In what is absolutely cliche, I must pause and ask forgiveness from my loyal readers. It has been a solid ten days since I posted and this will be the longest spell without a blog post.
It's been all the rage since it was announced (or "announced") and completely dominated the video gaming news this week. I guess with any new device, even if we've heard about the damn thing for months, it is still wondrous. What Sony is calling the NGP, or Next Generation Portable, I am calling the PSP2. Sincerely, I am glad that Sony is trying to step away from what the PSP was, or had turned into being in competition with its competition; and trying to make it sound remotely noteworthy is redeemable as well. If the NGP is what Sony goes with, I'll be sad. But enough of me ranting, let's discuss stuff everyone has already read.
Sony has been received free advertising for this thing for months, casually "leaking" out photos and letting information "slip" in interviews. The constant stream of news reports, stacking up digitally to the size of mountains, through pure speculation, has kept the PSP2 (that's what I'll be calling it through this blog post) in the annoying limelight for what seems like years. I am glad it is finally out there in the realm of public knowledge because if I have to see one more alleged photo of the fucking system I'd blow my brains out. That's all figurative, of course, but every week there was at least four or five stories on possibilities for Sony's next handheld. It was corporate brilliance to let the reports stack up, but also a news-making nuisance in letting the reports stack up. Why did Sony wait so damn long? I understand it was to try and combat the hype the 3DS has generated; but to do it in similar fashion? Why not show it at E3, even if it was in the early stages, and let the speculation train start there. I was excited for this thing, I really was; the failure of the PSP meant Sony would learn from their mistakes and be careful about how to approach this. And it seems like they have. Now if they call it the PSP2, I may have some genuine feelings towards it, but for now I am standing last in line.
Breaking down the hardware, this thing is a technological marvel. Minus the fact that it looks exactly like its predecessor, the device will behave basically like a smartphone. I don't know why it necessarily needs two cameras, one on both sides, or even Bluetooth. People look like egotistical pricks and ultimately stupid with those puny headsets on. It will also include a touchscreen in the middle, stereo speakers, a built-in microphone, GPS, and both 3G and Wi-FI capabilities. I would also go into detail about the hardware internally but I know nothing about GPUS or core processors but at least it sounds fancy. And the biggest thing - a reward for those that stuck with Sony and kept playing five years after the original came out - working analog sticks! It will actually have functioning analog sticks and not those little fucking twigs that caught sometimes and were really hard to move! Thank you Sony! You have made some kids' end of January very good.
As impressive as the hardware is, it comes nowhere close to the software. As expected, the device will have interconnection with the Playstation Network, and a user interface called LiveArea (a shot at Microsoft perhaps?) that is focused solely around the touchscreen. When I watched a replay of the conference, the person speaking got a little too excited over this. Maybe that's just me. To help contribute to the software, gameplay from several games was shown and other franchises to have games on the device included Uncharted, Call of Duty, Killzone, Wipeout, Resistance and LittleBigPlanet - so most of Sony's best exclusives. Taking a lesson from Nintendo, the PSP2 will also allow the user to download and play games from the Playstation Network (with the awesome lineup it has) and have trophies (something Nintendo has yet to embrace)! Going through the long list of developers scheduled to make games for it, there was one notably absent name: Electronic Arts. It could be nothing, but I thought it was worth pointing out,
I do have my concerns though. For one, the name just sounds stupid. I understand NGP is only a codename and will unlikely be the actual name of the thing, but Sony's creative department (if the company has one) should be scolded. Secondly, according to a video game information firm, Sony told developers that the device is "almost as powerful as the PS3". For everyone that knows anything about anything, the PS3's graphics would be impossible to replicate on a handheld because that would kill the battery life. And a handheld is, expected I'd say, to be used on the go. Or somewhere not near a socket. Unless Sony has some way of extending the battery life, in practice that isn't even possible. Two hours of gaming only is not worth just shy of a grand (Thanks GameStop!) out of my wallet.
Will this do well? I hope so. Will it make up for the inescapable failure of the PSP? Probably. But what Sony should be most fearful of, especially if they expect this to exceed all expectations, and arguably what is leading the hype train right now, is the 3DS. Nintendo is the king of the handheld market, and if Sony can reasonably price it and still have 3D then I'm game.
January 30, 2011
January 20, 2011
Are Games Too Wide Open?
As an avid news junkie, every time I visit Kotaku I am welcomed with an interesting article. They have a thing called "Speak Up" where the readers write in about their questions and concerns to various topics. And the topic list is pretty widespread - so I figured, with such a great topic list at my disposal, why not respond to some of them? Maybe I'll even one in to the news organization and we'll see if I get on. That would be awesome.
The topic today - one that I haven't given much though to - is are games becoming too free? Is the open world concept being pushed to a point where games, and developers, are losing creativity? The complainer also mentioned areas, especially in the Fallout series, feel there is not enough of a noticeable difference when comparing different zones. To some degree this is true, but if a game is trying to distinctively recreate an existing place, do we really need to lose the sameness?
For games like Fallout, now legendary with perfecting the open world concept, the areas don't need to be drastically different for each to feel unique. As unrealistic as the series is, people tend to forget that the games take place in a wasteland, a barren lifeless wasteland. If I was actually stuck in such a scenario, I wouldn't expect a huge diversity of places. Fallout, obviously, is a fictionalized place, however, and the games give a uniquely authentic feel.
One thing I do agree with is that Fallout is known for something else - the glitches. Glitches can be hilarious, but mostly annoying when you get stuck in between two rocks or something else completely silly. In a game with a massive scale, these things happen, and certainly a game like Just Cause 2 could be scaled down. And I don't think immersive-ness (so to speak) plays a factor either - developers are trying to increase the playable time of their games, and as such having an open world will lead to a wealth of enemies to kill, objects to find, and to fill the void us completionists desire. Yes, I am a completionist.
The open world concept, as great as it is, has been used annoyingly as well. Mafia 2, a game advertised as being "open world" is, well, an open world game. You drive from mission to mission with the freedom to explore the rest of Empire Bay; but that's it. There is no reason to explore the rest of the world, and it is a monotonous task to drive home to shit, shower, and shave, and then come back to shooting and pushing ice picks through the back of necks. If I'm playing a fictionalized version of the Mafia, I'd rather be doing the aforementioned things, and not go home to shit, shower, and shave. The open world concept can be utilized effectively when it is appropriate, and diversity of new zones is not needed, needless to repeat.
The topic today - one that I haven't given much though to - is are games becoming too free? Is the open world concept being pushed to a point where games, and developers, are losing creativity? The complainer also mentioned areas, especially in the Fallout series, feel there is not enough of a noticeable difference when comparing different zones. To some degree this is true, but if a game is trying to distinctively recreate an existing place, do we really need to lose the sameness?
For games like Fallout, now legendary with perfecting the open world concept, the areas don't need to be drastically different for each to feel unique. As unrealistic as the series is, people tend to forget that the games take place in a wasteland, a barren lifeless wasteland. If I was actually stuck in such a scenario, I wouldn't expect a huge diversity of places. Fallout, obviously, is a fictionalized place, however, and the games give a uniquely authentic feel.
One thing I do agree with is that Fallout is known for something else - the glitches. Glitches can be hilarious, but mostly annoying when you get stuck in between two rocks or something else completely silly. In a game with a massive scale, these things happen, and certainly a game like Just Cause 2 could be scaled down. And I don't think immersive-ness (so to speak) plays a factor either - developers are trying to increase the playable time of their games, and as such having an open world will lead to a wealth of enemies to kill, objects to find, and to fill the void us completionists desire. Yes, I am a completionist.
The open world concept, as great as it is, has been used annoyingly as well. Mafia 2, a game advertised as being "open world" is, well, an open world game. You drive from mission to mission with the freedom to explore the rest of Empire Bay; but that's it. There is no reason to explore the rest of the world, and it is a monotonous task to drive home to shit, shower, and shave, and then come back to shooting and pushing ice picks through the back of necks. If I'm playing a fictionalized version of the Mafia, I'd rather be doing the aforementioned things, and not go home to shit, shower, and shave. The open world concept can be utilized effectively when it is appropriate, and diversity of new zones is not needed, needless to repeat.
January 19, 2011
2011 Has Started Off With A Bang
The first month and a bit of a brand new year is often a slow time for news organizations, especially those covering the video game journalism industry. People are still on the high of the new year, recklessly damaging their ability to complete resolutions, and so nothing productive happens. There are exceptions to this rule, however, with 2011 being one of them. Not just because of some big releases next week, but also the continuation of a trend seen from last year - the terrible economy swallowing studios whole and relentlessly exacerbating resources until all is gone.
It's always a tragedy to hear of a studio being closed and people - qualified, talented developers - losing their jobs over reasons mostly out of their control. They put a product out that they created, and have no idea how the community will respond. In these times, it is exceptionally difficult to make a masterpiece, or at least something that doesn't suck, and not every studio can spit out works of art. As unfortunate as it is, that is the nature of business. Two studios - Propaganda and Bizarre - are going through this scenario as I write this. One studio made a great game that didn't sell well (that some blame on infrequent advertising) and one had a huge game canceled leading to its demise.
Bizarre Creations, legendary in the field of racing, has treated audiences over the years with Project Gotham Racing and Metropolis Street Racer. The developer also made the immensely popular Geometry Wars, one of the most colourful and seizure-inducing games I have ever seen. And then, the company came up with an idea that we haven't seen since the days of the N64 - a grown-up version of Mario Kart. The template was basically there, and adhering to adult audiences would be a breeze (although I still know plenty of people that love Mario Kart). Blur, a promising new IP with the backing of a legendary developer, was born. As a video game enthusiast, I try my best to play as many games as I can afford; I had heard about this game a week AFTER it was released, with no commercials on anything. The reason why the game sold poorly (and for people that haven't played it are doing themselves an injustice) is Bizarre's owner, Activision, had seemingly no advertisements anywhere. There were commercials but it seemed like these 30-second snapshots were played sparingly. Look at what happened to Tony Hawk: Shred - minus the fact that the game was horrific, it only sold 3000 copies and the only advertising Activision had put out was a 30-second bit at a game conference. Publishers can't magically expect every game they put out to have the same success as Call of Duty.
The other studio - Propaganda Games - had everything working against them. Established as a Vancouver-wing under Disney Interactive, the company was doomed from the start. Pitted to "reboot" the seamlessly terrible string of Turok games, the developer's first outing got mixed reviews. After that, since Disney wanted to further capitalize on the monetary powerhouse that is Pirates of the Caribbean, Armada of the Damned was announced for a March 2011 release. Some major development setbacks and firings forced the studio to cancel the game, hindering its ability to stay afloat. It was deja vu when Propaganda was asked to make the ill-fated Tron: Evolution, the obligatory video game tie-in to the movie sequel. In my review, I tore the studio apart and rightfully so, but I do apologize because it is a sad day that any business - regardless of who's fault it is - goes out of business and people lose their jobs. So I am sorry, Propaganda Games.
Aside from the studio-closing heartache, I'm sure we can expect every more bumps on the road to video game perfection. Activision has said they have tried looking for someone to buy Bizarre, and here's to hoping they do (I have a drink in my hand), but for now we'll have to wait and see. What other memorable moments does this year hold? As I've said, it's fun to speculate.
It's always a tragedy to hear of a studio being closed and people - qualified, talented developers - losing their jobs over reasons mostly out of their control. They put a product out that they created, and have no idea how the community will respond. In these times, it is exceptionally difficult to make a masterpiece, or at least something that doesn't suck, and not every studio can spit out works of art. As unfortunate as it is, that is the nature of business. Two studios - Propaganda and Bizarre - are going through this scenario as I write this. One studio made a great game that didn't sell well (that some blame on infrequent advertising) and one had a huge game canceled leading to its demise.
Bizarre Creations, legendary in the field of racing, has treated audiences over the years with Project Gotham Racing and Metropolis Street Racer. The developer also made the immensely popular Geometry Wars, one of the most colourful and seizure-inducing games I have ever seen. And then, the company came up with an idea that we haven't seen since the days of the N64 - a grown-up version of Mario Kart. The template was basically there, and adhering to adult audiences would be a breeze (although I still know plenty of people that love Mario Kart). Blur, a promising new IP with the backing of a legendary developer, was born. As a video game enthusiast, I try my best to play as many games as I can afford; I had heard about this game a week AFTER it was released, with no commercials on anything. The reason why the game sold poorly (and for people that haven't played it are doing themselves an injustice) is Bizarre's owner, Activision, had seemingly no advertisements anywhere. There were commercials but it seemed like these 30-second snapshots were played sparingly. Look at what happened to Tony Hawk: Shred - minus the fact that the game was horrific, it only sold 3000 copies and the only advertising Activision had put out was a 30-second bit at a game conference. Publishers can't magically expect every game they put out to have the same success as Call of Duty.
The other studio - Propaganda Games - had everything working against them. Established as a Vancouver-wing under Disney Interactive, the company was doomed from the start. Pitted to "reboot" the seamlessly terrible string of Turok games, the developer's first outing got mixed reviews. After that, since Disney wanted to further capitalize on the monetary powerhouse that is Pirates of the Caribbean, Armada of the Damned was announced for a March 2011 release. Some major development setbacks and firings forced the studio to cancel the game, hindering its ability to stay afloat. It was deja vu when Propaganda was asked to make the ill-fated Tron: Evolution, the obligatory video game tie-in to the movie sequel. In my review, I tore the studio apart and rightfully so, but I do apologize because it is a sad day that any business - regardless of who's fault it is - goes out of business and people lose their jobs. So I am sorry, Propaganda Games.
Aside from the studio-closing heartache, I'm sure we can expect every more bumps on the road to video game perfection. Activision has said they have tried looking for someone to buy Bizarre, and here's to hoping they do (I have a drink in my hand), but for now we'll have to wait and see. What other memorable moments does this year hold? As I've said, it's fun to speculate.
January 18, 2011
I'd Rather Have Versus Instead
Usually sequels are a great thing. It first means that a studio has enough confidence in a franchise to warrant another game, but also it means that said studio sees room for improvement. Improvement that can make or break a game no less. To the minority of Final Fantasy fans out there, today's announcement is a great one. A sequel to what some thought as the best game in the series. I'm tentative to say I am excited for this announcement and I hope people don't shun me for saying that, but it's absolutely true. By Final Fantasy standards, XIII was a big change from what the audience is comfortable with. The game itself was great, if not the best JRPG of the current generation; the reviews were generally favourable and the metacritic score is 83. But, as much as a drastic change it was, and how much the game dramatically changed the genre, was it too much of a change to warrant a sequel? And if needless to say, will the game sell well?
In the first game, if you didn't realize it, the logo of the game gave away the ending. For XIII-2, we get an idea of what the second game will feature: Lightning, or a mysterious figure who looks like Lightning, against a similar silhouetted figure. This could be hinting at really anything - will Lightning and crew be facing a Sephiroth-esque adversary or could the main boss(es) be a shadow of their former selves? And also, why is Lightning in black armour and not the white? Will this game be darker than its predecessor? XIII was very uppity-uppity; it was tamer and innocent compared to other games in the franchise. I welcome a darker tone, which may be ultimately necessary, to keep the game interesting. The plot was slow and stale and a character-driven sotry has never suited the franchise (yet alone the genre) well. If that is continued, I won't be buying the game. I probably won't buy it in the first place, but any FF title is on my radar.
While the team at Square is working hard planning for a 2011 release, die hard fans are wondering what has happened to FFXIII Versus - the ill-fated project with an awesome trailer. First unveiled at E3 2006, fans have heard little to no information about the game. It's unfortunate to receive such a reaction from the industry, to follow up with five years of mere disappointment. Foolishness doesn't even begin to describe Square's actions toward this game. I can't tell if the developer has given up, but at least reward our satiable appetites with any information at all, something to leave us jaw-dropped and not tight-lipped; a tidbit of anything to satisfy our dying hunger (a little over the top, yeah I know).
Do something we've haven't seen before Square; not something we've already seen.
In the first game, if you didn't realize it, the logo of the game gave away the ending. For XIII-2, we get an idea of what the second game will feature: Lightning, or a mysterious figure who looks like Lightning, against a similar silhouetted figure. This could be hinting at really anything - will Lightning and crew be facing a Sephiroth-esque adversary or could the main boss(es) be a shadow of their former selves? And also, why is Lightning in black armour and not the white? Will this game be darker than its predecessor? XIII was very uppity-uppity; it was tamer and innocent compared to other games in the franchise. I welcome a darker tone, which may be ultimately necessary, to keep the game interesting. The plot was slow and stale and a character-driven sotry has never suited the franchise (yet alone the genre) well. If that is continued, I won't be buying the game. I probably won't buy it in the first place, but any FF title is on my radar.
While the team at Square is working hard planning for a 2011 release, die hard fans are wondering what has happened to FFXIII Versus - the ill-fated project with an awesome trailer. First unveiled at E3 2006, fans have heard little to no information about the game. It's unfortunate to receive such a reaction from the industry, to follow up with five years of mere disappointment. Foolishness doesn't even begin to describe Square's actions toward this game. I can't tell if the developer has given up, but at least reward our satiable appetites with any information at all, something to leave us jaw-dropped and not tight-lipped; a tidbit of anything to satisfy our dying hunger (a little over the top, yeah I know).
Do something we've haven't seen before Square; not something we've already seen.
January 16, 2011
Damnit, Go Buy More Games!
I once thought video gaming, as an industry, was impenetrable. Economically the industry has been hugely successful, especially with the rise of social gaming and such, but I'm saddened to say that profits for the business have gone down for the second straight year. Even with the highest-selling game of all time, sales of new games in 2010 dropped 6%. This figure is not as significant as what has been seen with other industries, but with a dedicated fanbase of this medium, this is surprising. A few sales records were set in 2011 and yet the profit earned by the entire industry still went down. Notable records broken were Black Ops becoming the highest-selling video game of all time and also having the biggest entertainment launch in history, and WoW: Cataclysm became the highest-selling PC title of all time. The 360 was the only console to enjoy higher year-over-year sales, so congratulations Microsoft. Your console actually made money for once.
Such a trend can obviously be attributed to how terrible some economies are still, even two years after the disaster. The casual audience is unwilling to spend money on games because they fear the worst, and no one can blame them for that - but if they are the sole reason, then this newfound audience is a lot bigger than I thought. For the last three years, both the Wii and popular interactive franchises like Rock Band have given the industry a major boost. But with sales tanking for both and the Wii losing its appeal, even the massive sales of Kinect couldn't stop the year-over-year deficit.
2010 was also a somewhat disappointing year for new game releases. Don't get me wrong, there was some amazing games this year - Red Dead, AC: Brotherhood, Mass Effect 2, Super Mario Galaxy 2 to name a few - but compared to past years, 2010 had only a select few high-profile releases. The Pach-Attack (Michael Pachter of Wedbush Securities and seen on Gametrailers.com) attributed this to the slump also.
In 2011, however, analysts are expecting profits to go up again. Even in the first four months of this year, the gaming industry should see a turnaround. Portal 2, Dead Space 2, LittleBigPlanet 2, Mass Effect 2 on PS3, Marvel vs Capcom 3, Killzone 3, Bulletstorm, Pokemon Black and White, Dragon Age II, Homefront, Crysis 2 and Brink. That's a stellar lineup (with only three of those not being sequels, which I find hilarious) and I'll definitely be wasting money on one or two. So please, all go out and buy a new game ASAP or wait for these great games scheduled to come out soon. We need to help support the industry (or any studio that doesn't have an affiliation with Activision)!
Such a trend can obviously be attributed to how terrible some economies are still, even two years after the disaster. The casual audience is unwilling to spend money on games because they fear the worst, and no one can blame them for that - but if they are the sole reason, then this newfound audience is a lot bigger than I thought. For the last three years, both the Wii and popular interactive franchises like Rock Band have given the industry a major boost. But with sales tanking for both and the Wii losing its appeal, even the massive sales of Kinect couldn't stop the year-over-year deficit.
2010 was also a somewhat disappointing year for new game releases. Don't get me wrong, there was some amazing games this year - Red Dead, AC: Brotherhood, Mass Effect 2, Super Mario Galaxy 2 to name a few - but compared to past years, 2010 had only a select few high-profile releases. The Pach-Attack (Michael Pachter of Wedbush Securities and seen on Gametrailers.com) attributed this to the slump also.
In 2011, however, analysts are expecting profits to go up again. Even in the first four months of this year, the gaming industry should see a turnaround. Portal 2, Dead Space 2, LittleBigPlanet 2, Mass Effect 2 on PS3, Marvel vs Capcom 3, Killzone 3, Bulletstorm, Pokemon Black and White, Dragon Age II, Homefront, Crysis 2 and Brink. That's a stellar lineup (with only three of those not being sequels, which I find hilarious) and I'll definitely be wasting money on one or two. So please, all go out and buy a new game ASAP or wait for these great games scheduled to come out soon. We need to help support the industry (or any studio that doesn't have an affiliation with Activision)!
January 14, 2011
Are Games Turning Into A "Social Lingua Franca"?
For the odd person that doesn't know what a lingua franca is, it is an alternative means of communications (language or otherwise) to what is normal for the people communicating. For example, English currently serves as the lingua franca of international business and diplomacy - primarily because of the American global economic impact - and other countries have attuned for that. When countries and businesses internationally talk business, they do it in English. A lingua franca is kind of like a reserve, or go-to, means of communication when all else fails.
Bing Gordon, the legendary video game exec, has called gaming a "social lingua franca" where millions of people go to share experiences, and start and continue connections with people. Surely games are still the purest form of entertainment, and players may not even realize it, but through all the trash-talk and profanity, they are communicating through a means they never normally would. It's an amazing thing how much gaming can bring people together - especially couples.
He likened the rise of this phenomenon to the rise of interactive PC games, when back in the 80s PC was never seen as an interactive platform. The one reference he makes is to FarmVille: "Facebook is not designed to be an interactive app host. There is still some awkwardness to it." And there is, as most gamers feel uneasy about playing the game, but it is bringing completely different people to enjoy and celebrate the same experience. And that to me it is an amazing thing.
I shouldn't even be comparing myself to Mr. Gordon as he is legendary in the industry on both the business and development side of things - but I have seen this also. Normally, and especially on Xbox Live where this is commonplace, you would never see a 13-year-old and an adult who had no previous relationship argue about anything. This is sad, of course, to hear this stuff, but it does happen, and on first-person shooters these kind of confrontations have become notorious. But these two individuals are communicating when they normally wouldn't, and that is a perfect example of what Mr. Gordon is talking about. Simply put, video gaming is acting as a link or a common focus between people, and this is seen in MMOs quite a bit. People who have had no past contact coordinating twenty-five people who have also probably never met each other in real life.
And the best example of all, is the rise of realistic, interactive digital worlds like Second Life. In this game players create pixelated avatars in their own image or not, and can basically live life as he/she sees fit - date, own a business, go to work; the game is a dumbed-down version of Surrogates, or the Sims on crack.
But the real question, and one I think all people that play video games should ask themselves, is if this idea catches on, what else is gaming capable of? What else can gaming turn into? I can't wait to find out.
Bing Gordon, the legendary video game exec, has called gaming a "social lingua franca" where millions of people go to share experiences, and start and continue connections with people. Surely games are still the purest form of entertainment, and players may not even realize it, but through all the trash-talk and profanity, they are communicating through a means they never normally would. It's an amazing thing how much gaming can bring people together - especially couples.
He likened the rise of this phenomenon to the rise of interactive PC games, when back in the 80s PC was never seen as an interactive platform. The one reference he makes is to FarmVille: "Facebook is not designed to be an interactive app host. There is still some awkwardness to it." And there is, as most gamers feel uneasy about playing the game, but it is bringing completely different people to enjoy and celebrate the same experience. And that to me it is an amazing thing.
I shouldn't even be comparing myself to Mr. Gordon as he is legendary in the industry on both the business and development side of things - but I have seen this also. Normally, and especially on Xbox Live where this is commonplace, you would never see a 13-year-old and an adult who had no previous relationship argue about anything. This is sad, of course, to hear this stuff, but it does happen, and on first-person shooters these kind of confrontations have become notorious. But these two individuals are communicating when they normally wouldn't, and that is a perfect example of what Mr. Gordon is talking about. Simply put, video gaming is acting as a link or a common focus between people, and this is seen in MMOs quite a bit. People who have had no past contact coordinating twenty-five people who have also probably never met each other in real life.
And the best example of all, is the rise of realistic, interactive digital worlds like Second Life. In this game players create pixelated avatars in their own image or not, and can basically live life as he/she sees fit - date, own a business, go to work; the game is a dumbed-down version of Surrogates, or the Sims on crack.
But the real question, and one I think all people that play video games should ask themselves, is if this idea catches on, what else is gaming capable of? What else can gaming turn into? I can't wait to find out.
I Can Pee More Than You!
In all my blog posts, I have covered the hard-hitting news that people expect, but since it has been a somewhat slow news week, I am going to diverge my focus a bit and talk about something completely unexpected - and kind of stupid - but may encourage people to use public bathrooms and have fun doing it. The last sentence sounds weird and could be taken in all kinds of context, so let me explain.
Sega, as I've said many times, is in a weird place right now. The company's games don't sell well, they are done with consoles for good, so they've had to find money elsewhere. The Japanese have done weirder things than this, so it ain't really a surprise to hear that they are turning bathrooms - specifically urinals - into video games.
The contraptions, affectionately known as "Toylets", feature built-in consoles that calculate various things like how much the "player" peed, to how fast his/her stream was. Moreover, players can download their "high scores" unto flash drives. That could lead to some interesting Saturday heroics; "I bet you couldn't beat my high score!" "Oh yeah? I'd like to try. What game?" "How much you can pee." "...What?" (Actual conversation between two average Japanese males, but translated into English for your viewing pleasure).
There is also other games where the "player" can blast graffiti off a wall with a hose, attempt to blow a woman's dress off with the "player" acting like the wind, and a pseudo-competition with the previous user to see who had stronger flow. The best thing of all about this entire story is that Sega plans to monetize this by placing advertisements in between games. Sega certiainly is getting creative in how they make money. Sincerely, I wish them the best of luck in this endeavour, and at least they aren't wasting time, money, and other valuable resources on another failed console. Keep up the good work Sega.
Sega, as I've said many times, is in a weird place right now. The company's games don't sell well, they are done with consoles for good, so they've had to find money elsewhere. The Japanese have done weirder things than this, so it ain't really a surprise to hear that they are turning bathrooms - specifically urinals - into video games.
The contraptions, affectionately known as "Toylets", feature built-in consoles that calculate various things like how much the "player" peed, to how fast his/her stream was. Moreover, players can download their "high scores" unto flash drives. That could lead to some interesting Saturday heroics; "I bet you couldn't beat my high score!" "Oh yeah? I'd like to try. What game?" "How much you can pee." "...What?" (Actual conversation between two average Japanese males, but translated into English for your viewing pleasure).
There is also other games where the "player" can blast graffiti off a wall with a hose, attempt to blow a woman's dress off with the "player" acting like the wind, and a pseudo-competition with the previous user to see who had stronger flow. The best thing of all about this entire story is that Sega plans to monetize this by placing advertisements in between games. Sega certiainly is getting creative in how they make money. Sincerely, I wish them the best of luck in this endeavour, and at least they aren't wasting time, money, and other valuable resources on another failed console. Keep up the good work Sega.
January 12, 2011
3DS, PSP2 - Handheld Extravagenza!
2011 may have one of the best lineups in recent years, and probably one of the best of the new millennium, but also it's one for the history books. The end of 2010 started the rise of two trends to take over the industry - 3D and the rise of motion control and in 2011 gamers will finally get to see the true potential, and survivability, of these two. Motion control will most likely be around for a long time, and judging by the outstanding (and unexpected) roar 3D has had in theatres, we can only expect it to achieve the same level in gaming. One particular product has taken 3D and made it feasible - no stupid glasses - and will, guaranteed, give Nintendo a lead in the industry that will be hard to overcome. It's been salivated over by pretty much everyone, including the gaming blogs (and the lucky bastards who got to test the device at E3), and I can't wait to get my own. I haven't gamed on a handheld in a while and it should be a fun experience.
There is one thing I can't figure out though - why is there so much mass appeal over such a device? It is a company taking an established brand and converting (and caving in) to a popular trend, and historically that is what gamers hate. Or at least the gamers I know. Look at the first-person shooter genre. Or maybe it's the magical absence of glasses? Everyone does look stupid wearing them, and I guess that mystery combining with the fanfare generated with any Nintendo release has led to all the buzz. Personally I'm not excited for that it is 3D - I don't really care for the whole trend - but the fact that it's a Game Boy not including "di" in the title. There has been so many versions of the Game Boy shoved to shelves in the last five years that I stopped caring. But they sell, as anything Nintendo does, and I can't blame the company for trying to keep the brand "fresh" and "new" with "innovations" or whatever people call them these days.
The lineup for day one in Japan (information for the North American and European side of things I couldn't find) is solid, and full of popular game boy titles. Nintendogs + Cats and Super Street Fighter IV 3D Edition should be interesting to play (I'm not big on the first game though) and Professor Layton and his puzzling ways is making an appearance as well.
A report came out today suggesting Nintendo will launch the device in the United Kingdom at 230 pounds (I don't know how to do the pound symbol on a Macbook) and on March 25th. As release dates go, we can expect it in North America about the same time, and for about the same price. Current exchange rates suggest it at $226 CDN. I'm not sure about the price - is the company pulling a Microsoft and pricing their product obscenely higher than the production costs or is the price actually a bargain? I haven't found anything on that just yet. I'm sure the technology itself and the screen are what make up a majority of the costs, and frankly the price doesn't matter for the Nintendo faithful. The thing will sell like hotcakes and the best part of all: it's region-locked! For the game-illiterate (and don't worry, I had to look it up too) basically a 3DS sold in the US won't be able to play Japanese or European games, or anything other combination one can think of. This wasn't at all surprising, as the DS and all its iterations had this as well, and I don't even know why Nintendo does it (probably to sell more games, them greedy bastards).
On a completely separate note, as the title suggests, the ill-announced PSP2 got some news as well. Apparently, a report by MCV says that Sony plans to unveil the product on January 27 at an event in Tokyo. The worst-kept secret in the industry, the PSP2 has been "rumoured" for about two years now, and the fading effect of the PSP makes me really not care for the handheld. I've been barraged with reports about the thing, and I couldn't care less. This thing is a PR nightmare for Sony, so why they haven't done this earlier I don't know. The second thing is the supposed Playstation Phone, being manufactured by Sony Ericsson, is set to unveiled soon as well. Looks like Sony has big plans for this year. (We all know, unfortunately for Sony, that the PSP2 will get its butt kicked by Nintendo in 2011).
Handheld news galore! Should be fun to see what company employs what tactic to win the handheld market over. The 3DS is winning by far right now, but Sony must have something up their sleeve, and I can't to see it. This should be fun.
There is one thing I can't figure out though - why is there so much mass appeal over such a device? It is a company taking an established brand and converting (and caving in) to a popular trend, and historically that is what gamers hate. Or at least the gamers I know. Look at the first-person shooter genre. Or maybe it's the magical absence of glasses? Everyone does look stupid wearing them, and I guess that mystery combining with the fanfare generated with any Nintendo release has led to all the buzz. Personally I'm not excited for that it is 3D - I don't really care for the whole trend - but the fact that it's a Game Boy not including "di" in the title. There has been so many versions of the Game Boy shoved to shelves in the last five years that I stopped caring. But they sell, as anything Nintendo does, and I can't blame the company for trying to keep the brand "fresh" and "new" with "innovations" or whatever people call them these days.
The lineup for day one in Japan (information for the North American and European side of things I couldn't find) is solid, and full of popular game boy titles. Nintendogs + Cats and Super Street Fighter IV 3D Edition should be interesting to play (I'm not big on the first game though) and Professor Layton and his puzzling ways is making an appearance as well.
A report came out today suggesting Nintendo will launch the device in the United Kingdom at 230 pounds (I don't know how to do the pound symbol on a Macbook) and on March 25th. As release dates go, we can expect it in North America about the same time, and for about the same price. Current exchange rates suggest it at $226 CDN. I'm not sure about the price - is the company pulling a Microsoft and pricing their product obscenely higher than the production costs or is the price actually a bargain? I haven't found anything on that just yet. I'm sure the technology itself and the screen are what make up a majority of the costs, and frankly the price doesn't matter for the Nintendo faithful. The thing will sell like hotcakes and the best part of all: it's region-locked! For the game-illiterate (and don't worry, I had to look it up too) basically a 3DS sold in the US won't be able to play Japanese or European games, or anything other combination one can think of. This wasn't at all surprising, as the DS and all its iterations had this as well, and I don't even know why Nintendo does it (probably to sell more games, them greedy bastards).
On a completely separate note, as the title suggests, the ill-announced PSP2 got some news as well. Apparently, a report by MCV says that Sony plans to unveil the product on January 27 at an event in Tokyo. The worst-kept secret in the industry, the PSP2 has been "rumoured" for about two years now, and the fading effect of the PSP makes me really not care for the handheld. I've been barraged with reports about the thing, and I couldn't care less. This thing is a PR nightmare for Sony, so why they haven't done this earlier I don't know. The second thing is the supposed Playstation Phone, being manufactured by Sony Ericsson, is set to unveiled soon as well. Looks like Sony has big plans for this year. (We all know, unfortunately for Sony, that the PSP2 will get its butt kicked by Nintendo in 2011).
Handheld news galore! Should be fun to see what company employs what tactic to win the handheld market over. The 3DS is winning by far right now, but Sony must have something up their sleeve, and I can't to see it. This should be fun.
January 11, 2011
What is Bungie's Next Project?
To be fair, as cynical as I am about Activision, the company does some things right. It was a brilliant business move to get the 10-year exclusive deal with Bungie, as Bungie is an amazing studio and their next project is highly-anticipated. A decade is a long time, and it's obvious that both companies are setting up something big - the Halo franchise under Bungie went nine years strong - but what could it be? Could it be from an already-established franchise like Marathon or Myst, or even (and this is a stretch) but a sequel to Oni? Speculation, however, has said the studio plans on doing something far more ambitious - something fantasy or an MMO. Imagine a first-person shooter MMO set in space? I'd have to quit WoW temporarily and give that a try.
It would be cliche for the studio to do something set in space where something is dying by bullets, and I can't blame them for continuing a formula that has been hugely successful. Halo was their baby - and in many gamers' eyes still is - and the next big project by 343 Industries may be a huge success, or it may disappoint (a sequel or prequel to the Halo storyline, not the remake of Combat Evolved using the Reach engine). Back in October, a Bungie developer was asked about the new IP and he responded cryptically, as many would expect. He said: "Wouldn't it be great if we could make a world that was always there for you?" Many of the gaming sites assumed this was attributed this to an MMO, and it makes sense, but developers often throw red herrings at the very information-hungry industry we are a part of.
It's funny because last night, as I was first starting to write this blog post, I didn't expect any new information to come out for a while. This morning, however, I was pleasantly met with some ripe and pretty useful information - that Bungie's next IP will be on mobile devices as well as PC and consoles. This further proves that both companies are planning something massive, and whether it is Activision's prerogative or not, they are still planning to take over the gaming world. Also, a trademark sleuth website found some interesting trademarks secretly done by Bungie back in July - these are Osiris, Seven Seraphs, New Monarchy and Dead Orbit. It hasn't been confirmed what these will be used for, but one of these is the likely name of Bungie's next project. An MMO shooter called Dead Orbit? I'm game.
Whatever it is, both companies are putting a lot of faith in such an endeavour, and whether or not it's successful we'll have to see. But I know one thing is for certain - I'm intrigued.
It would be cliche for the studio to do something set in space where something is dying by bullets, and I can't blame them for continuing a formula that has been hugely successful. Halo was their baby - and in many gamers' eyes still is - and the next big project by 343 Industries may be a huge success, or it may disappoint (a sequel or prequel to the Halo storyline, not the remake of Combat Evolved using the Reach engine). Back in October, a Bungie developer was asked about the new IP and he responded cryptically, as many would expect. He said: "Wouldn't it be great if we could make a world that was always there for you?" Many of the gaming sites assumed this was attributed this to an MMO, and it makes sense, but developers often throw red herrings at the very information-hungry industry we are a part of.
It's funny because last night, as I was first starting to write this blog post, I didn't expect any new information to come out for a while. This morning, however, I was pleasantly met with some ripe and pretty useful information - that Bungie's next IP will be on mobile devices as well as PC and consoles. This further proves that both companies are planning something massive, and whether it is Activision's prerogative or not, they are still planning to take over the gaming world. Also, a trademark sleuth website found some interesting trademarks secretly done by Bungie back in July - these are Osiris, Seven Seraphs, New Monarchy and Dead Orbit. It hasn't been confirmed what these will be used for, but one of these is the likely name of Bungie's next project. An MMO shooter called Dead Orbit? I'm game.
Whatever it is, both companies are putting a lot of faith in such an endeavour, and whether or not it's successful we'll have to see. But I know one thing is for certain - I'm intrigued.
January 8, 2011
Just Some Stuff About My Lovely Blog
So, by now, through my countless rantings on some clearly absurd topics relating to video games, I want to branch out. Or I am going through the mental process of strongly considering it. What people don't realize is creating a serious blog, especially one where a variety of topics are discussed, is a difficult task. Having to constantly come up with content and fill it with juicy details, especially on a topical blog, is sometimes frustrating. When I'm in the mood to write a post, I scour the biggest gaming blogs and websites for news and there is usually nothing concrete enough to rant on. I want the meaty stuff, the hardcore stories, the ones that can really change a person's perspective on things; and I have tried my best each new post. Even though video gaming is where my heart lies - as ridiculously nerdy as that sounds - I am also pretty active in the political realm (especially American politics) and in sports as well. So this leaves me in a bind: do I continue a topical blog, or move on to bigger topics? (This may not seem like a big thing to you, but as a writer, I have to set certain standards and abide by those standards to a tee).
As a human being I have intellect, and intellect would have already made a decision here - but my brain is failing me. And failing me hard. So I turn to you, the whole lot of you that I have taken a gander at my literal contraption and said "man, this guy sucks" to the people who check each day to see if I post something new, should I change? My blog is meant solely for other people - I only do it because I have free time and I spend my free time either writing or playing video games. It seemed like a perfect scenario to start one of these, never trying it before, to see how it worked out. I love doing it, and I hope people love reading them. The one feeling that beats no other in the life of a writer is gratitude from the reader. That makes it all worthwhile.
I'll cut this off early before I rant on and on which I tend to do. On a personal level, I want to thank everyone who has given my blog a chance, and an even greater thanks to people that check my blog daily. If those people do exist, thank you dearly. I'm going to gather opinions and see what people think. I'll either update this post or write a new one for my plans for this blog. Thanks again! Really!
As a human being I have intellect, and intellect would have already made a decision here - but my brain is failing me. And failing me hard. So I turn to you, the whole lot of you that I have taken a gander at my literal contraption and said "man, this guy sucks" to the people who check each day to see if I post something new, should I change? My blog is meant solely for other people - I only do it because I have free time and I spend my free time either writing or playing video games. It seemed like a perfect scenario to start one of these, never trying it before, to see how it worked out. I love doing it, and I hope people love reading them. The one feeling that beats no other in the life of a writer is gratitude from the reader. That makes it all worthwhile.
I'll cut this off early before I rant on and on which I tend to do. On a personal level, I want to thank everyone who has given my blog a chance, and an even greater thanks to people that check my blog daily. If those people do exist, thank you dearly. I'm going to gather opinions and see what people think. I'll either update this post or write a new one for my plans for this blog. Thanks again! Really!
January 7, 2011
Pre-release DLC - A Good Idea Or Not?
The video gaming industry is all about trends. Something becomes popular and catches fire like herpes in a hot tub (thanks Stephen Colbert for that joke). The big one right now is first-person shooters, with everyone trying to dry hump the success of Call of Duty (but at least these companies aren't overpricing their DLC!), but there is another one about to emerge. The CEO of Gun, a consulting firm for the industry, suggests the pre-release DLC model could become standard going off the success of Dead Rising: Case Zero (selling 300,000 copies in the first two weeks of release). I wouldn't be surprised if Activision jumped on the bandwagon first, actually I think they are going to release a map pack before the next Call of Duty even comes out.
I am on the fence about this issue. I am all for companies utilizing means other than straight advertising to promote their games, and it also gives players a chance to play an extended demo of their most anticipated release. But that's the one problem - there will be some games that are just too short and it could be counted as demos - and if this becomes common practice, companies could end up starting to charge for demos. That's a dire situation, but still completely plausible if the trend continues as predicted. I judge what I want to play by demos, and losing that ability could either cause me to lose out on some gems or not buy as many games as I want. It's the same case for a portion of the audience also, and to charge a fee for their preferred way into gaming will limit accessibility. There are other means to discovering new games - video sites, social networking and the like - but it doesn't feel the same as having the game in front of you with a controller or mouse in your hand.
Case Zero sold 300,000 copies in its first two weeks and now holds the title as the fastest-selling XBLA game ever. The episode had tons of replayability and for $5 was a steal. I loved the fact that it was an entirely new adventure, and felt like a new game, but still had ties to the game it was advertising. It was a simple adventure with interesting characters, destructive weapons, and zombies. This is the best example anyone could come up with for pre-release DLC, and Capcom should be commended. Now let's hope other companies don't tire out this model.
In theory this sounds like a really good idea. But, as the same case with anything, executing the idea may be a different story. If these downloadable episodes had an influence on the main game (like a level increase or some other kind of bonus) like the stats for Case Zero carrying over, then it's perfectly fine. At some point, though, one company will find a way to monetize the shit out of this model (Activision) and it'll become industry standard - and I don't want to overwhelmed by so much downloadable content. Activision may even stop releasing demos for their games and apply this model. (This would be good because those fuckers would go out of business and Bobby Kotick would finally be out of the god damn industry).
I am on the fence about this issue. I am all for companies utilizing means other than straight advertising to promote their games, and it also gives players a chance to play an extended demo of their most anticipated release. But that's the one problem - there will be some games that are just too short and it could be counted as demos - and if this becomes common practice, companies could end up starting to charge for demos. That's a dire situation, but still completely plausible if the trend continues as predicted. I judge what I want to play by demos, and losing that ability could either cause me to lose out on some gems or not buy as many games as I want. It's the same case for a portion of the audience also, and to charge a fee for their preferred way into gaming will limit accessibility. There are other means to discovering new games - video sites, social networking and the like - but it doesn't feel the same as having the game in front of you with a controller or mouse in your hand.
Case Zero sold 300,000 copies in its first two weeks and now holds the title as the fastest-selling XBLA game ever. The episode had tons of replayability and for $5 was a steal. I loved the fact that it was an entirely new adventure, and felt like a new game, but still had ties to the game it was advertising. It was a simple adventure with interesting characters, destructive weapons, and zombies. This is the best example anyone could come up with for pre-release DLC, and Capcom should be commended. Now let's hope other companies don't tire out this model.
In theory this sounds like a really good idea. But, as the same case with anything, executing the idea may be a different story. If these downloadable episodes had an influence on the main game (like a level increase or some other kind of bonus) like the stats for Case Zero carrying over, then it's perfectly fine. At some point, though, one company will find a way to monetize the shit out of this model (Activision) and it'll become industry standard - and I don't want to overwhelmed by so much downloadable content. Activision may even stop releasing demos for their games and apply this model. (This would be good because those fuckers would go out of business and Bobby Kotick would finally be out of the god damn industry).
January 6, 2011
Avatar Kinect... Clever Name Microsoft!
I clearly expected something better. In the Microsoft meeting, as they were discussing the name, one guy looked at it and said to himself: "Hm... it is a group of avatars sitting around on lawn chairs in the freezing cold representing real people on their egregiously overpriced Kinects... What's a good name? Kinect Your Avatar! No. Think, man. You are being paid good money to screw with people. Um... Gotta mention that it's on Kinect and uses Avatars... Avatar Kinect!" The worst part is they actually used the name. I guess simplicity is the name of the game at Microsoft!
Is this really necessary? It seems rather laughable that Microsoft tries to mimic something Sony has had on their own service for over two years now. Game Room was supposed to be the answer to PSHome, and looked at what happened to Krome! (The studio closed down). Most people will say this is a big announcement, and an "evolution" of the whole motion control thing, but come on people. Sincerely, did you really not think Microsoft was going to come out with their own version of a program that encourages laziness and urges people not to actually socialize? Whatever happened with going out to the bar? Or watching the Canadian junior hockey team get their ass handed to them by Russia? (I watched that entire game and wow that pissed me off). For people that argue it's useful for long-distance communication, chances are people reading this have a computer (if not, they are great devices!) so download a free program called Skype. Skype is free! There is no need to spend $200 on a new console, $150 for the fucking Kinect device, and $60 for a year of live just to use this. That's $410 (I added it myself) to free! The features coming out for these motion control devices are useless and it makes Microsoft look pathetic. Or ready to take over the world. Take your pick.
I didn't bother watching the press conference because Steve Ballmer scares me. He looks like Terry Bradshaw "frond"ed. (Internet people will know what I am talking about. The normal people should look it up. "Fronds" in Google and you'll instantly see what I mean). And, regardless of his appearance, he made the "mistake" of saying Kinect "sold" "eight million units", which it didn't. That was a flat out lie, and he knows it. These things are rehearsed and he knows not to make mistakes. This was on purpose, and then Microsoft plays it safe and says he meant to say shipped. Get it right next time.
Why do people care about some crap golf game for Fable? Fable III was an over-hyped, underwhelming end to a once great trilogy (Fable 2 sucked) and it came out three months ago. Anyone buying the game then already has stupid amounts of gold and doesn't need some bullshit Windows Live game to make more. I don't know what the hell is going on at Microsoft's marketing division. This type of game should be released around the time the actual game is released, not a quarter-year later. THAT'S A LONG TIME IN GAMING IF YOU HAVEN'T DISCOVERED THAT YET. PEOPLE HAVE MOVED ON TO BIGGER AND BETTER GAMES, ESPECIALLY WITH THE LINEUP FOR THE FIRST PART OF 2011.
The Netflix announcement I can understand because we already knew it was coming. The Hulu Plus I really don't though. People can access high quality, streaming video Hulu's website for free, yet the console companies expect people to pay $10 a month to use Hulu Plus on consoles. Is this not highway robbery? It also hints that Hulu plans to soon make their service pay-to-use also. This seems all so unnecessary and still there are idiots out there willing to pay for this. Netflix, I get, I really do. BUT NOT TELEVISION WHICH IS USUALLY FREE ON MOST CHANNEL'S WEBSITES ANYWAY WITH LIMITED ADVERTISING. I'm ashamed to say I am a part of a society that is so misinformed sometimes.
I know the Consumer Electronics Show is not usually the biggest place for gaming announcements but this nonsensical bullshit could be saved for some other conference.
Also to Sony (who actually had a show worth watching except for the fucking Cirque du Soleil guys appearing again; seriously why the fuck do the gaming companies love these guys so much?), just show the PSP2 and the phone so I can stop reading countless reports on respected blogs. If you would do that, that'd be great. Thanks. Blog post done.
P.S. I apologize for the vulgarity of this blog post. Just I wish Microsoft would get their head out of their ass, stop sucking on their own bullshit, and give us some actually useful stuff. Rant done. :) Good night and good luck.
Is this really necessary? It seems rather laughable that Microsoft tries to mimic something Sony has had on their own service for over two years now. Game Room was supposed to be the answer to PSHome, and looked at what happened to Krome! (The studio closed down). Most people will say this is a big announcement, and an "evolution" of the whole motion control thing, but come on people. Sincerely, did you really not think Microsoft was going to come out with their own version of a program that encourages laziness and urges people not to actually socialize? Whatever happened with going out to the bar? Or watching the Canadian junior hockey team get their ass handed to them by Russia? (I watched that entire game and wow that pissed me off). For people that argue it's useful for long-distance communication, chances are people reading this have a computer (if not, they are great devices!) so download a free program called Skype. Skype is free! There is no need to spend $200 on a new console, $150 for the fucking Kinect device, and $60 for a year of live just to use this. That's $410 (I added it myself) to free! The features coming out for these motion control devices are useless and it makes Microsoft look pathetic. Or ready to take over the world. Take your pick.
I didn't bother watching the press conference because Steve Ballmer scares me. He looks like Terry Bradshaw "frond"ed. (Internet people will know what I am talking about. The normal people should look it up. "Fronds" in Google and you'll instantly see what I mean). And, regardless of his appearance, he made the "mistake" of saying Kinect "sold" "eight million units", which it didn't. That was a flat out lie, and he knows it. These things are rehearsed and he knows not to make mistakes. This was on purpose, and then Microsoft plays it safe and says he meant to say shipped. Get it right next time.
Why do people care about some crap golf game for Fable? Fable III was an over-hyped, underwhelming end to a once great trilogy (Fable 2 sucked) and it came out three months ago. Anyone buying the game then already has stupid amounts of gold and doesn't need some bullshit Windows Live game to make more. I don't know what the hell is going on at Microsoft's marketing division. This type of game should be released around the time the actual game is released, not a quarter-year later. THAT'S A LONG TIME IN GAMING IF YOU HAVEN'T DISCOVERED THAT YET. PEOPLE HAVE MOVED ON TO BIGGER AND BETTER GAMES, ESPECIALLY WITH THE LINEUP FOR THE FIRST PART OF 2011.
The Netflix announcement I can understand because we already knew it was coming. The Hulu Plus I really don't though. People can access high quality, streaming video Hulu's website for free, yet the console companies expect people to pay $10 a month to use Hulu Plus on consoles. Is this not highway robbery? It also hints that Hulu plans to soon make their service pay-to-use also. This seems all so unnecessary and still there are idiots out there willing to pay for this. Netflix, I get, I really do. BUT NOT TELEVISION WHICH IS USUALLY FREE ON MOST CHANNEL'S WEBSITES ANYWAY WITH LIMITED ADVERTISING. I'm ashamed to say I am a part of a society that is so misinformed sometimes.
I know the Consumer Electronics Show is not usually the biggest place for gaming announcements but this nonsensical bullshit could be saved for some other conference.
Also to Sony (who actually had a show worth watching except for the fucking Cirque du Soleil guys appearing again; seriously why the fuck do the gaming companies love these guys so much?), just show the PSP2 and the phone so I can stop reading countless reports on respected blogs. If you would do that, that'd be great. Thanks. Blog post done.
P.S. I apologize for the vulgarity of this blog post. Just I wish Microsoft would get their head out of their ass, stop sucking on their own bullshit, and give us some actually useful stuff. Rant done. :) Good night and good luck.
January 5, 2011
2011 - The Year of Kinect?
Microsoft's motion control device was one of the biggest stories of last year. It sold just about five million units before Christmas, matching the company's previous assertion, and making this casual revolution of the current generation even more revolutionary. It was only a matter of time before both Microsoft and Sony released their own motion control peripherals and both were received favourably. But that was the end of 2010 - since both are out on the market now and the wondrous aura has died down somewhat, how else can the companies spark more interest in their device?
Microsoft has claimed 2011 will be the "the year of Kinect". Right now it's hard to judge since I'm not a psychic, but the lineups for both Kinect and the 360 itself are not great. The Kinect has the return of Steel Battalion, codename: D (which we still don't know anything about), Child of Eden (the spiritual successor to eyegasm Rez) and Project Draco (a ripoff of the classic Panzer Dragoon series). Sure these games look good, and the hype will start building soon, but a year is a long time. Four games can't constitute "the year of" title. Reports came out yesterday for leaked photos for something called "Avatar Kinect" set to be unveiled a few hours after I post this blog post. Could it be even more interactivity between users of the device? Most likely. Moreover, Microsoft has also confirmed titles for *takes a breath* Activision, Bethesda, Capcom, Disney, EA, Konami (can you slash one mirrion troops?), MTV Games, Namco Bandai, Sega, Square Enix, THQ and Ubisoft. All in alphabetical order too! (Love you Wikipedia). With most of the major studios making games, it shows the industry is realizing the potential of this device - and five million units won't play themselves!
Outside of Microsoft's control is what other people have done with the device and its capabilities. University students in California set up WoW with the device, and it looks pretty cool. Microsoft has plans to release the device on PCs with an MMO called Divine Souls to be the first game using it. An MMO using motion control sounds appealing, but with the hectic nature of battles in these types of games, is it really feasible and necessary to do this? Other teams have set up Kinect to control Google Chrome, play fictional instruments by tapping keys on a desk, and even used multiple Kinects to function as a security system!
Like every device, however, Kinect has a few things working against it. For one, the price. I know multitudes of people that want the device, but can't afford the steep price. For others, its the price of the games (at $60 each). The biggest thing, though, has to be the quality of games. Out of the seventeen launch titles for Kinect, only four or five looked tolerable. The other games had a lot wrong with them - unresponsiveness, terrible and repetitive gameplay - I even heard one customer say "The Wii did it better." That has to sting, Microsoft. The reason I refuse to get one is not just the fact that it's motion control (because contrary to most hardcore gamers out there, I think this trend has some potential for great titles) but a report that came out saying it costs Microsoft about $50.00 to make it. And they are selling it at $149.99 I saw some Wiis this holiday season going for only $100! People purchasing the device forget that you need a console to make it work, and then a year of Live as well. It's a BIG commitment economically. And yet, after all these warnings, five million people still bought the device. This just amazes me.
The technology has a lot of potential, and therefore could earn the "year of" title. By this time next year, will Microsoft be on top of the casual world, or will Sony take over, or will the Wii surge again to win the console war? I don't know, but one thing is for certain: Kinect helped Microsoft win 2010, and they'll be tough to beat in 2011.
Microsoft has claimed 2011 will be the "the year of Kinect". Right now it's hard to judge since I'm not a psychic, but the lineups for both Kinect and the 360 itself are not great. The Kinect has the return of Steel Battalion, codename: D (which we still don't know anything about), Child of Eden (the spiritual successor to eyegasm Rez) and Project Draco (a ripoff of the classic Panzer Dragoon series). Sure these games look good, and the hype will start building soon, but a year is a long time. Four games can't constitute "the year of" title. Reports came out yesterday for leaked photos for something called "Avatar Kinect" set to be unveiled a few hours after I post this blog post. Could it be even more interactivity between users of the device? Most likely. Moreover, Microsoft has also confirmed titles for *takes a breath* Activision, Bethesda, Capcom, Disney, EA, Konami (can you slash one mirrion troops?), MTV Games, Namco Bandai, Sega, Square Enix, THQ and Ubisoft. All in alphabetical order too! (Love you Wikipedia). With most of the major studios making games, it shows the industry is realizing the potential of this device - and five million units won't play themselves!
Outside of Microsoft's control is what other people have done with the device and its capabilities. University students in California set up WoW with the device, and it looks pretty cool. Microsoft has plans to release the device on PCs with an MMO called Divine Souls to be the first game using it. An MMO using motion control sounds appealing, but with the hectic nature of battles in these types of games, is it really feasible and necessary to do this? Other teams have set up Kinect to control Google Chrome, play fictional instruments by tapping keys on a desk, and even used multiple Kinects to function as a security system!
Like every device, however, Kinect has a few things working against it. For one, the price. I know multitudes of people that want the device, but can't afford the steep price. For others, its the price of the games (at $60 each). The biggest thing, though, has to be the quality of games. Out of the seventeen launch titles for Kinect, only four or five looked tolerable. The other games had a lot wrong with them - unresponsiveness, terrible and repetitive gameplay - I even heard one customer say "The Wii did it better." That has to sting, Microsoft. The reason I refuse to get one is not just the fact that it's motion control (because contrary to most hardcore gamers out there, I think this trend has some potential for great titles) but a report that came out saying it costs Microsoft about $50.00 to make it. And they are selling it at $149.99 I saw some Wiis this holiday season going for only $100! People purchasing the device forget that you need a console to make it work, and then a year of Live as well. It's a BIG commitment economically. And yet, after all these warnings, five million people still bought the device. This just amazes me.
The technology has a lot of potential, and therefore could earn the "year of" title. By this time next year, will Microsoft be on top of the casual world, or will Sony take over, or will the Wii surge again to win the console war? I don't know, but one thing is for certain: Kinect helped Microsoft win 2010, and they'll be tough to beat in 2011.
January 3, 2011
How Big Can Call of Duty Get?
After a light news week and limited stuff to write about, the year has now started off nicely. I have some ideas with what I want to do with this blog and I may make a separate post about what my plans are. If you guys are interested that is. But please, keep reading and comment if you have a Blogger account. Any criticism is helpful. Stay tuned for further updates! Now onto post number 24:
Call of Duty is on top of the gaming world and it seems there is no slowing the franchise down. Modern Warfare 2 had the biggest launch of all time, and soon after Black Ops beat it by 10%. Any studio would be ecstatic that people appreciate their game that much, and everyone at that studio would be grateful - but not Activision! According to Wedbush Securities, the place where the Pach-Attack works, they predict Activision will unveil a "second tier" of its cashcow franchise. They also expect this to happen in the first quarter of 2011 - extremely soon. What could Activison be planning and how much bigger could Call of Duty possibly get?
The term "second tier" could mean anything. For Activision, the options are limitless. It could stretch from an in-game store, to a subscription-based MMO, to even releasing two games a year. And the sad thing is all of these would pay off. The CoD fanbase is very devoted - especially when new games and those egregiously priced map packs come out - and their reaction to Activision's next project should be interesting. We all think a Call of Duty MMO would pay off, but what if it doesn't? What if the fanbase finally sees what Activision is doing and calls them out on it? (This will never, ever happen until the day gaming dies, but it's always fun to speculate). At least if the company went the MMO format, they have Blizzard to look at for experience.
An evolution of the multiplayer side of this franchise has been rumoured for a long time so this isn't really a surprise. For avid readers of the prominent gaming blogs, there is an article every three weeks or so by Kotick or someone else reaffirming for everyone the possibility of an expansion. I don't know if this is Activision reassuring the video gaming industry that Call of Duty is still around - trust me, none of us have forgotten - or if they are bragging. I don't know, nor do I really care, but the gaming blogs can stop reporting on it already. I realize it makes for nice fodder, and the only more persistent story than this one last year was whether Brett Favre was going to retire.
In the document earlier this year, Activision laid out their plan for CoD; the company plans to deliver "high-margin digital online content and further the brand as the leading entertainment franchise in new geographies, new genres and with new business models." That's the corporate way of saying they want to take over the world. The aggressiveness of Activision can see in two ways: either the company is doing something good by exposing more people to video gaming, or destroying the very foundation of what video gaming is now. Such aggressiveness will open up new audiences beyond the already-established hardcore and newfound motion control crowd, and will give the rest of society a chance at redeeming their aged hatred of the industry. But also such aggressiveness puts Activision at an extreme advantage, way ahead of others who dare challenge Call of Duty's reign. Competition breeds innovation, and if one franchise is so successful that it cockblocks other franchises, then the FPS genre and maybe even video gaming in general is doomed. I hate to sound like a pessimist, but it is entirely possible for the actions of one company with one game to have a domino effect on the rest of the industry - that's just how fragile most economic markets are. Activision's actions could lead to another crash like the one in 1983.
But that is, of course, the gloomiest of scenarios and highly unlikely in the current environment. The state of the industry is strong and healthy and resilient to anything, even the economic troubles of the last two years - and the Call of Duty franchise has proven that. Even in bad times, when families are hard-pressed to feed their families and pay bills, people are still out fairing the bad weather to buy games. People claim the success of CoD on the stellar gameplay - and to some extent I agree, I was a big fan of Modern Warfare 1 myself - but it's getting stale. There is only so much a franchise can do before it must expand, and expand they will. I'm just waiting for the next Call of Duty game after modern warfare is done - one in space.
Call of Duty is on top of the gaming world and it seems there is no slowing the franchise down. Modern Warfare 2 had the biggest launch of all time, and soon after Black Ops beat it by 10%. Any studio would be ecstatic that people appreciate their game that much, and everyone at that studio would be grateful - but not Activision! According to Wedbush Securities, the place where the Pach-Attack works, they predict Activision will unveil a "second tier" of its cashcow franchise. They also expect this to happen in the first quarter of 2011 - extremely soon. What could Activison be planning and how much bigger could Call of Duty possibly get?
The term "second tier" could mean anything. For Activision, the options are limitless. It could stretch from an in-game store, to a subscription-based MMO, to even releasing two games a year. And the sad thing is all of these would pay off. The CoD fanbase is very devoted - especially when new games and those egregiously priced map packs come out - and their reaction to Activision's next project should be interesting. We all think a Call of Duty MMO would pay off, but what if it doesn't? What if the fanbase finally sees what Activision is doing and calls them out on it? (This will never, ever happen until the day gaming dies, but it's always fun to speculate). At least if the company went the MMO format, they have Blizzard to look at for experience.
An evolution of the multiplayer side of this franchise has been rumoured for a long time so this isn't really a surprise. For avid readers of the prominent gaming blogs, there is an article every three weeks or so by Kotick or someone else reaffirming for everyone the possibility of an expansion. I don't know if this is Activision reassuring the video gaming industry that Call of Duty is still around - trust me, none of us have forgotten - or if they are bragging. I don't know, nor do I really care, but the gaming blogs can stop reporting on it already. I realize it makes for nice fodder, and the only more persistent story than this one last year was whether Brett Favre was going to retire.
In the document earlier this year, Activision laid out their plan for CoD; the company plans to deliver "high-margin digital online content and further the brand as the leading entertainment franchise in new geographies, new genres and with new business models." That's the corporate way of saying they want to take over the world. The aggressiveness of Activision can see in two ways: either the company is doing something good by exposing more people to video gaming, or destroying the very foundation of what video gaming is now. Such aggressiveness will open up new audiences beyond the already-established hardcore and newfound motion control crowd, and will give the rest of society a chance at redeeming their aged hatred of the industry. But also such aggressiveness puts Activision at an extreme advantage, way ahead of others who dare challenge Call of Duty's reign. Competition breeds innovation, and if one franchise is so successful that it cockblocks other franchises, then the FPS genre and maybe even video gaming in general is doomed. I hate to sound like a pessimist, but it is entirely possible for the actions of one company with one game to have a domino effect on the rest of the industry - that's just how fragile most economic markets are. Activision's actions could lead to another crash like the one in 1983.
But that is, of course, the gloomiest of scenarios and highly unlikely in the current environment. The state of the industry is strong and healthy and resilient to anything, even the economic troubles of the last two years - and the Call of Duty franchise has proven that. Even in bad times, when families are hard-pressed to feed their families and pay bills, people are still out fairing the bad weather to buy games. People claim the success of CoD on the stellar gameplay - and to some extent I agree, I was a big fan of Modern Warfare 1 myself - but it's getting stale. There is only so much a franchise can do before it must expand, and expand they will. I'm just waiting for the next Call of Duty game after modern warfare is done - one in space.
The Biggest Tragedy of 2010 - 1 vs 100 Live
A deeply pessimistic aura fell on the day of July 15 - a great loss for fans of both game shows and Xbox Live. Now I love both of these, and I was ecstatic to have heard that Microsoft was putting a version of 1 vs 100 on Xbox Live for free. An interactive competition of the masses with the focus on one (which I never was) battling for trivia supremacy. Throw in the occasional repeated question and disconnection and you have one of the most interestingly simple experiences of gaming.
It was really, really fun to lay back, relax, and answer questions with friends. Especially when they would make it into something more and bragging rights were put on the line (I would win most of the time). To be fair, I was playing against Americans and some of the questions tailored to the Canadian audience; but these tests of knowledge were a rarity at best, and at the rare time these did come up, I would get them instantaneously. I had some good memories with this game. I even have all the achievements and one of the few who do! (Something minuscule to be proud of).
And then, something else promising happened. Before we knew Project Natal existed, another free game was speculated and then confirmed by Microsoft - a racing game called Joyride. The game got a full-scale showing at E3 2009 and was said to be a free Arcade game later that year. After anxiously waiting for over a year with nothing coming out about the game, it was revealed to be part of the lineup for the newly announced Kinect. My heart broke in two - a clearly missed opportunity to expand on the success of 1 vs 100 Live.
Why 1 vs 100 Live failed is partly a mystery. Microsoft said it was because the company couldn't find any major sponsors for season three and I think this is complete bullshit. I suspect Microsoft wanted this to be bigger than it was - although it set a Guinness record for most people playing a game show concurrently - and this easily could have been achieved if Microsoft gave the game proper advertising. There was minimal mention of it on the main Xbox Live screen, and I never saw it under the Spotlight tab. In both seasons, I played every Tuesday and Friday I possibly could, and I know many others did as well. I know a few people who bought gold subscriptions JUST to play it. With such success in a limited period of time, and knowing how desperate Microsoft is to keep people paying for a year of Xbox Live, it's really a shame because the continuation of this game would have been hugely beneficial for both parties.
The team who worked on 1 vs 100 Live, Microsoft claims, is working on bigger and better stuff for Microsoft Game Studios. If they try and repeat the same model with a different game show, I'll give it a shot. The way 1 vs 100 played was perfect for a massive console game and few other game shows have the formula to function successfully. But, if MGS can work the magic once again, I'll give the game a chance. The free model could be huge for Microsoft and I wish that they would see it the same way.
It was really, really fun to lay back, relax, and answer questions with friends. Especially when they would make it into something more and bragging rights were put on the line (I would win most of the time). To be fair, I was playing against Americans and some of the questions tailored to the Canadian audience; but these tests of knowledge were a rarity at best, and at the rare time these did come up, I would get them instantaneously. I had some good memories with this game. I even have all the achievements and one of the few who do! (Something minuscule to be proud of).
And then, something else promising happened. Before we knew Project Natal existed, another free game was speculated and then confirmed by Microsoft - a racing game called Joyride. The game got a full-scale showing at E3 2009 and was said to be a free Arcade game later that year. After anxiously waiting for over a year with nothing coming out about the game, it was revealed to be part of the lineup for the newly announced Kinect. My heart broke in two - a clearly missed opportunity to expand on the success of 1 vs 100 Live.
Why 1 vs 100 Live failed is partly a mystery. Microsoft said it was because the company couldn't find any major sponsors for season three and I think this is complete bullshit. I suspect Microsoft wanted this to be bigger than it was - although it set a Guinness record for most people playing a game show concurrently - and this easily could have been achieved if Microsoft gave the game proper advertising. There was minimal mention of it on the main Xbox Live screen, and I never saw it under the Spotlight tab. In both seasons, I played every Tuesday and Friday I possibly could, and I know many others did as well. I know a few people who bought gold subscriptions JUST to play it. With such success in a limited period of time, and knowing how desperate Microsoft is to keep people paying for a year of Xbox Live, it's really a shame because the continuation of this game would have been hugely beneficial for both parties.
The team who worked on 1 vs 100 Live, Microsoft claims, is working on bigger and better stuff for Microsoft Game Studios. If they try and repeat the same model with a different game show, I'll give it a shot. The way 1 vs 100 played was perfect for a massive console game and few other game shows have the formula to function successfully. But, if MGS can work the magic once again, I'll give the game a chance. The free model could be huge for Microsoft and I wish that they would see it the same way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)