if it's modded or whatever. And honestly, look at the Sony controllers compared to the Xbox controllers, they're.... almost.... I mean right there.... practically... Ok ok the dpad is in a different spot. but that's something the user could get over.
Number 5
Star Wars: Battlefront 3. I know Pandemic is out of business. I know it.
(while researching if a Battlefront is possible, I came across Number 6)
Number 6
A mute button for Adam Sessler. 3 years til you're 40, old man.... since we're tossin out mute buttons, one for Aaron Kirby too, he has the job I'm supposed to have. (And no, not store manager)
G4 is to video games what Tosh.0 is to the internets and 4chan.
Number 7
A sony bluray remote that doesn't turn on the system when you look at it the wrong way. If you own one, you know what I mean, if you don't own one, be glad.
Number 8
Last one, I promise, I've wanted one of these since they stopped making Game Boy SPs. I pocketsized gaming device. Something small to fit into a coat pocket or pants pocket. The DS looks like you're stealing a bible, the psp looks like you have a flask. I want something small that isn't too small, not Game Boy Micro small (hahaha it's tiny, I get it, my pinky covered the screen), just something phone sized. Don't say go. I have a go. I'm downloading Lunar: Silver Star Harmony for it as we speak. The time it took for me to type this whole blog was how long it took to install. Just somethin small.
Screw it, I'm going to go get out my SP and FF:Tactics.
(Also, Killzone 3 beta is up... awwwsaammmmeee)
(Mildly off-topic but that's how I like to keep it, next week will be a how to roast a duck blog)
Number 1.
A legit D&D game that you can play alone.
Here me out.... you listening? It's text based. Not choose your own LAME-venture, but like.... you send a text message for your actions. You receive texts about what you encounter. Remember back in the day when playing the assassin game in real life wasn't illegal? Like that only completely through text. Right about know you're going "oooooh, ok that might be cool". Yeah, think of it.
"Oh, I got a text, my group is being attacked, lemme roll for a save *roll* (using your smart phones dice app).... hey I saved *text*text*text, there, saved.
What would keep people from lying about their rolls? Um... its D&D. If you're playing it, you won't lie about your rolls.
Number 2.
Netflix on my phone. I have it on the lappy, on the xbox, on the ipad, my phone can support streaming media... so why.... can't.... I have... Lookit. I'm not even asking for 3g netflix, just wi-fi supportable netflix would be stellar.
Number 3ish
I want.. and I don't even know if this is a thing.... a decent RPG on my phone. Something legit and fun to play. It's almost like 1, but #1 is a hefty demand, and might not happen. Hell, make number 1 be on a console even.
and don't gimmedat "WoW is like online D&D, so is Mass Effect and KOTOR", cuz it ain't. And neither is Temple of Elemental Evil or Neverwinter Nights. I had a lvl 7 fighter who forwent all his other skills and talents to be a master at the whip, and all he did was trip people, but he could trip them directionally. (It's possible, don't start bitchin, read your 3rd ed books closely). I want a game where it's sandbox, but unlimited sandbox style. (Put all that up with #1 if you must)
Number 4.
One controller to bind them all. It would play PS2 and PS3, Xboxs, GameCube, work as a classic controller, the whole schemagilla. I don't care if it's modded or whatever. And honestly, look at the Sony controllers compared to the Xbox controllers, they're.... almost.... I mean right there.... practically... Ok ok the dpad is in a different spot. but that's something the user could get over.
Number 5
Star Wars: Battlefront 3. I know Pandemic is out of business. I know it.
(while researching if a Battlefront is possible, I came across Number 6)
Number 6
A mute button for Adam Sessler. 3 years til you're 40, old man.... since we're tossin out mute buttons, one for Aaron Kirby too, he has the job I'm supposed to have. (And no, not store manager)
G4 is to video games what Tosh.0 is to the internets and 4chan.
Number 7
A sony bluray remote that doesn't turn on the system when you look at it the wrong way. If you own one, you know what I mean, if you don't own one, be glad.
Number 8
Last one, I promise, I've wanted one of these since they stopped making Game Boy SPs. I pocketsized gaming device. Something small to fit into a coat pocket or pants pocket. The DS looks like you're stealing a bible, the psp looks like you have a flask. I want something small that isn't too small, not Game Boy Micro small (hahaha it's tiny, I get it, my pinky covered the screen), just something phone sized. Don't say go. I have a go. I'm downloading Lunar: Silver Star Harmony for it as we speak. The time it took for me to type this whole blog was how long it took to install. Just somethin small.
Screw it, I'm going to go get out my SP and FF:Tactics.
(Also, Killzone 3 beta is up... awwwsaammmmeee)
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Just Stop Stealing Media......You have No Excuse.
This post won’t make me popular, and some people will absolutely hate me for this, but it’s the truth and needs to be said.
Let me preface this with a TRUE STORY that happened in the same location Doug works (you weren’t there that day Doug, so maybe one of your comrades told you). Here I am in line about to buy a new video game (I honestly don’t know which one, I probably buy a new one every other week), when a customer in front of me of clearly Russian descent (no racism, I promise, there is a reason for me notating that) asks one of the clerks for an R4 game card. The clerk seemed immediately flustered, I was embarrassed for him, and everyone within earshot gave a noticeable look and smile at the Russian guy. So the clerk, very politely, informed the man that they do not sell such an item. The Russian man was confused and asked why not. At this point I visibly rolled my eyes and the clerk explained to the man, “Well, sir, it’s because technically they are illegal.” The Russian man seemed even more confused; he stated he had seen plenty of children that he knew using this device and that all it did was it would give him free video games. The clerk now gave a noticeably fake laugh and replied that of course a device that gives away something for free has to be illegal. The Russian gentlemen then decided against the idea and also decided against what was going to be his purchase of 2 used DS systems because he couldn’t get an R4 card.
Now, the first question that should be answered that may not have been picked up is “What is an R4 card?” Well, most websites that sell it advertise it as a media player and file storage unit. Right…and Bit Torrent is mostly used for legal file sharing…. The real reason people buy these cards is to slam them is so you can load illegally ported games onto your DS. Yes, that’s right, it’s nothing more than a method for illegally stealing games. As per why I noted the man was Russian, I thought I should note this because he did have a very heavy accent and maybe the country where he is from this isn’t really a big deal to buy items like this from a retailer. I know from personal experience that in Iraq and Kuwait it’s the Wild West for merchandise. Illegal games, movies, whatever, you got money, they have product.
History lesson about myself: I used to be younger and I thought stealing media was the way to go. I did it all of the time. Then, one day, almost out of nowhere, I thought about it for a second. I really sat in my room and thought about it….How much effort was put into the song I just got for free? How about this movie? Especially when the movie/song was in piss poor quality. I decided to just, stop, because none of it felt right. Yeah, the record label and the artist are missing their 99 cents, but then why didn’t I just pay 99 cents and get a good quality song? Why didn’t I just rent or eBay the movie and get a good copy? There was no excuse. So, I grew up and stops making excuses. I stop being a thief/pirate/whatever and decided, if it was worth having it was worth paying for.
So, is it ok to steal video games? How about music? Movies? Hmmm..what do you think? Let’s break down the economics of making a song; In the case of say Ke$ha and Justin Beiber, very little work is done and the songs are pumped out about as swift as the last one. Don’t believe me? Go to iTunes, and listen to the sample of Justin Beiber’s song “Baby”. It’s the same 4 words, again, and again, and afu**ing again and AGAIN!!!! This was on the top 40 for some damn reason! BUT, everyone has their tastes, so if you really like the song, you can purchase it from iTunes or Amazon music for 99 cents.
How about movies? Isn’t ok to steal those? Ask yourself this; do you realize how much work goes into making ONE movie? Let’s try an animated feature, like Toy Story 3, those only involve voice actors and cheap CG animation, so they don’t costs that much to make, right? Well, do you know how to use Maya efficiently sir/madam? No. Do you even know what Maya is?
How about this: Toy Story 3 took over THREE AND A HALF YEARS to make! Technically, it took longer than that, but that’s a different story altogether. You know the junkyard scene near the end of the movie? That entire set piece had a dedicated team working on it and it took 1.5 years just to make what amounts to 15 minutes of footage! For the love of crap, it was the first movie that had it’s sound engineering in true Dolby 7.1! Over 200 million dollars was spent on this 1 hour and 48 minute movie, about toys. AND SOME F**KERS WANT TO RIP COPIES OF IT!!!!!!!!??????
SO NO It’s not OK to steal movies!
How about video games? Who cares if we steal those? There are cheap and over priced anyways, so who cares?
You motherfu**er……. I have verbally berated any human being that has ever told me it was ok to steal video games and tried my damnedest to make them feel like a pile of crap.
Once again, let me illustrate the work that goes into making a video game, like say, Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit (2010 edition). This game was in development for two years. It took several game designers, audio technicians, and lots of programmers, level designers, artists, producers, and testers. That was just to make the game, let’s not even get into the distribution channel, that’s a headache in and of itself. At $60 a pop, the game would need to sell at least 4 million copies JUST to break even (side note: as of 2010, they sold 5 million copies). So yeah, stealing games is out, too.
You know, this isn’t a rant to say “everyone” steals media, because that’s obviously not true. The record company does well for itself, the game industry is the only industry that actually stayed the course during the recession, and the movie industry has to find a way to stop bitching about Netflix, but otherwise they are fine.
Really, I am ranting because, WHY steal media? At this day and age the very act of stealing media is more trouble than just buying the damn thing. You want the latest song? Just create an iTunes or Amazon account, to which I promise will only takes 5 minutes, do a simple search for the song, buy it and download it. SIMPLE! How about that movie you have wanted to see? Ah, movies are more complicated because the movie industry has artificial time-release windows in place to keep the consumers grubby paws off of their material…. Yeah I know that makes no sense, but that’s honestly what they do. WELL, here is your solution: get a Netflix account (once again, less than 5 minutes to set-up) and spend $10 a month and watch as much as want. Don’t worry; if you have any game console or Blu-Ray player, you can stream it to your TV just fine. OR visit your local RedBox, pay a dollar, and watch your movie. That’s right, a DOLLAR.
What about games? OH, games are too expensive, $40-$60 is too much for a new game? Listen here ass-hat…people like GOOD games, with great graphics, astounding musical scores, and they want the game to memorable, fun, and a joy to play, and the experience comes with a fu**ing price! Gaming is not a necessity it’s a commodity. That’s right, for as much as Doug, peaceman86, or I talk about games, they are merely LUXURY items, something you do not need in your everyday life. You NEED video games about as much as you NEED mustard on a hamburger, sometimes it’s nice to have but you can definitely get by without it. If you really want a video game on the cheap BUY USED. Except for brand new releases, I almost exclusively buy used, because after I am done with the game I visit my local GameStop and trade it in. With this cycle in mind, I hardly EVER pay full price for a video game. How about this, go to that same RedBox and spend $2 a night to rent a game. It’s really no different than if you went to a video rental store, just more convenient.
This being mostly a game blog, everyone needs to understand games take A LOT of money to make. OK, lemme back up, console games CAN take a lot of money to make. DS games can actually be made relatively cheaply, but that depends on what you call cheap also. An Xbox 360 game with a PS3 port can cost millions upon millions of dollars and will, not can, WILL take at least two years to create. Your average DS game, like Golden Sun: Dark Dawn, take around a year and a half and it'snot uncommon for them to break the millin dollar development budget.
OK, I admit this is becoming long winded, but I hope I have made the point. Stealing media is a problem. It’s not as rampant as the media portrays it to be, but it’s still a big enough problem that DRM is being put into games to try and stop pirates. The cold hard truth is, if you’re a pirate, you’re an ass-clown, a douchebag, an idiot. There is no, and I mean no, viable, excusable reason to steal media while living in the United States. It has become too fu**ing easy to just get the media you want without breaking the bank, or the law to do it. If you want to bitch by saying “I don’t have the money to buy all that stuff”, THEN DON’T BUY IT!
If you steal media, then I hope it gets traced back to your IP address that you are the one doing it and you get sued out the ass. You can contemplate if it was worth that Bit-Torrent download as you stand in front of a judge, wondering if you just should have paid that 10 bucks or 99 cents.
Let me preface this with a TRUE STORY that happened in the same location Doug works (you weren’t there that day Doug, so maybe one of your comrades told you). Here I am in line about to buy a new video game (I honestly don’t know which one, I probably buy a new one every other week), when a customer in front of me of clearly Russian descent (no racism, I promise, there is a reason for me notating that) asks one of the clerks for an R4 game card. The clerk seemed immediately flustered, I was embarrassed for him, and everyone within earshot gave a noticeable look and smile at the Russian guy. So the clerk, very politely, informed the man that they do not sell such an item. The Russian man was confused and asked why not. At this point I visibly rolled my eyes and the clerk explained to the man, “Well, sir, it’s because technically they are illegal.” The Russian man seemed even more confused; he stated he had seen plenty of children that he knew using this device and that all it did was it would give him free video games. The clerk now gave a noticeably fake laugh and replied that of course a device that gives away something for free has to be illegal. The Russian gentlemen then decided against the idea and also decided against what was going to be his purchase of 2 used DS systems because he couldn’t get an R4 card.
Now, the first question that should be answered that may not have been picked up is “What is an R4 card?” Well, most websites that sell it advertise it as a media player and file storage unit. Right…and Bit Torrent is mostly used for legal file sharing…. The real reason people buy these cards is to slam them is so you can load illegally ported games onto your DS. Yes, that’s right, it’s nothing more than a method for illegally stealing games. As per why I noted the man was Russian, I thought I should note this because he did have a very heavy accent and maybe the country where he is from this isn’t really a big deal to buy items like this from a retailer. I know from personal experience that in Iraq and Kuwait it’s the Wild West for merchandise. Illegal games, movies, whatever, you got money, they have product.
History lesson about myself: I used to be younger and I thought stealing media was the way to go. I did it all of the time. Then, one day, almost out of nowhere, I thought about it for a second. I really sat in my room and thought about it….How much effort was put into the song I just got for free? How about this movie? Especially when the movie/song was in piss poor quality. I decided to just, stop, because none of it felt right. Yeah, the record label and the artist are missing their 99 cents, but then why didn’t I just pay 99 cents and get a good quality song? Why didn’t I just rent or eBay the movie and get a good copy? There was no excuse. So, I grew up and stops making excuses. I stop being a thief/pirate/whatever and decided, if it was worth having it was worth paying for.
So, is it ok to steal video games? How about music? Movies? Hmmm..what do you think? Let’s break down the economics of making a song; In the case of say Ke$ha and Justin Beiber, very little work is done and the songs are pumped out about as swift as the last one. Don’t believe me? Go to iTunes, and listen to the sample of Justin Beiber’s song “Baby”. It’s the same 4 words, again, and again, and afu**ing again and AGAIN!!!! This was on the top 40 for some damn reason! BUT, everyone has their tastes, so if you really like the song, you can purchase it from iTunes or Amazon music for 99 cents.
How about movies? Isn’t ok to steal those? Ask yourself this; do you realize how much work goes into making ONE movie? Let’s try an animated feature, like Toy Story 3, those only involve voice actors and cheap CG animation, so they don’t costs that much to make, right? Well, do you know how to use Maya efficiently sir/madam? No. Do you even know what Maya is?
How about this: Toy Story 3 took over THREE AND A HALF YEARS to make! Technically, it took longer than that, but that’s a different story altogether. You know the junkyard scene near the end of the movie? That entire set piece had a dedicated team working on it and it took 1.5 years just to make what amounts to 15 minutes of footage! For the love of crap, it was the first movie that had it’s sound engineering in true Dolby 7.1! Over 200 million dollars was spent on this 1 hour and 48 minute movie, about toys. AND SOME F**KERS WANT TO RIP COPIES OF IT!!!!!!!!??????
SO NO It’s not OK to steal movies!
How about video games? Who cares if we steal those? There are cheap and over priced anyways, so who cares?
You motherfu**er……. I have verbally berated any human being that has ever told me it was ok to steal video games and tried my damnedest to make them feel like a pile of crap.
Once again, let me illustrate the work that goes into making a video game, like say, Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit (2010 edition). This game was in development for two years. It took several game designers, audio technicians, and lots of programmers, level designers, artists, producers, and testers. That was just to make the game, let’s not even get into the distribution channel, that’s a headache in and of itself. At $60 a pop, the game would need to sell at least 4 million copies JUST to break even (side note: as of 2010, they sold 5 million copies). So yeah, stealing games is out, too.
You know, this isn’t a rant to say “everyone” steals media, because that’s obviously not true. The record company does well for itself, the game industry is the only industry that actually stayed the course during the recession, and the movie industry has to find a way to stop bitching about Netflix, but otherwise they are fine.
Really, I am ranting because, WHY steal media? At this day and age the very act of stealing media is more trouble than just buying the damn thing. You want the latest song? Just create an iTunes or Amazon account, to which I promise will only takes 5 minutes, do a simple search for the song, buy it and download it. SIMPLE! How about that movie you have wanted to see? Ah, movies are more complicated because the movie industry has artificial time-release windows in place to keep the consumers grubby paws off of their material…. Yeah I know that makes no sense, but that’s honestly what they do. WELL, here is your solution: get a Netflix account (once again, less than 5 minutes to set-up) and spend $10 a month and watch as much as want. Don’t worry; if you have any game console or Blu-Ray player, you can stream it to your TV just fine. OR visit your local RedBox, pay a dollar, and watch your movie. That’s right, a DOLLAR.
What about games? OH, games are too expensive, $40-$60 is too much for a new game? Listen here ass-hat…people like GOOD games, with great graphics, astounding musical scores, and they want the game to memorable, fun, and a joy to play, and the experience comes with a fu**ing price! Gaming is not a necessity it’s a commodity. That’s right, for as much as Doug, peaceman86, or I talk about games, they are merely LUXURY items, something you do not need in your everyday life. You NEED video games about as much as you NEED mustard on a hamburger, sometimes it’s nice to have but you can definitely get by without it. If you really want a video game on the cheap BUY USED. Except for brand new releases, I almost exclusively buy used, because after I am done with the game I visit my local GameStop and trade it in. With this cycle in mind, I hardly EVER pay full price for a video game. How about this, go to that same RedBox and spend $2 a night to rent a game. It’s really no different than if you went to a video rental store, just more convenient.
This being mostly a game blog, everyone needs to understand games take A LOT of money to make. OK, lemme back up, console games CAN take a lot of money to make. DS games can actually be made relatively cheaply, but that depends on what you call cheap also. An Xbox 360 game with a PS3 port can cost millions upon millions of dollars and will, not can, WILL take at least two years to create. Your average DS game, like Golden Sun: Dark Dawn, take around a year and a half and it'snot uncommon for them to break the millin dollar development budget.
OK, I admit this is becoming long winded, but I hope I have made the point. Stealing media is a problem. It’s not as rampant as the media portrays it to be, but it’s still a big enough problem that DRM is being put into games to try and stop pirates. The cold hard truth is, if you’re a pirate, you’re an ass-clown, a douchebag, an idiot. There is no, and I mean no, viable, excusable reason to steal media while living in the United States. It has become too fu**ing easy to just get the media you want without breaking the bank, or the law to do it. If you want to bitch by saying “I don’t have the money to buy all that stuff”, THEN DON’T BUY IT!
If you steal media, then I hope it gets traced back to your IP address that you are the one doing it and you get sued out the ass. You can contemplate if it was worth that Bit-Torrent download as you stand in front of a judge, wondering if you just should have paid that 10 bucks or 99 cents.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Pc Gaming doesn't know you.
Pc gaming isn't dead.
It's just moved on, it doesn't want to see you anymore. It's got new friends. It's blocked your facebook and won't answer your texts. From years of you ignoring it's gaming abilities and abusing it for hulu and other video whores, it just got fed up. I mean.... when was the last time you even checked it's ram memory or video card? You really brought most of this onto yourself.
PC gamings new friends are a hardcore bunch. Very devoted and usually pretty damn smart. They use computers not just for pictures of naked ladies, but for a job too. Impressed? You should be.
Most pc gamers right now are mining resources, building barracks, researching a new military squadron, scouting your bases, filing their taxes, answering emails, writing their dissertations, charming a woman, and downloading torrents. Meanwhile you have to mute the tv to finish making ramen.
....what the hell is he talking about?
PC gamers. They exist. You won't see them, since they buy most of their games from the internet. Or Steam. yeah, remember Steam? They've gotten pretty big recently.
Here's Steam. Where you been?
For gods sake they even have a Mac section! With decent titles in it!!
So what happened? Well, it's not a short answer, not something easily explained. It's a complex list of changes and problems that caused PC gaming to go to the wayside.
Hardware Support.
ok.... that wasn't that hard. See, here's the thing. The newest game comes out, and your system needs one of the following.
1. HD space
2. graphics card
3. ram
4. memory
5. processor
If any one of these things weren't pretty decent, your game would draaaaggggg.
So, in walks the console game. That sexy beast. It doesn't ask for much, just pop a disc in and the games ready to play. No system hardware requirements, and your game is guaranteed to run at its perfect setting.
Remember the days of praying your system could play the game on medium settings and just dreaming what high or ultra high would look like?
Auto Detect graphic settings........ Medium detected. *facepalm*
But.... you're saying there are people who still play PC games? Yessir.
MMOs and RTSs make up the biggest section, but the people who play shooters know they're better than console shooting. But console shooters compared to pc shooters are a different beast altogether.
Let's take a look at what games are on my mac-attack right now....
WoW and SC2. (playable on a mac is a nice thing.)
MacMAME (if i could own an original copy of The Simpsons Arcade game, I would.)
Plants Vs. Zombies (which basically changed the tower defense genre.)
Fallout 2
And about every Sierra dos game on a rom.
Does that mean every pc gamer has the same list? Oh my no. Total War and Empires are the big ones out there. There are about 5 popular MMOs out there, and a billion more free ones. People do honestly still buy shooters for PC. I sold a guy a copy of Dead Space 2 for the PC.
Mostly it makes me wonder what their systems are like.... I bet they're nice....
Console gaming just made it easier to play games, less requirements and less muck. When this transition occurred, houses had multiple tvs, but usually one computer. I remember the days of having to fight my sister to be able to play EQ on the pc. The thing dragged, looked terrible, and if you picked up the phone...... god help you if you picked up the phone......
Consoles made it easier to play, and were keeping up quite nicely with the pc games. Just think, Doom 3 was used as a benchmark for computers when it came out, it was released on the original Xbox too, and both ran at about the same top fps.
I feel like this isn't all that can be said about pc gaming, not by a long shot. But it'll do for now.
It's just moved on, it doesn't want to see you anymore. It's got new friends. It's blocked your facebook and won't answer your texts. From years of you ignoring it's gaming abilities and abusing it for hulu and other video whores, it just got fed up. I mean.... when was the last time you even checked it's ram memory or video card? You really brought most of this onto yourself.
PC gamings new friends are a hardcore bunch. Very devoted and usually pretty damn smart. They use computers not just for pictures of naked ladies, but for a job too. Impressed? You should be.
Most pc gamers right now are mining resources, building barracks, researching a new military squadron, scouting your bases, filing their taxes, answering emails, writing their dissertations, charming a woman, and downloading torrents. Meanwhile you have to mute the tv to finish making ramen.
....what the hell is he talking about?
PC gamers. They exist. You won't see them, since they buy most of their games from the internet. Or Steam. yeah, remember Steam? They've gotten pretty big recently.
Here's Steam. Where you been?
For gods sake they even have a Mac section! With decent titles in it!!
So what happened? Well, it's not a short answer, not something easily explained. It's a complex list of changes and problems that caused PC gaming to go to the wayside.
Hardware Support.
ok.... that wasn't that hard. See, here's the thing. The newest game comes out, and your system needs one of the following.
1. HD space
2. graphics card
3. ram
4. memory
5. processor
If any one of these things weren't pretty decent, your game would draaaaggggg.
So, in walks the console game. That sexy beast. It doesn't ask for much, just pop a disc in and the games ready to play. No system hardware requirements, and your game is guaranteed to run at its perfect setting.
Remember the days of praying your system could play the game on medium settings and just dreaming what high or ultra high would look like?
Auto Detect graphic settings........ Medium detected. *facepalm*
But.... you're saying there are people who still play PC games? Yessir.
MMOs and RTSs make up the biggest section, but the people who play shooters know they're better than console shooting. But console shooters compared to pc shooters are a different beast altogether.
Let's take a look at what games are on my mac-attack right now....
WoW and SC2. (playable on a mac is a nice thing.)
MacMAME (if i could own an original copy of The Simpsons Arcade game, I would.)
Plants Vs. Zombies (which basically changed the tower defense genre.)
Fallout 2
And about every Sierra dos game on a rom.
Does that mean every pc gamer has the same list? Oh my no. Total War and Empires are the big ones out there. There are about 5 popular MMOs out there, and a billion more free ones. People do honestly still buy shooters for PC. I sold a guy a copy of Dead Space 2 for the PC.
Mostly it makes me wonder what their systems are like.... I bet they're nice....
Console gaming just made it easier to play games, less requirements and less muck. When this transition occurred, houses had multiple tvs, but usually one computer. I remember the days of having to fight my sister to be able to play EQ on the pc. The thing dragged, looked terrible, and if you picked up the phone...... god help you if you picked up the phone......
Consoles made it easier to play, and were keeping up quite nicely with the pc games. Just think, Doom 3 was used as a benchmark for computers when it came out, it was released on the original Xbox too, and both ran at about the same top fps.
I feel like this isn't all that can be said about pc gaming, not by a long shot. But it'll do for now.
Solo Gaming- Talk amongst yourselves.
Ok ok ok, truth be told, there are times when a home theatre set-up is perfect for gaming.
Duh.
Frankly I remember one time telling Stan something wildly outrageous like all Sonic games suck, or something like that, mostly to hear the long-winded response. It was hilarious.
(In fact, I've recently beaten and fully enjoyed Sonic Colors on my DS, delicious gaming)
But, it got me thinking (the recent discussions, not Colors), about the difference between solo gaming and co-op gaming. There are games that are made specifically for multiple people to play, it makes it painfully obvious.
Borderlands, Army of Two, Left4Dead, Gears of War 1 & 2, Halo: ODST.
(theres your list there kids, no Kirby to be found).
All of these games were made with the idea in mind that people will want to play with someone next to them, or on a local network. Army of Two basically demands it, Gears opens up new combat tactics if they're sitting next to you, and ODST has an entire game mode for it (which some might argue is better than the single player campaign solo)
Now, this doesn't mean these are the only co-op games, and this doesn't mean these games are only to be played with friends, they's just a few games that work well with it.
You'll notice you didn't see things like Rock Band and Guitar Hero on the list.
Aren't those co-op games? Well yes.... but..... recently at work we were discussing if you could call music games "games", I mean if you do call them games, then workout games are games, and if that's the case "Personal Trainer Cooking" and "My Stop-Smoking Coach", are games. Where do you draw the line?
I think for many people, at least older gamers, they call it when another person is involved or when the objective isn't as clear. Rock Band has objectives, goals, skills needed to play, but saying "Rock Band and Legend of Zelda are both video games", just sounds off. That's why older gamers consider them music games. When you bring another person into the equation, you completely change the games dynamic.
Co-Op games aren't a bad thing, but they take away, or at least can, take away some of the elements of a good game. Specifically length and achievements. Army of Two plays the same whether you are playing next to someone or not, regardless the game is short and has very little replayability. Borderlands gets you to play it again and again because of different classes, but if you'd only have the one character, it would become a game that you only play with someone around. And if it's a game you play specifically when someone else is around, that's a different kind of game altogether.
Maybe it's me being the old crotchety gamer, maybe I'm tired of games focusing on multiplay more than the game itself.
Bioshock 2, GTA4, Batman: AA are just a few games that come to mind that I personally don't think needed multiplay. Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood is another one, but the multiplay doesn't seem to hinder on the solo game.
I guess I'll always see true games as a solo venture. Imagine if you were fighting Ganon, just your sword, your shield and your wits. He tosses a powerball at you that you daftly avoid, you smack one back to him and hit him square in the chest...... and some asshat kid was in the background screaming that you stole his kill.
Ok maybe not that dramatic, but when you add additional players, do you take away some of the immersion and storyline of the game? Kinda?
It's hard to have a storyline driven game that's played by two people, since it would demand both people be there. Which created the "jump in co-op" that allows someone to join when they'd want to. Gears did that, but still... at the end of the day, Gears of War is shorter because of the space needed for multiplay. That's a fact kids, games with multiplay are shorter in the campaign than games without.
Call of Duty.
ahem.
Now, could you play Rock Band with everyone wearing headphones?
I suppose, but it might be a bit weird. Ok no, Rock Band demands a home theatre setup.
Could you play Dead Space 2 or Killzone 2 with a home theatre setup? Sure. Could you with headphones? Yep. Which one makes it more intimate and personal? Headphones. But that's not to say a home theatre system wouldn't also do the trick. A shooter or a scary game with the headphones turned way up just feels different. And some games, like God Of War, demand headphones because of the uhh... ahem.... mini-games.
The difference there is Rock Band is a music game, while Dead Space and the others are solo games. I prefer solo games. The game designers consider me and me alone when they make the game, so I get more for my money on a personal experience. Not to say there is anything wrong with playing multiplayer. Solo basketball is a sad thing to see, but a group rubix cube is annoying. Both are considered games, just of a different sort. If gamers wanted strictly one or the other, you'd see a crash in the opposite unwanted category, but some gamers want solo games, and some want multiplay.
That all goes into time available and patience for the game. The same people who have multiple prestiges, and have beaten COD the campaign on all skill levels will often return Assassins Creed complaining that it takes too long.
IMO, video games are something you play until you win or complete (sandbox and music games are different), and you can't really "win" or "complete" a multiplayer game. Sure you can be the top of the leaderboard, but give it a week or so, and you won't be. My point? I think there have been many more good games that focused on the solo aspect than there have been multiplay games. It's my $60, I'm not gonna spend it on somethin some hyperactive 7yr old can beat me in 30 times in a row.
Yeah.
Duh.
Frankly I remember one time telling Stan something wildly outrageous like all Sonic games suck, or something like that, mostly to hear the long-winded response. It was hilarious.
(In fact, I've recently beaten and fully enjoyed Sonic Colors on my DS, delicious gaming)
But, it got me thinking (the recent discussions, not Colors), about the difference between solo gaming and co-op gaming. There are games that are made specifically for multiple people to play, it makes it painfully obvious.
Borderlands, Army of Two, Left4Dead, Gears of War 1 & 2, Halo: ODST.
(theres your list there kids, no Kirby to be found).
All of these games were made with the idea in mind that people will want to play with someone next to them, or on a local network. Army of Two basically demands it, Gears opens up new combat tactics if they're sitting next to you, and ODST has an entire game mode for it (which some might argue is better than the single player campaign solo)
Now, this doesn't mean these are the only co-op games, and this doesn't mean these games are only to be played with friends, they's just a few games that work well with it.
You'll notice you didn't see things like Rock Band and Guitar Hero on the list.
Aren't those co-op games? Well yes.... but..... recently at work we were discussing if you could call music games "games", I mean if you do call them games, then workout games are games, and if that's the case "Personal Trainer Cooking" and "My Stop-Smoking Coach", are games. Where do you draw the line?
I think for many people, at least older gamers, they call it when another person is involved or when the objective isn't as clear. Rock Band has objectives, goals, skills needed to play, but saying "Rock Band and Legend of Zelda are both video games", just sounds off. That's why older gamers consider them music games. When you bring another person into the equation, you completely change the games dynamic.
Co-Op games aren't a bad thing, but they take away, or at least can, take away some of the elements of a good game. Specifically length and achievements. Army of Two plays the same whether you are playing next to someone or not, regardless the game is short and has very little replayability. Borderlands gets you to play it again and again because of different classes, but if you'd only have the one character, it would become a game that you only play with someone around. And if it's a game you play specifically when someone else is around, that's a different kind of game altogether.
Maybe it's me being the old crotchety gamer, maybe I'm tired of games focusing on multiplay more than the game itself.
Bioshock 2, GTA4, Batman: AA are just a few games that come to mind that I personally don't think needed multiplay. Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood is another one, but the multiplay doesn't seem to hinder on the solo game.
I guess I'll always see true games as a solo venture. Imagine if you were fighting Ganon, just your sword, your shield and your wits. He tosses a powerball at you that you daftly avoid, you smack one back to him and hit him square in the chest...... and some asshat kid was in the background screaming that you stole his kill.
Ok maybe not that dramatic, but when you add additional players, do you take away some of the immersion and storyline of the game? Kinda?
It's hard to have a storyline driven game that's played by two people, since it would demand both people be there. Which created the "jump in co-op" that allows someone to join when they'd want to. Gears did that, but still... at the end of the day, Gears of War is shorter because of the space needed for multiplay. That's a fact kids, games with multiplay are shorter in the campaign than games without.
Call of Duty.
ahem.
Now, could you play Rock Band with everyone wearing headphones?
I suppose, but it might be a bit weird. Ok no, Rock Band demands a home theatre setup.
Could you play Dead Space 2 or Killzone 2 with a home theatre setup? Sure. Could you with headphones? Yep. Which one makes it more intimate and personal? Headphones. But that's not to say a home theatre system wouldn't also do the trick. A shooter or a scary game with the headphones turned way up just feels different. And some games, like God Of War, demand headphones because of the uhh... ahem.... mini-games.
The difference there is Rock Band is a music game, while Dead Space and the others are solo games. I prefer solo games. The game designers consider me and me alone when they make the game, so I get more for my money on a personal experience. Not to say there is anything wrong with playing multiplayer. Solo basketball is a sad thing to see, but a group rubix cube is annoying. Both are considered games, just of a different sort. If gamers wanted strictly one or the other, you'd see a crash in the opposite unwanted category, but some gamers want solo games, and some want multiplay.
That all goes into time available and patience for the game. The same people who have multiple prestiges, and have beaten COD the campaign on all skill levels will often return Assassins Creed complaining that it takes too long.
IMO, video games are something you play until you win or complete (sandbox and music games are different), and you can't really "win" or "complete" a multiplayer game. Sure you can be the top of the leaderboard, but give it a week or so, and you won't be. My point? I think there have been many more good games that focused on the solo aspect than there have been multiplay games. It's my $60, I'm not gonna spend it on somethin some hyperactive 7yr old can beat me in 30 times in a row.
Yeah.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Sega's Marketing Dept. Sucks...
Have you ever played Vanquish? Most haven't, even though Gamestop advertised it for the better part of 2 months. The unfortunate part of the games popularity is, Gamestop was the ONLY channel that advertised the game! This game had been in production since 2007 and was released in 2010, no less. So, why wouldn't the publisher properly advertise this game they dumped so much time and money into? I think I know the answer...
Now don't take that as a bad game rant "foreshadow". Vanquish is good. REALLY GOOD. You play the game as Sam Gideon, a DARPA agent fitted with an experimental nano-suit that can enhance his senses, strength, and speed (read: Bullet Time) and it has jet thrusters he can use to boost around the battlefield. The suit also has a nano-weapon that allows him to switch weapons on the fly, while its still in his hands. Basically, you're a weapon designed to kill anything before it has a chance to react.
Lemme talk about the plot, so you can understand why Gamestop never advertised it.
*Breathes in deeply*
Sam is sent to a space station that has been taken over by Russian terrorist robots to save a scientist that, incidentally, created an energy source that has been re-formatted as a WMD. It should be noted that the WMD space colony has already destroyed San Francisco and Sam is attached to a bunch of Marines.
This is not exactly an award-winning plot, it is actually the most stereotypical story I have ever heard for a modern game. It's really an excuse to shot stuff, like the story was just an after thought.
Back to being basically a human weapon. After completing this game all I can ask is, what can't you do in this game? You can dropkick a robot right after coming out of a rocket slide, then proceed to slow down time and fill said airborne robot with lead as its tumbling end over end. Seriously, if that last sentence doesn't make you want to buy the game, nothing will. The whole game is just filled with ludicrous amounts of robot destroying violence. I mean, hell, if a large robot fires a big missile at you, Sam can slow down time, shoot the offending missile and, if destroyed close enough to the offending robot, it will blow up in his face. In my humble opinion, this game has more style in it than the last two Devil May Cry games combined.
Vanquish...does have its faults. On big one is the completion time of the game, four to five hours. That’s it. It could be said I took my time with this game and I completed it in four and a half hours. The only incentives to keep playing is to either ramp up the difficulty or try to see if you can beat it with a better score (read: artificial reasons). Maybe that’s another reason why it didn’t have a ton of advertising, since you can beat the game in one sitting if you have half a day to kill. Sorry, but five hours (MAX if you have a TON of trouble with it) of gameplay is hardly worth $60. Maybe $40, but not $60.
Another flaw is how seriously the game takes itself at times. The story is just garbage. The ending of it does hint HEAVILY at a sequel, so I can only imagine how much better this game series can be. Well, there is a moment in the game involving a boombox playing what sounds like GunStar Heroes and…well…you will just have to see for yourself.
My suggestion is to rent or borrow this one, or wait until the price drops substantially or even buy a used copy for $20. It’s a good game, but there is zero longevity to it.
Now don't take that as a bad game rant "foreshadow". Vanquish is good. REALLY GOOD. You play the game as Sam Gideon, a DARPA agent fitted with an experimental nano-suit that can enhance his senses, strength, and speed (read: Bullet Time) and it has jet thrusters he can use to boost around the battlefield. The suit also has a nano-weapon that allows him to switch weapons on the fly, while its still in his hands. Basically, you're a weapon designed to kill anything before it has a chance to react.
Lemme talk about the plot, so you can understand why Gamestop never advertised it.
*Breathes in deeply*
Sam is sent to a space station that has been taken over by Russian terrorist robots to save a scientist that, incidentally, created an energy source that has been re-formatted as a WMD. It should be noted that the WMD space colony has already destroyed San Francisco and Sam is attached to a bunch of Marines.
This is not exactly an award-winning plot, it is actually the most stereotypical story I have ever heard for a modern game. It's really an excuse to shot stuff, like the story was just an after thought.
Back to being basically a human weapon. After completing this game all I can ask is, what can't you do in this game? You can dropkick a robot right after coming out of a rocket slide, then proceed to slow down time and fill said airborne robot with lead as its tumbling end over end. Seriously, if that last sentence doesn't make you want to buy the game, nothing will. The whole game is just filled with ludicrous amounts of robot destroying violence. I mean, hell, if a large robot fires a big missile at you, Sam can slow down time, shoot the offending missile and, if destroyed close enough to the offending robot, it will blow up in his face. In my humble opinion, this game has more style in it than the last two Devil May Cry games combined.
Vanquish...does have its faults. On big one is the completion time of the game, four to five hours. That’s it. It could be said I took my time with this game and I completed it in four and a half hours. The only incentives to keep playing is to either ramp up the difficulty or try to see if you can beat it with a better score (read: artificial reasons). Maybe that’s another reason why it didn’t have a ton of advertising, since you can beat the game in one sitting if you have half a day to kill. Sorry, but five hours (MAX if you have a TON of trouble with it) of gameplay is hardly worth $60. Maybe $40, but not $60.
Another flaw is how seriously the game takes itself at times. The story is just garbage. The ending of it does hint HEAVILY at a sequel, so I can only imagine how much better this game series can be. Well, there is a moment in the game involving a boombox playing what sounds like GunStar Heroes and…well…you will just have to see for yourself.
My suggestion is to rent or borrow this one, or wait until the price drops substantially or even buy a used copy for $20. It’s a good game, but there is zero longevity to it.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Headphone Fussin and Solo Gaming
Yeah, I said it. Headphones are the preferred audio set-up for most games.
Deal with it.
Here's why. Recently I was snowed in at work and watching the GameStop tv, the host Kirby (a unnecessarily verbose man, and I do hope you're reading this...), was talking about how he and his friend were playing God of War 3, an extremely cinematic game. At one point, he had his friend play entirely so he could simply sit and watch. Now in that instance, a home theatre system would have been the optimal setting for sounds. But... here's the issue, two people are involved, meanwhile gaming is a (for the most part) solo situation. Game developers love you, game producers don't. Game developers want you to enjoy and fully immerse yourself into the world. (Headphones do the trick), Game producers want you to share the experience with others to increase their customer base.
Ok, maybe that's a bit far-fetched. But it stands to reason that games nowadays are a solo venture (if you're playing online, you're still playing alone, yet online, and chances are pretty good you're using a headset). I think around the time gaming companies started to make less and less games where two people could sit next to each other and game, home theatre systems started its sad Hulk walk out the gamers door.
Does that mean all gamers have headphones and those who use home theatre systems are damn fools?
Yes. Well.... yes. Ok yes and no.
Games are loud; explosions, guns, screams, general disarray are all best experienced in the confines of your own domicile. Unfortunately due to the population growth the humble homes of humans are becoming quickly crowded. Your neighbors are probably just a few feet away. Listening to you, they're probably listening in.... right..... now....
Maybe I'm too polite, maybe I have concern for my neighbors, maybe I just like that my neighbors hear no sound whatsoever coming from my place, but I happen to love headphones (especially ones worth their money, but we've been over that), more than home theatre systems.
Quantum physically? I'm well aware that I'm not actually "in" the game, that's why I'm looking at a small screen and holding a controller. I don't need 5.2 or 7.2 or any such things for my games. It's a nice feature for movies, I guess, but for gaming it's somewhat excessive. Come to think of it, the only gaming system which could realistically use 5.1 sound would be a motion sensing system.... since "technically" you're "inside" the gaming area. Even then, it's a stretch.
I like my games loud, my neighbors happy, and my gaming experience personal. If that means headphones are the way to go. Then that's the way I'm gonna.
The super nerdy kids have multiple headphones for guests.
But Doug, what if you want to talk while you're gaming?
No talking while gaming is in progress. No listening either, you hear me boy?
If I'm playing Uncharted, or God of War, or some such that other people want to watch with, then maybe I'll turn on some speakers, otherwise.... and this might sting a little.... no one else wants to hear your game. I'm sorry, it's true. Quit being that guy who uses his cell phone as a radio and walks around the mall with it turned up. If you use a home theatre system, that's who you are. Don't be that guy.
Deal with it.
Here's why. Recently I was snowed in at work and watching the GameStop tv, the host Kirby (a unnecessarily verbose man, and I do hope you're reading this...), was talking about how he and his friend were playing God of War 3, an extremely cinematic game. At one point, he had his friend play entirely so he could simply sit and watch. Now in that instance, a home theatre system would have been the optimal setting for sounds. But... here's the issue, two people are involved, meanwhile gaming is a (for the most part) solo situation. Game developers love you, game producers don't. Game developers want you to enjoy and fully immerse yourself into the world. (Headphones do the trick), Game producers want you to share the experience with others to increase their customer base.
Ok, maybe that's a bit far-fetched. But it stands to reason that games nowadays are a solo venture (if you're playing online, you're still playing alone, yet online, and chances are pretty good you're using a headset). I think around the time gaming companies started to make less and less games where two people could sit next to each other and game, home theatre systems started its sad Hulk walk out the gamers door.
Does that mean all gamers have headphones and those who use home theatre systems are damn fools?
Yes. Well.... yes. Ok yes and no.
Games are loud; explosions, guns, screams, general disarray are all best experienced in the confines of your own domicile. Unfortunately due to the population growth the humble homes of humans are becoming quickly crowded. Your neighbors are probably just a few feet away. Listening to you, they're probably listening in.... right..... now....
Maybe I'm too polite, maybe I have concern for my neighbors, maybe I just like that my neighbors hear no sound whatsoever coming from my place, but I happen to love headphones (especially ones worth their money, but we've been over that), more than home theatre systems.
Quantum physically? I'm well aware that I'm not actually "in" the game, that's why I'm looking at a small screen and holding a controller. I don't need 5.2 or 7.2 or any such things for my games. It's a nice feature for movies, I guess, but for gaming it's somewhat excessive. Come to think of it, the only gaming system which could realistically use 5.1 sound would be a motion sensing system.... since "technically" you're "inside" the gaming area. Even then, it's a stretch.
I like my games loud, my neighbors happy, and my gaming experience personal. If that means headphones are the way to go. Then that's the way I'm gonna.
The super nerdy kids have multiple headphones for guests.
But Doug, what if you want to talk while you're gaming?
No talking while gaming is in progress. No listening either, you hear me boy?
If I'm playing Uncharted, or God of War, or some such that other people want to watch with, then maybe I'll turn on some speakers, otherwise.... and this might sting a little.... no one else wants to hear your game. I'm sorry, it's true. Quit being that guy who uses his cell phone as a radio and walks around the mall with it turned up. If you use a home theatre system, that's who you are. Don't be that guy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)