Following in the steps of Rockstar, Activision and EA Sports, Epic has announced a one-time fee for all DLC following the release of Gears of War 3. (The first sentence wasn't purposely meant to rhyme so smoothly.) Calling this marketing gimmick the 'season pass', players who purchase it supposedly get subsequent downloadable content for a third less than buying all individually.
I don't mind paying for downloadable content that was probably meant to be included on the original disc. It's additional content for a game I am aching to play and I trust Epic enough given the extraordinary DLC for Gears of War 2. But how can these companies expect us to pay blindly? The most aggravating thing about this whole situation is not individual companies charging - they have the right - but that fans will fall into the trap and the extra content could disappoint. The occasional map pack or two is expected, but what if one DLC is purely weapon skins? I can type with confidence that not everyone is interested in the aesthetics of characters.
Therefore, it's up to the uneasily deceived fans to stand tall, united as one, and not fall victim. If it works, other companies will start omitting valuable content from the main game and charge a ridiculous fee to access the content knowing some fans will pay. The pass is available on launch day, September 20, and the first DLC is planned for November.
I beg you all not to get trapped by this silly corporate mechanism meant to steal your money. Use common sense and know what you are buying before you buy it. Seriously, people. Jeff out.
August 30, 2011
August 29, 2011
A Discussion About The Gaming Blogosphere
As I've said on multiple occasions, blogging is an elevated form of citizen journalism. A platform between individuals to exchange positive and productive ideas about a mutually shared passion. No other time in human history has a form of communication presented so many people with the opportunity to have their unique thoughts heard and be part of a truly worldwide audience. The magic of blogging has spurred the new generation into communicating with each other and not segregating us through technological means.
The process of reading, researching, dot-jotting and idea gathering not only encourages others to blog also, but can strive many readers to become interested in the topic, thus furthering the discussed medium. This happens especially when a blog post goes viral - a dream of many prospective bloggers - bringing in instant viewership and perhaps even revenue.
Gaming is still rarely discussed in the mass media. While several sites (and blogs) dedicated to gaming are successful, the group pales in comparison to other forms of consumed media. But this is slowly changing and the industry has finally started noticing. Including my lovely blog, the popularity of gaming-centric blogs has exploded in the last number of years, and could possibly be attributed to the rising interest in casual and social gaming. Only those deemed the "hardcore" perused such blogs five years ago, but the rapid growth of sites like Joystiq (started in 2004) and Destructoid (started in 2006) proves the trend.
Banking on this, many aspiring gaming journalists and bloggers have created websites hoping to either get noticed or attain a solid audience. Sadly, these beginner websites don't have the extraordinary access to the industry like the bigger sites (including me) so oftentimes the news is reiterated and the mess of websites becomes redundant. Any blogger knows the imperative blogging creed: "content is king". Reiterating content is viewed as criminal unless attributed to the original source, so that's why many bloggers pose ridiculous questions hoping to attract eyes. I'm guilty of doing this but it's ultimately necessary.
As an easy-to-use mass form of communication, anyone can operate a blog with ease. Kotaku noticed a trend not innovative by any means nor exclusive to the gaming industry: the cheerleading pablum produced by corporate blogs. Each console manufacturer has a company blog, obviously serving the purpose of championing the company's own cause. But some can provide very useful information like Major Nelson's blog posting the top ten games played by user count per week. Another excellent example is the Playstation blog where, since most PS3-exclusive developers are owned by Sony, the companies often post daily. They even reply directly to comments too, allowing fans to voice their concerns. (And both are great sources of information for blogging ideas.)
With the wealth of gaming blogs starting up, many don't do enough research. Running a successful website is difficult enough in a niche, but an overcrowded one complicates the process. For every great blog out there, five exist that are terrible, and filtering out quality reads has become daunting. While the "content is king" rule applies evermore here, it's also vital for the site's perspective to be intriguing and different. Different being the operative word. Sites galore feature "Game" or "Gamer" in the title and that's boring. Responsible research beforehand (or just common knowledge of the industry) shows the most successful sites don't have the word in the name. Being creative, establishing an identity, and primarily focusing on a section of the industry is the best way to recognition.
Blogging is all about building a community; amassing a respectable amount of readers and engaging in conversation with them about a shared passion. Multiple factors of the gaming industry exist which allow for this including game design, the business side, individual countries and the industry perspective. One can even break into specific genres if desired. Gaming is a vast medium and its full capabilities have yet to be explored. And blogging is fun.
Personally, I implore anyone daring enough to read through this entire post to start a blog. If you do, or if you have one already, please post in the comments or shoot an email to me and I'll do you the honour of highlighting your site in a future post. It's the least I can do for my readers. Jeff out.
The process of reading, researching, dot-jotting and idea gathering not only encourages others to blog also, but can strive many readers to become interested in the topic, thus furthering the discussed medium. This happens especially when a blog post goes viral - a dream of many prospective bloggers - bringing in instant viewership and perhaps even revenue.
Gaming is still rarely discussed in the mass media. While several sites (and blogs) dedicated to gaming are successful, the group pales in comparison to other forms of consumed media. But this is slowly changing and the industry has finally started noticing. Including my lovely blog, the popularity of gaming-centric blogs has exploded in the last number of years, and could possibly be attributed to the rising interest in casual and social gaming. Only those deemed the "hardcore" perused such blogs five years ago, but the rapid growth of sites like Joystiq (started in 2004) and Destructoid (started in 2006) proves the trend.
Banking on this, many aspiring gaming journalists and bloggers have created websites hoping to either get noticed or attain a solid audience. Sadly, these beginner websites don't have the extraordinary access to the industry like the bigger sites (including me) so oftentimes the news is reiterated and the mess of websites becomes redundant. Any blogger knows the imperative blogging creed: "content is king". Reiterating content is viewed as criminal unless attributed to the original source, so that's why many bloggers pose ridiculous questions hoping to attract eyes. I'm guilty of doing this but it's ultimately necessary.
As an easy-to-use mass form of communication, anyone can operate a blog with ease. Kotaku noticed a trend not innovative by any means nor exclusive to the gaming industry: the cheerleading pablum produced by corporate blogs. Each console manufacturer has a company blog, obviously serving the purpose of championing the company's own cause. But some can provide very useful information like Major Nelson's blog posting the top ten games played by user count per week. Another excellent example is the Playstation blog where, since most PS3-exclusive developers are owned by Sony, the companies often post daily. They even reply directly to comments too, allowing fans to voice their concerns. (And both are great sources of information for blogging ideas.)
With the wealth of gaming blogs starting up, many don't do enough research. Running a successful website is difficult enough in a niche, but an overcrowded one complicates the process. For every great blog out there, five exist that are terrible, and filtering out quality reads has become daunting. While the "content is king" rule applies evermore here, it's also vital for the site's perspective to be intriguing and different. Different being the operative word. Sites galore feature "Game" or "Gamer" in the title and that's boring. Responsible research beforehand (or just common knowledge of the industry) shows the most successful sites don't have the word in the name. Being creative, establishing an identity, and primarily focusing on a section of the industry is the best way to recognition.
Blogging is all about building a community; amassing a respectable amount of readers and engaging in conversation with them about a shared passion. Multiple factors of the gaming industry exist which allow for this including game design, the business side, individual countries and the industry perspective. One can even break into specific genres if desired. Gaming is a vast medium and its full capabilities have yet to be explored. And blogging is fun.
Personally, I implore anyone daring enough to read through this entire post to start a blog. If you do, or if you have one already, please post in the comments or shoot an email to me and I'll do you the honour of highlighting your site in a future post. It's the least I can do for my readers. Jeff out.
August 28, 2011
Silverblade Sunday #6 - Which Game Will Lose Out This Holiday Season?
Let us reflect for a second. In retrospect, the Christmas season has always been crowded with the best offerings from top tier studios. I feel the industry is slowing progressing away from this trend, but for now, once the snow falls, the major studios come full force. And 2011 is no exception.
Continuing the stellar performance from last year, this holiday season is looking to be one for the ages. Just to name off a few titles: Gears of War 3, Dark Souls, Rage, Forza 4, Arkham City, Battlefield 3, Uncharted 3, Modern Warfare 3, Skyrim, Minecraft, Assassin's Creed: Revelations, Halo Combat Evolved Anniversary and Skyward Sword. (The bold titles I'll discuss in this post.) With so many prominent and beloved franchises having releases, brand recognition will be the deciding factor of which developers can solely rely on. There's guaranteed successes and there will be categorical failures, but which games will be which? Read on to find out.
It's always sad for fans to part with a franchise, but Epic seems to throwing everything the studio has at Gears of War 3. Planned as the developer's longest ever campaign and jam-packed with plenty of modes to delight fans, Epic's biggest-to-date hits shelves September 20. But how will it fare against competitors?
Originally pegged as a 2010 release, Microsoft pushed the project back for "development" then "marketing" purposes. Whatever that means, being first on the docket has its pros and cons. Soaking up all the attention plus heavy advertising from Microsoft will guarantee sales early on, but as the days number and Christmas approaches, all that built-up hype will switch to other games. The most important thing to remember is a majority of shoppers get their business done a week or two before the big day. The massive lineup for November will hurt sales down the road, but the pre-order numbers are booming. So it's a win-lose situation. But, we cannot forget the tirelessly passionate fan base. They will camp out in droves for the endless satisfaction of chainsawing each other; therefore the third game should be perfectly fine.
With its predecessor holding the Guinness World Record as the Most Critically Acclaimed Superhero Game Ever, early expectations for Batman: Arkham City are soaring. Rocksteady, based in London, was mostly unknown to gaming fans and they are the prime example of how quickly a studio's reputation can turn around. The studio even won the "prestigious" Studio of the Year at the 2009 Spike Video Game Awards. That being said, could the young studio's newfound reputation get the better of them?
As an iconic figure, anything Batman is destined to be successful. But Rocksteady has done something magical. The studio has taken an established figure (with a bad history in the gaming world) and spun it into a masterpiece. Nerds of every specialty rejoiced at the sight of Arkham Asylum and its sequel, quite the change of past Batman games. And this fandom created around Rocksteady's take on the universe will surely generate even more interest as the days push forward to October 18. Having the release date mid-October is favourable because the only other major title that month is Battlefield 3. For many, this will be their first purchase of the holiday season and we may not see them until November.
When DICE first commissioned the Bad Company series, many first-person shooter fans were left stunned. However, the studio was masterful in creating buzz for the Battlefield franchise on consoles and they were one step closer to their ultimate goal: ruling the gaming world. Now that Battlefield 3 has been confirmed, PC and console players are anxiously peering over calendars marking the days until October 25. Does the growing battle with a hefty competitor hurt the game's chance at success?
Probably not. Battlefield is a religion amongst the PC community and players still invest hundreds of hours in Battlefield 2 which came out six years ago. The failure that was Modern Warfare 2 pushed the Bad Company series into the forefront of the genre, and the rise on consoles gave birth to a bitter rivalry between the world's two largest publishers. The business tongue-jarring has intensified this rivalry and passionate fans are rallying the naysayers to squeeze as many sales as possible. Therefore, DICE will be sitting pretty once sales numbers are unveiled to the world.
The follow-up to the unanimous Game of the Year candidate and winner of 2009, Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception follows Nathan Drake, the mirror image of the infallible Nolan North, as he searches the globe for the Iram of the Pillars. The game won several "Best of E3" awards including Best PS3 game from several publications. Will the brash of awards and an established brand help or hinder sales?
It could quite possibly do both. Uncharted is in the same boat as Gears of War; a prominent exclusive franchise meeting its end. The one disadvantage, however, is the positioning of the release date. The casual audience may overlook the title because it's smack dab in the middle of the plethora of other games coming out. Plus, I've seen very little advertising from Sony Online Entertainment and Naughty Dog but that could be because of the channels I watch. While the graphics are gorgeous (and could qualify as the best looking game this year) and the gameplay translates to sheer brilliance, I don't feel confident the overall market will share my view. As with Gears of War, the dedicated fan base means a certain sales threshold but I'm remaining skeptical until November 1.
I was actually having trouble formulating an opinion about Modern Warfare 3 without sounding redundant. Activision's most cherished franchise will undoubtedly produce massive sales numbers. But the one hindrance of the franchise is how tiresome the industry is of hearing about Call of Duty annually. It's a common complaint on Internet message boards, and honestly, anticipating to hear about Modern Warfare 3 right from the get-go drained my aspiration to watch E3 in June. There's not much more to be said: ten million copies plus sold, $15 map packs, and Activision grinning with a mouth full of money.
Where to start? Arguably the most wanted game of the last half-decade, Bethesda is bringing back its crown jewel franchise for a fifth time. The famed and highly regarded Elder Scrolls series is a favourite in the gaming community and (except for a few hiccups with overpriced DLC) has managed to sustain lingering success. Even five years after, a staple of any friends list is someone playing Oblivion. Will Skyrim be a soaring success this holiday season?
It's undeniable. It's almost a universal truth of the industry that an Elder Scrolls game sells millions. The extremely detailed settings, eclectic combat options and the inclusion of dragons is a surefire solid package. Hell, even the interactive menu is beautiful. Bethesda takes delicate care with the slightest of details and not only does the effort show through gameplay, but fans are all the more appreciative. A Game of the Year candidate obviously, Skyrim should be the best selling game this Christmas.
Seemingly the most talked about game of the last two years, Minecraft is the definitive example of what makes indie gaming a spectacle. Although the title has been available for purchase for quite a while, November 11 will be the full release. The little-game-that could gave birth to a brand new studio and a charismatic Swedish millionaire criminally entertaining on twitter. Can Mojang pull out a winner come November?
What's there to say? Minecraft has passed the three million mark and hasn't even seen a wide-scale release yet. The simple idea of surviving toppled by the multitude of complexities through each update consistently grows the fan base, and more importantly, the revenue stream. The launch date won't necessarily see a massive growth in sales, but word-of-mouth is a powerful form of advertising. So who knows, Mojang's masterpiece could hit five million by Christmas.
The return of Ezio hasn't been without distaste or disgust from some fans, and his prompt return I believe will hurt Revelations. Fans will infinitely adore this series for a captivating and unpredictable plot, realistic reconstructions of civilizations past, and the likeness of feeling badass, but the same character starring three games consecutively doesn't forcibly constitute a deep connection with that character. Part of what makes the Assassin's Creed universe so amicable is the sympathetic feeling toward the assassins in their ageless battle. That in mind, we shouldn't feel tiresome of playing as the main character. (Anyway, that's another blog post.)
Annual releases was not the smartest move on Ubisoft's part. Especially against the collective popularity of competing franchises this winter. The sales will falter but probably pick up into next year, and maybe Ubisoft could reconsider pitting their undermined franchises against the likes of The Elder Scrolls. Early spring or February would be the preferred choice.
There we have it! After a productive two hours of writing and two cups of coffee, I am finally finished. And famished! Now I must reward myself for finishing by stuffing my face. A BLT (bacon, lettuce, tomato) with extra mayonnaise sounds good right now. Jeff out.
Continuing the stellar performance from last year, this holiday season is looking to be one for the ages. Just to name off a few titles: Gears of War 3, Dark Souls, Rage, Forza 4, Arkham City, Battlefield 3, Uncharted 3, Modern Warfare 3, Skyrim, Minecraft, Assassin's Creed: Revelations, Halo Combat Evolved Anniversary and Skyward Sword. (The bold titles I'll discuss in this post.) With so many prominent and beloved franchises having releases, brand recognition will be the deciding factor of which developers can solely rely on. There's guaranteed successes and there will be categorical failures, but which games will be which? Read on to find out.
It's always sad for fans to part with a franchise, but Epic seems to throwing everything the studio has at Gears of War 3. Planned as the developer's longest ever campaign and jam-packed with plenty of modes to delight fans, Epic's biggest-to-date hits shelves September 20. But how will it fare against competitors?
Originally pegged as a 2010 release, Microsoft pushed the project back for "development" then "marketing" purposes. Whatever that means, being first on the docket has its pros and cons. Soaking up all the attention plus heavy advertising from Microsoft will guarantee sales early on, but as the days number and Christmas approaches, all that built-up hype will switch to other games. The most important thing to remember is a majority of shoppers get their business done a week or two before the big day. The massive lineup for November will hurt sales down the road, but the pre-order numbers are booming. So it's a win-lose situation. But, we cannot forget the tirelessly passionate fan base. They will camp out in droves for the endless satisfaction of chainsawing each other; therefore the third game should be perfectly fine.
With its predecessor holding the Guinness World Record as the Most Critically Acclaimed Superhero Game Ever, early expectations for Batman: Arkham City are soaring. Rocksteady, based in London, was mostly unknown to gaming fans and they are the prime example of how quickly a studio's reputation can turn around. The studio even won the "prestigious" Studio of the Year at the 2009 Spike Video Game Awards. That being said, could the young studio's newfound reputation get the better of them?
As an iconic figure, anything Batman is destined to be successful. But Rocksteady has done something magical. The studio has taken an established figure (with a bad history in the gaming world) and spun it into a masterpiece. Nerds of every specialty rejoiced at the sight of Arkham Asylum and its sequel, quite the change of past Batman games. And this fandom created around Rocksteady's take on the universe will surely generate even more interest as the days push forward to October 18. Having the release date mid-October is favourable because the only other major title that month is Battlefield 3. For many, this will be their first purchase of the holiday season and we may not see them until November.
When DICE first commissioned the Bad Company series, many first-person shooter fans were left stunned. However, the studio was masterful in creating buzz for the Battlefield franchise on consoles and they were one step closer to their ultimate goal: ruling the gaming world. Now that Battlefield 3 has been confirmed, PC and console players are anxiously peering over calendars marking the days until October 25. Does the growing battle with a hefty competitor hurt the game's chance at success?
Probably not. Battlefield is a religion amongst the PC community and players still invest hundreds of hours in Battlefield 2 which came out six years ago. The failure that was Modern Warfare 2 pushed the Bad Company series into the forefront of the genre, and the rise on consoles gave birth to a bitter rivalry between the world's two largest publishers. The business tongue-jarring has intensified this rivalry and passionate fans are rallying the naysayers to squeeze as many sales as possible. Therefore, DICE will be sitting pretty once sales numbers are unveiled to the world.
The follow-up to the unanimous Game of the Year candidate and winner of 2009, Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception follows Nathan Drake, the mirror image of the infallible Nolan North, as he searches the globe for the Iram of the Pillars. The game won several "Best of E3" awards including Best PS3 game from several publications. Will the brash of awards and an established brand help or hinder sales?
It could quite possibly do both. Uncharted is in the same boat as Gears of War; a prominent exclusive franchise meeting its end. The one disadvantage, however, is the positioning of the release date. The casual audience may overlook the title because it's smack dab in the middle of the plethora of other games coming out. Plus, I've seen very little advertising from Sony Online Entertainment and Naughty Dog but that could be because of the channels I watch. While the graphics are gorgeous (and could qualify as the best looking game this year) and the gameplay translates to sheer brilliance, I don't feel confident the overall market will share my view. As with Gears of War, the dedicated fan base means a certain sales threshold but I'm remaining skeptical until November 1.
I was actually having trouble formulating an opinion about Modern Warfare 3 without sounding redundant. Activision's most cherished franchise will undoubtedly produce massive sales numbers. But the one hindrance of the franchise is how tiresome the industry is of hearing about Call of Duty annually. It's a common complaint on Internet message boards, and honestly, anticipating to hear about Modern Warfare 3 right from the get-go drained my aspiration to watch E3 in June. There's not much more to be said: ten million copies plus sold, $15 map packs, and Activision grinning with a mouth full of money.
Where to start? Arguably the most wanted game of the last half-decade, Bethesda is bringing back its crown jewel franchise for a fifth time. The famed and highly regarded Elder Scrolls series is a favourite in the gaming community and (except for a few hiccups with overpriced DLC) has managed to sustain lingering success. Even five years after, a staple of any friends list is someone playing Oblivion. Will Skyrim be a soaring success this holiday season?
It's undeniable. It's almost a universal truth of the industry that an Elder Scrolls game sells millions. The extremely detailed settings, eclectic combat options and the inclusion of dragons is a surefire solid package. Hell, even the interactive menu is beautiful. Bethesda takes delicate care with the slightest of details and not only does the effort show through gameplay, but fans are all the more appreciative. A Game of the Year candidate obviously, Skyrim should be the best selling game this Christmas.
Seemingly the most talked about game of the last two years, Minecraft is the definitive example of what makes indie gaming a spectacle. Although the title has been available for purchase for quite a while, November 11 will be the full release. The little-game-that could gave birth to a brand new studio and a charismatic Swedish millionaire criminally entertaining on twitter. Can Mojang pull out a winner come November?
What's there to say? Minecraft has passed the three million mark and hasn't even seen a wide-scale release yet. The simple idea of surviving toppled by the multitude of complexities through each update consistently grows the fan base, and more importantly, the revenue stream. The launch date won't necessarily see a massive growth in sales, but word-of-mouth is a powerful form of advertising. So who knows, Mojang's masterpiece could hit five million by Christmas.
The return of Ezio hasn't been without distaste or disgust from some fans, and his prompt return I believe will hurt Revelations. Fans will infinitely adore this series for a captivating and unpredictable plot, realistic reconstructions of civilizations past, and the likeness of feeling badass, but the same character starring three games consecutively doesn't forcibly constitute a deep connection with that character. Part of what makes the Assassin's Creed universe so amicable is the sympathetic feeling toward the assassins in their ageless battle. That in mind, we shouldn't feel tiresome of playing as the main character. (Anyway, that's another blog post.)
Annual releases was not the smartest move on Ubisoft's part. Especially against the collective popularity of competing franchises this winter. The sales will falter but probably pick up into next year, and maybe Ubisoft could reconsider pitting their undermined franchises against the likes of The Elder Scrolls. Early spring or February would be the preferred choice.
There we have it! After a productive two hours of writing and two cups of coffee, I am finally finished. And famished! Now I must reward myself for finishing by stuffing my face. A BLT (bacon, lettuce, tomato) with extra mayonnaise sounds good right now. Jeff out.
August 26, 2011
Attention to Publishers: Summer Drought Perfect For Releases
It's a strange thing to suggest. Even I feel uncomfortable writing this post. A publisher having the gull to release a hugely anticipated game during the summer months, right in between the major gaming conferences? An unprecedented suggestion; who would be stupid enough? I know, right?!?!?!
While late August technically isn't the summer, I'm taking some liberties with this post anyway. The early release date of Deus Ex: Human Revolution boosted sales. Square Enix purposefully committed to this week because no competitors are out and the resurgence of an older franchise is a risky gamble. The collection of high-profile titles this holiday season was guaranteed a prime factor in the conversation for when to put the game out to the public. Pitting Deus Ex versus any franchise coming out before Christmas would have been the dumbest possible business move and the game would surely get slaughtered sales-wise.
Does this sound familiar? Rockstar made the same estimate when reviving Red Dead. Last year's unanimous Game of The Year, Red Dead Redemption was released in May, avoiding titles like Bad Company 2, Mass Effect 2 and Bioshock 2. Lotso' sequels. Through brilliant marketing and word-of-mouth, the game exploded up the charts and ended the year incredibly strong. Without the Rockstar branding, it would have been killed if the publisher had sought a date before Christmas.
Predictably being the only major title released in a month means the entire industry is focused on that one game. The isolation can only be good, right? My understanding is the buzz involving the conferences dies down quickly after it's over and that leaves reporters questioning what to write about. Conveniently having a major game to come out eerily between conferences means more exposure from the gaming media and that translates into more sales. But I'm darting around the question: Why don't publishers take advantage?
Being a blogger, the summer is an atrocious time. Most of the games in my collection I'm done, or refuse to play again because I'm no fan of experiencing the same thing twice. (Mass Effect 2 is one exception.) So for a publisher to pepper in a release means more content coming my way and more content for the audience to enjoy. The same thing goes for all gaming news outlets. It works out for everyone.
When major publishers finally realize that Christmas is not the hub of game sales anymore, release dates should spread throughout the year. October alone will empty wallets, then November creeps up and reminds us that Christmas sucks sometimes. Jeff out.
While late August technically isn't the summer, I'm taking some liberties with this post anyway. The early release date of Deus Ex: Human Revolution boosted sales. Square Enix purposefully committed to this week because no competitors are out and the resurgence of an older franchise is a risky gamble. The collection of high-profile titles this holiday season was guaranteed a prime factor in the conversation for when to put the game out to the public. Pitting Deus Ex versus any franchise coming out before Christmas would have been the dumbest possible business move and the game would surely get slaughtered sales-wise.
Does this sound familiar? Rockstar made the same estimate when reviving Red Dead. Last year's unanimous Game of The Year, Red Dead Redemption was released in May, avoiding titles like Bad Company 2, Mass Effect 2 and Bioshock 2. Lotso' sequels. Through brilliant marketing and word-of-mouth, the game exploded up the charts and ended the year incredibly strong. Without the Rockstar branding, it would have been killed if the publisher had sought a date before Christmas.
Predictably being the only major title released in a month means the entire industry is focused on that one game. The isolation can only be good, right? My understanding is the buzz involving the conferences dies down quickly after it's over and that leaves reporters questioning what to write about. Conveniently having a major game to come out eerily between conferences means more exposure from the gaming media and that translates into more sales. But I'm darting around the question: Why don't publishers take advantage?
Being a blogger, the summer is an atrocious time. Most of the games in my collection I'm done, or refuse to play again because I'm no fan of experiencing the same thing twice. (Mass Effect 2 is one exception.) So for a publisher to pepper in a release means more content coming my way and more content for the audience to enjoy. The same thing goes for all gaming news outlets. It works out for everyone.
When major publishers finally realize that Christmas is not the hub of game sales anymore, release dates should spread throughout the year. October alone will empty wallets, then November creeps up and reminds us that Christmas sucks sometimes. Jeff out.
We Shouldn't Feel Xenophobic Toward Non-Gamers
The times are rapidly changing. Social and mobile gaming have exceeded all expectations in both popularity and sales, motion control has firmly gripped a new audience, and Nintendo releases a new handheld that doesn't sell millions upon millions of units. Ten years ago, the industry looked vastly different, and I think the existing gaming populous needs to accept these changes.
I don't show any animosity toward the newfound social and casual gaming audiences, but there's a large percentage of gaming enthusiasts (of all ages) who do. And, to put it bluntly, I'm not sure I understand their ridiculous sentiment. Our passion for gaming is ours to share, not to be shrouded by the childish and xenophobic tendencies of the reluctant. We shouldn't feel obligated to shun those unfamiliar with the industry just because they are unfamiliar; the "hardcore" market isn't going to change. Triple-A titles will still see the light of day (or the snow glare) but release dates could be scattered to try and appeal to the new audiences. I would actually approve of this considering how many excellent games are coming out this holiday season alone.
This anger is actually more damaging than taken at face value. Not only is the angry crowd shunning the new audiences, but aspiring "hardcore" gamers feel embarrassed and ultimately intimidated. Gaming of any kind shouldn't be intimidating - except maybe getting massacred by 13-year-olds in any first-person shooter - because our medium should be presenting itself as an enjoyable experience. Having the ability to engage in an interactive experience with friends or strangers is what sets gaming apart from all other mediums, and limiting that joy for newcomers represents our passion in a negative light. Therefore, next time a parent (or so daringly, a grandparent) offers their valuable time to share the magical experience of gaming, take the careful time to show that person the ropes and the time sacrificed will probably improve the relationship.
It shouldn't be such an alien thought. Like movies and music, gaming is a consumable form of media. And why we are hogging all the fun bothers me. Now, lovely readers, don't feel it necessary to push; there are those that think gaming is an unproductive and useless habit (this is an odd statement). Everyone won't feel so strongly about the desire to share a gaming session so don't enforce the idea. Gradually ease them in by letting them watch the gameplay and see their actions. Don't push because people can get aggressive.
Extra Credits, an excellent video series from The Escapist magazine, explores the world of game design and they cover this very topic in seven minutes. The video can be found here. Go through and watch the other videos too. Really interesting stuff (and a great source of information).
In the comments, leave your stories of trying to convince siblings or other family members to give gaming a whirl, or explain why you agree/disagree with me. Jeff out.
I don't show any animosity toward the newfound social and casual gaming audiences, but there's a large percentage of gaming enthusiasts (of all ages) who do. And, to put it bluntly, I'm not sure I understand their ridiculous sentiment. Our passion for gaming is ours to share, not to be shrouded by the childish and xenophobic tendencies of the reluctant. We shouldn't feel obligated to shun those unfamiliar with the industry just because they are unfamiliar; the "hardcore" market isn't going to change. Triple-A titles will still see the light of day (or the snow glare) but release dates could be scattered to try and appeal to the new audiences. I would actually approve of this considering how many excellent games are coming out this holiday season alone.
This anger is actually more damaging than taken at face value. Not only is the angry crowd shunning the new audiences, but aspiring "hardcore" gamers feel embarrassed and ultimately intimidated. Gaming of any kind shouldn't be intimidating - except maybe getting massacred by 13-year-olds in any first-person shooter - because our medium should be presenting itself as an enjoyable experience. Having the ability to engage in an interactive experience with friends or strangers is what sets gaming apart from all other mediums, and limiting that joy for newcomers represents our passion in a negative light. Therefore, next time a parent (or so daringly, a grandparent) offers their valuable time to share the magical experience of gaming, take the careful time to show that person the ropes and the time sacrificed will probably improve the relationship.
It shouldn't be such an alien thought. Like movies and music, gaming is a consumable form of media. And why we are hogging all the fun bothers me. Now, lovely readers, don't feel it necessary to push; there are those that think gaming is an unproductive and useless habit (this is an odd statement). Everyone won't feel so strongly about the desire to share a gaming session so don't enforce the idea. Gradually ease them in by letting them watch the gameplay and see their actions. Don't push because people can get aggressive.
Extra Credits, an excellent video series from The Escapist magazine, explores the world of game design and they cover this very topic in seven minutes. The video can be found here. Go through and watch the other videos too. Really interesting stuff (and a great source of information).
In the comments, leave your stories of trying to convince siblings or other family members to give gaming a whirl, or explain why you agree/disagree with me. Jeff out.
There Should Be a Price Drop Coming For Microsoft Shortly
Three new posts each day, and officially I start with what I think should be Microsoft's answer to Sony cutting the price on the PS3. If you guys want to read more on the new posting schedule, click here.
Microsoft's console is the cheaper of the two heavyweights, and surely that has helped them in sales. They make up for lost profits through Xbox Live anyway. But with the consoles traditionally priced similar, does Microsoft need to drop the Xbox 360's price? One answer: yes.
It's a fairly simple concept. The cheaper something is, the more likely a consumer will buy it. Sony is grinning because Microsoft has failed to capitalize on the prime opportunity. The current console generation is nearing the end of its lifespan, therefore both companies should have been hinting at a price cut earlier. Personally, I would have announced the news at E3 and not after Gamescom, unless Sony is trying to persuade interested buyers into possibly getting PS3 exclusives later this year instead of the hotly-anticipated Gears of War 3 coming in a month. Going by that, the timeline seems suitable.
But Microsoft's nonsensical actions will cost them sales. The sales race is remarkably close, and M$ is probably looking to come out on top once the generation ends. The company will need to make a decision before Christmas on the future state of its console price-wise. Perhaps even considering to drop the price to play online as well. The smartest marketing move, however, would be to announce a price drop on September 20 or shortly after, as to not hinder hype and to exploit further the console's biggest exclusive this year.
Microsoft has shot themselves in the foot. In this very corporate game of console chess, it's Microsoft's move now.
If you like this, why not subscribe? That can be done under the "Follow by Email" tab on the sidebar!
Microsoft's console is the cheaper of the two heavyweights, and surely that has helped them in sales. They make up for lost profits through Xbox Live anyway. But with the consoles traditionally priced similar, does Microsoft need to drop the Xbox 360's price? One answer: yes.
It's a fairly simple concept. The cheaper something is, the more likely a consumer will buy it. Sony is grinning because Microsoft has failed to capitalize on the prime opportunity. The current console generation is nearing the end of its lifespan, therefore both companies should have been hinting at a price cut earlier. Personally, I would have announced the news at E3 and not after Gamescom, unless Sony is trying to persuade interested buyers into possibly getting PS3 exclusives later this year instead of the hotly-anticipated Gears of War 3 coming in a month. Going by that, the timeline seems suitable.
But Microsoft's nonsensical actions will cost them sales. The sales race is remarkably close, and M$ is probably looking to come out on top once the generation ends. The company will need to make a decision before Christmas on the future state of its console price-wise. Perhaps even considering to drop the price to play online as well. The smartest marketing move, however, would be to announce a price drop on September 20 or shortly after, as to not hinder hype and to exploit further the console's biggest exclusive this year.
Microsoft has shot themselves in the foot. In this very corporate game of console chess, it's Microsoft's move now.
If you like this, why not subscribe? That can be done under the "Follow by Email" tab on the sidebar!
August 25, 2011
A New Beginning
Hey guys, I'm going to be trying a new posting schedule for the next couple months. Basically I'll be posting whenever I find something interesting; though I'll limit it to three posts a day. These posts will be shorter and simpler. I'll be leaving the posts that detail sweeping issues with the industry for Silverblade Sunday. I'm just trying to figure out what schedule works best for me, and what you guys expect when viewing my blog. The more posts, the better, right?
The one thing I won't be doing is posting straight news. Frankly, if you guys want just news, go to sites that pay their writers like IGN, Gamespot, etc. I don't have that luxury. But what I can say is today marks a new beginning for Volatile Mode. With college creeping up, I want to keep myself busy and blogging is one way to do that. So three posts a day, all at different times, all about varying subjects.
Now some days, because of homework piling up and other responsibilities, I won't meet the three posts threshold. I wish blogging was my only responsibility, supporting myself with this blog and such, but sadly life hasn't worked out that way just yet. But I do have big plans for the future of my little piece of paradise, so stay tuned for further details. If you guys wish to contribute, help grow the blog, please click the "Guest-blog" tab above.
Starting tomorrow, officially August 25, Volatile Mode begins anew. Spread the word! Jeff out.
The one thing I won't be doing is posting straight news. Frankly, if you guys want just news, go to sites that pay their writers like IGN, Gamespot, etc. I don't have that luxury. But what I can say is today marks a new beginning for Volatile Mode. With college creeping up, I want to keep myself busy and blogging is one way to do that. So three posts a day, all at different times, all about varying subjects.
Now some days, because of homework piling up and other responsibilities, I won't meet the three posts threshold. I wish blogging was my only responsibility, supporting myself with this blog and such, but sadly life hasn't worked out that way just yet. But I do have big plans for the future of my little piece of paradise, so stay tuned for further details. If you guys wish to contribute, help grow the blog, please click the "Guest-blog" tab above.
Starting tomorrow, officially August 25, Volatile Mode begins anew. Spread the word! Jeff out.
August 23, 2011
Rehashing Old Franchises: Laziness or Silliness?
Just wanted to apologize again for my previous post. Normally I don't rant, but when you feel strongly about something, so impassioned that it bottles up, it's hard to ignore. Or I'm just a huge nerd. :)
An extraordinary event has occurred in the industry. Deciphering why the phenomenon has happened is for a madman, therefore I won't try and spin my head around it. Why the sudden, reinvigorated interest in franchises past? This year has seen an uptick in the amount of studios reviving dead franchises and releasing HD remakes of classic trilogies. I feel the gaming industry is running out of ideas and relying too heavily on nostalgia to sell games.
Of course, I am inspired because of the major release today in North America, Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Unfortunately Ion Storm, the original developer, doesn't exist anymore but to Eidos' credit, the game is receiving rave reviews. The Metacritic score reflects this. I have yet to actually play (though I'll probably do a review sometime in the near future) but some fans are extremely delighted that the born-again sequel recaptures the magic first witnessed in the original Deus Ex. Some are even saying it exceeds what Ion Storm did. Clearly, Eidos made the right choice.
However, 2011 will ultimately be remembered for the resurgence of Duke Nukem. After thirteen years in development, Forever was railed for being bland, clearing showing its age and incessantly trying to reinvent the main character's manliness. Gearbox was noble in taking over the franchise's rights, and if Duke Nukem is slated to continue, perhaps having a dedicated developer will see the series return to prominence. But it's extremely difficult to be anxiously optimistic about the return of the series. I was never a big fan of Duke Nukem anyway.
The argument is all about the intention. Are gaming companies seeking a quick buck, or are they trying to appease fans? Twenty years ago, as gaming was still in its infancy, I would have guessed the latter. But the industry has exploded rapidly and the companies are still learning how to adequately capitalize. Frankly, relaunching old franchises is a cheap gimmick and the audience is falling for it. I'll never invest in games re-released as "high definition" remakes if I've played them in a past life. Beyond Good & Evil is the exception.
Strictly speaking, there is only one case where releasing past games is credible. If a studio is planning a sequel and trying to grow interest back into the franchise, it's a great marketing ploy. Just consumers being aware of "the next game" means the gimmick has worked to its full effect. For example, the smarter choice for the Sly Cooper franchise would have been to hold off releasing The Sly Collection until this year, possibly early next year, because Thieves in Time is hitting store shelves in 2012.
This whole trend leaves me skeptical. I can't help but wonder if companies will adapt to relying on this for marketing purposes or diabolically re-releasing for a quick buck. Thankfully, Human Revolution isn't a dead game walking and will surely sell once word spreads of the review scores. But as a gaming audience, we can't fall victim to these cheap tricks. Don't feel guilt-tripped because obligation shouldn't be motivated by nostalgia.
Do you guys approve of the recent trend? Not only for reviving once-dead franchises but companies blatantly releasing HD remakes of trilogies for diabolical purposes? Shout in the comments below!
Please promote this article! Subscribe by email, tweet and post it on Facebook and other social networking sites. Thanks. Jeff out.
An extraordinary event has occurred in the industry. Deciphering why the phenomenon has happened is for a madman, therefore I won't try and spin my head around it. Why the sudden, reinvigorated interest in franchises past? This year has seen an uptick in the amount of studios reviving dead franchises and releasing HD remakes of classic trilogies. I feel the gaming industry is running out of ideas and relying too heavily on nostalgia to sell games.
Of course, I am inspired because of the major release today in North America, Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Unfortunately Ion Storm, the original developer, doesn't exist anymore but to Eidos' credit, the game is receiving rave reviews. The Metacritic score reflects this. I have yet to actually play (though I'll probably do a review sometime in the near future) but some fans are extremely delighted that the born-again sequel recaptures the magic first witnessed in the original Deus Ex. Some are even saying it exceeds what Ion Storm did. Clearly, Eidos made the right choice.
However, 2011 will ultimately be remembered for the resurgence of Duke Nukem. After thirteen years in development, Forever was railed for being bland, clearing showing its age and incessantly trying to reinvent the main character's manliness. Gearbox was noble in taking over the franchise's rights, and if Duke Nukem is slated to continue, perhaps having a dedicated developer will see the series return to prominence. But it's extremely difficult to be anxiously optimistic about the return of the series. I was never a big fan of Duke Nukem anyway.
The argument is all about the intention. Are gaming companies seeking a quick buck, or are they trying to appease fans? Twenty years ago, as gaming was still in its infancy, I would have guessed the latter. But the industry has exploded rapidly and the companies are still learning how to adequately capitalize. Frankly, relaunching old franchises is a cheap gimmick and the audience is falling for it. I'll never invest in games re-released as "high definition" remakes if I've played them in a past life. Beyond Good & Evil is the exception.
Strictly speaking, there is only one case where releasing past games is credible. If a studio is planning a sequel and trying to grow interest back into the franchise, it's a great marketing ploy. Just consumers being aware of "the next game" means the gimmick has worked to its full effect. For example, the smarter choice for the Sly Cooper franchise would have been to hold off releasing The Sly Collection until this year, possibly early next year, because Thieves in Time is hitting store shelves in 2012.
This whole trend leaves me skeptical. I can't help but wonder if companies will adapt to relying on this for marketing purposes or diabolically re-releasing for a quick buck. Thankfully, Human Revolution isn't a dead game walking and will surely sell once word spreads of the review scores. But as a gaming audience, we can't fall victim to these cheap tricks. Don't feel guilt-tripped because obligation shouldn't be motivated by nostalgia.
Do you guys approve of the recent trend? Not only for reviving once-dead franchises but companies blatantly releasing HD remakes of trilogies for diabolical purposes? Shout in the comments below!
Please promote this article! Subscribe by email, tweet and post it on Facebook and other social networking sites. Thanks. Jeff out.
August 22, 2011
Times Are Ajar For Video Game Journalism
I saw this great post by David Radd of IndustryGamers and anyone inspiring to be a games journalist should take a glance: http://www.industrygamers.com/news/so-you-want-to-be-a-video-game-journalist-part-1/.
Sorry if this stretches too far. I'm ranting and I apologize.
He attributes the difficulty of becoming a video game journalist to many things, but mostly (and quite ironically in my case), the explosion of blogging as a medium. Every Internet user owns a blog these days, so grasping eyes is getting increasingly difficult. Hell, I even feel it when I check my daily blog views. Sometimes I hope Blogger is lying to me because after eight months I presumed I'd have a substantial daily audience.
(Not that I don't love my readers already, I mean, without you guys this blog would be pointless.)
Reading that article, however, has cast a gloomy outlook on my future career as a journalist. I don't have numbers available but thousands of blogs and fan sites must exist that examine and study games far better than I ever can. Whereas I try and give you, my readers, the widest variety of gaming commentary possible, I feel strongly I must establish myself in a niche within gaming. Like, for example, specializing in the particulars of game design or covering the business side. Thankfully, the writing gods have blessed me with the interest of both, so I am flexible.
The root cause is too many writers and not enough publications. Meaning either there's isn't enough interest in gaming yet to make covering the industry viable, or gaming has evolved too rapidly and the journalism industry hasn't taken advantage. Being an aspiring journalist, I really do hope it's the latter. My ideal career is combining my two passions: video games and journalism. Perhaps, if there's an interest, I could focus on improving the credibility of gaming journalism? (Seriously, I just had this realization now. How sad.)
An industry like covering games is much like Hollywood but for the wrong reasons. It's all about who you know. Connections and networking is the path when pure hard work means nothing. Honestly, I'd prefer getting a job writing somewhere showcasing my portfolio, not having a friend on the inside. This was my intention when I first made this blog: become popular, get noticed, get hired. I thought the process was simple and without problems. Look how that turned out.
Someday, if I work hard enough, I'll get a job writing. Being persistent is tough though. Constantly having to reassure myself that all this effort isn't meaningless. This is the struggle many prominent bloggers talk about. The waning line between success and failure. Whether the effort to continue is worth the reward. But all I want to do is satisfy the audience's desire for information. To understand and enjoy the little things that make gaming great.
I'm now pleading. Anyone bothering to read this miniature manifesto, I do applaud you. My words don't only echo in my own head anymore. But can I ask one more thing of you? Spread the word, through Facebook, twitter, StumbleUpon or any other social networking hub. And tell your friends! Other gaming fans. Even your mother currently obsessed with FarmVille!
Thanks again. Jeff out.
Sorry if this stretches too far. I'm ranting and I apologize.
He attributes the difficulty of becoming a video game journalist to many things, but mostly (and quite ironically in my case), the explosion of blogging as a medium. Every Internet user owns a blog these days, so grasping eyes is getting increasingly difficult. Hell, I even feel it when I check my daily blog views. Sometimes I hope Blogger is lying to me because after eight months I presumed I'd have a substantial daily audience.
(Not that I don't love my readers already, I mean, without you guys this blog would be pointless.)
Reading that article, however, has cast a gloomy outlook on my future career as a journalist. I don't have numbers available but thousands of blogs and fan sites must exist that examine and study games far better than I ever can. Whereas I try and give you, my readers, the widest variety of gaming commentary possible, I feel strongly I must establish myself in a niche within gaming. Like, for example, specializing in the particulars of game design or covering the business side. Thankfully, the writing gods have blessed me with the interest of both, so I am flexible.
The root cause is too many writers and not enough publications. Meaning either there's isn't enough interest in gaming yet to make covering the industry viable, or gaming has evolved too rapidly and the journalism industry hasn't taken advantage. Being an aspiring journalist, I really do hope it's the latter. My ideal career is combining my two passions: video games and journalism. Perhaps, if there's an interest, I could focus on improving the credibility of gaming journalism? (Seriously, I just had this realization now. How sad.)
An industry like covering games is much like Hollywood but for the wrong reasons. It's all about who you know. Connections and networking is the path when pure hard work means nothing. Honestly, I'd prefer getting a job writing somewhere showcasing my portfolio, not having a friend on the inside. This was my intention when I first made this blog: become popular, get noticed, get hired. I thought the process was simple and without problems. Look how that turned out.
Someday, if I work hard enough, I'll get a job writing. Being persistent is tough though. Constantly having to reassure myself that all this effort isn't meaningless. This is the struggle many prominent bloggers talk about. The waning line between success and failure. Whether the effort to continue is worth the reward. But all I want to do is satisfy the audience's desire for information. To understand and enjoy the little things that make gaming great.
I'm now pleading. Anyone bothering to read this miniature manifesto, I do applaud you. My words don't only echo in my own head anymore. But can I ask one more thing of you? Spread the word, through Facebook, twitter, StumbleUpon or any other social networking hub. And tell your friends! Other gaming fans. Even your mother currently obsessed with FarmVille!
Thanks again. Jeff out.
Silverblade Sunday #5 - Gaming Doesn't Need a Third Dimension
Hey guys, sorry about the perpetual lateness of these posts. I was throwing up buckets and even writing this I still feel groggy. But I am trooping it out because I live for my readership. Number five away!
When James Cameron's record-breaking Avatar hit silver screens, it instantly made an impact. Everyone flocked to see the beautiful marvel, enveloped in the dramatic possibilities of enhanced 3D. And now the novelty is dying. Every single movie out there seemingly has a 3D version, and the inundation of movie screens by the technology is just pissing people off. The same trend will occur within the gaming industry.
We've already seen evidence and faster than anyone expected. Sales of the 3DS have plummeted worldwide five months after release, incomparable to anything else bearing Nintendo's brand. On August 12, the company did the unthinkable and declared a price drop. In such a short time sales haven't been documented, but the price drop will surely have a positive impact.
Like Nintendo, Sony has jumped the gun and embraced 3D as well. Even going so far as to bank on it being a console seller. The company has implemented 3D technology into mostly everything in its lineup, from camcorders to the Bravia set of TVs. This year alone, Sony planned 30 titles for its console using 3D. And with Sony also enacting a price drop on the PS3, sales are expected to soar.
Both companies are wrong, though. As with the movie industry, the gaming industry shares the same attitude. There was a spike in interest because of Avatar and other movies that creatively utilized the technology. However, for every great movie coming out, five terrible movies come out. Eventually, the interest will fade and 3D movies will be limited releases. Gaming hasn't reached that stage yet, but there's a reason all three companies haven't embraced the technology.
A new technology is shiny and exciting but 3D will go the way of MySpace: completely overshadowed by the next fad. Gaming is part of that cycle. I don't know what will come next, but I can say confidently that 3D is dead-and-buried within five years.
A shorter post! Or maybe it feels shorter because I cut up the paragraphs. I got some constructive criticism from a trusty friend who suggested I chop up the paragraphs to make posts more readable. Let's hope it works! Jeff out.
When James Cameron's record-breaking Avatar hit silver screens, it instantly made an impact. Everyone flocked to see the beautiful marvel, enveloped in the dramatic possibilities of enhanced 3D. And now the novelty is dying. Every single movie out there seemingly has a 3D version, and the inundation of movie screens by the technology is just pissing people off. The same trend will occur within the gaming industry.
We've already seen evidence and faster than anyone expected. Sales of the 3DS have plummeted worldwide five months after release, incomparable to anything else bearing Nintendo's brand. On August 12, the company did the unthinkable and declared a price drop. In such a short time sales haven't been documented, but the price drop will surely have a positive impact.
Like Nintendo, Sony has jumped the gun and embraced 3D as well. Even going so far as to bank on it being a console seller. The company has implemented 3D technology into mostly everything in its lineup, from camcorders to the Bravia set of TVs. This year alone, Sony planned 30 titles for its console using 3D. And with Sony also enacting a price drop on the PS3, sales are expected to soar.
Both companies are wrong, though. As with the movie industry, the gaming industry shares the same attitude. There was a spike in interest because of Avatar and other movies that creatively utilized the technology. However, for every great movie coming out, five terrible movies come out. Eventually, the interest will fade and 3D movies will be limited releases. Gaming hasn't reached that stage yet, but there's a reason all three companies haven't embraced the technology.
A new technology is shiny and exciting but 3D will go the way of MySpace: completely overshadowed by the next fad. Gaming is part of that cycle. I don't know what will come next, but I can say confidently that 3D is dead-and-buried within five years.
A shorter post! Or maybe it feels shorter because I cut up the paragraphs. I got some constructive criticism from a trusty friend who suggested I chop up the paragraphs to make posts more readable. Let's hope it works! Jeff out.
August 20, 2011
Welcome to the Newly Revamped: Volatile Mode!
As I prepare to enter the world of OwningADomainLand (real place), the perfect name is necessary. "A Video Games Blog" is straightforwardly boring. So I introduce you to the newly formed Volatile Mode, the term coming from a dream I had once where I played a video game. Yes, I am so obsessed with the industry that I dream about partaking during my beauty sleep.
By the end of August, I'll have my own domain. It feels extremely weird. Moving my piece of paradise to something a little more solidified should be fun. And, hopefully, I can queue the gaming companies to giving me free review copies to bring more reviews on board.
Developer Alert: If you created a game you want me to review, click the 'About Me' section and send me an email.
Just had to pepper that in. Also, I finally got the email subscription widget working. It took some messing around with, so now anyone curious can subscribe through email. If the subscriptions aren't going through, berate me in the comments please. :D
Please enjoy the blog and spread the word!
By the end of August, I'll have my own domain. It feels extremely weird. Moving my piece of paradise to something a little more solidified should be fun. And, hopefully, I can queue the gaming companies to giving me free review copies to bring more reviews on board.
Developer Alert: If you created a game you want me to review, click the 'About Me' section and send me an email.
Just had to pepper that in. Also, I finally got the email subscription widget working. It took some messing around with, so now anyone curious can subscribe through email. If the subscriptions aren't going through, berate me in the comments please. :D
Please enjoy the blog and spread the word!
August 19, 2011
Diablo 3 on Consoles Wouldn't Be So Bad
We all know PC gamers are charismatically defensive of their platform. I even dedicated an entire blog post to the mentality. But the reluctance of allowing developers loyal to the PC onto other platforms is only holding back the industry. And now Blizzard is seeking to defy its persistently loyal audience by "seriously considering" bringing Diablo 3 to the consoles.
Alongside the announcement of the ultra-difficult "Inferno" mode, and without saying word of a release date, lead designer Josh Mosquiera at Gamescom said: "Today, we're trying to build the best console team at Blizzard. We're looking for programmers, designers, artists who think their dream job would be to bring Diablo to the console." So, apparently, it's been confirmed.
But the question remains: would the port be successful? None of Blizzard's key franchises (Starcraft, Warcraft and Diablo) have made their way to the consoles before, so the experiment would be a huge gamble. Only going on brand recognition alone, Blizzard has consistently high sales because consumers expect quality. And the implementation of Battle.net (Blizzard's online profile service) has prolonged the shelf life of any iterations from the three famous franchises. Could Blizzard garner the same type of community on consoles matching what exists on PC? It's hard to tell.
Typically, both mediums are considered separate. But PC-exclusive companies are realizing an audience exists within the console community that doesn't slave themselves over a Call of Duty game. Valve and Crytek, both previously exclusive, brought their star franchises to the console with favourable results. Many even said Crysis 2 is the best-looking console game to date. Valve made it possible for PS3 and PC players to play co-op on Portal 2. A precedent does exist, and if Blizzard could establish Battle.net without any hiccups or issues with the console makers, Diablo 3 could amass sufficient sales.
It's possible! I'd love to see the console audience embrace Blizzard's franchises with open arms. Perhaps this could further enclose the relationship between the PC and console fan base. Though, to ensure success, Blizzard should allow interconnectivity through the two platforms. Next year should be fun.
Alongside the announcement of the ultra-difficult "Inferno" mode, and without saying word of a release date, lead designer Josh Mosquiera at Gamescom said: "Today, we're trying to build the best console team at Blizzard. We're looking for programmers, designers, artists who think their dream job would be to bring Diablo to the console." So, apparently, it's been confirmed.
But the question remains: would the port be successful? None of Blizzard's key franchises (Starcraft, Warcraft and Diablo) have made their way to the consoles before, so the experiment would be a huge gamble. Only going on brand recognition alone, Blizzard has consistently high sales because consumers expect quality. And the implementation of Battle.net (Blizzard's online profile service) has prolonged the shelf life of any iterations from the three famous franchises. Could Blizzard garner the same type of community on consoles matching what exists on PC? It's hard to tell.
Typically, both mediums are considered separate. But PC-exclusive companies are realizing an audience exists within the console community that doesn't slave themselves over a Call of Duty game. Valve and Crytek, both previously exclusive, brought their star franchises to the console with favourable results. Many even said Crysis 2 is the best-looking console game to date. Valve made it possible for PS3 and PC players to play co-op on Portal 2. A precedent does exist, and if Blizzard could establish Battle.net without any hiccups or issues with the console makers, Diablo 3 could amass sufficient sales.
It's possible! I'd love to see the console audience embrace Blizzard's franchises with open arms. Perhaps this could further enclose the relationship between the PC and console fan base. Though, to ensure success, Blizzard should allow interconnectivity through the two platforms. Next year should be fun.
August 18, 2011
World of Warcraft: Early Details of Patch 4.3
The original posting I saw can be found here
I'm skeptical. This could be just a small site fishing for hits or remarkably credible information. But the information is worth noting nonetheless.
While unnecessarily late in the game's history, fans of World of Warcraft have been seeking these changes, basically pleading with Blizzard for years, and now apparently their wishes might be granted. The ability to customize armour sets, armor storage, and new content is all reportedly coming in the next patch.
Details are scarce as of this moment, but these changes will be much heralded by the game's community. The most welcome mechanic is surely armor storage, because high level characters dredge through older content to collect the awesome-looking tier sets. And since there has been twelve tiers already, one of two sets from each class are highly sought after.
Customizing armour is the surprise. Originally, it was clear-as-day which characters were high level and which characters weren't from how ostentatious their gear looked. Now, this will blur those lines. But Tom Chilton, the game's lead developer, says more players are reaching the top level at unprecedented speeds and Blizzard wants to make the experience more tailored for everyone. If a player is dedicated enough, reaching 85 can happen within a week. But with Blizzard now taking notice of this, it makes me wonder how the future of World of Warcraft will look.
Since 4.1, players have begrudgingly droned themselves through Zul'Gurub and Zul'Aman, rehashed raids but scaled down to fit the five-man dungeon setup. Thankfully, Blizzard is reportedly introducing three new dungeons (though not confirmed if the dungeons are brand new) and finally being able to take down Deathwing. The big black dragon needs to be taught a lesson for destroying half of Azeroth and finally players have a chance to do so.
Hopefully this information is credible. Appealing to the player base is something Blizzard desperately needs to do or else other games will soak up the leftover audience. How imperative this is for the future success of WoW is an understatement stupidly downplayed by the company. Therefore, let's all rejoice if this information is true.
I'm skeptical. This could be just a small site fishing for hits or remarkably credible information. But the information is worth noting nonetheless.
While unnecessarily late in the game's history, fans of World of Warcraft have been seeking these changes, basically pleading with Blizzard for years, and now apparently their wishes might be granted. The ability to customize armour sets, armor storage, and new content is all reportedly coming in the next patch.
Details are scarce as of this moment, but these changes will be much heralded by the game's community. The most welcome mechanic is surely armor storage, because high level characters dredge through older content to collect the awesome-looking tier sets. And since there has been twelve tiers already, one of two sets from each class are highly sought after.
Customizing armour is the surprise. Originally, it was clear-as-day which characters were high level and which characters weren't from how ostentatious their gear looked. Now, this will blur those lines. But Tom Chilton, the game's lead developer, says more players are reaching the top level at unprecedented speeds and Blizzard wants to make the experience more tailored for everyone. If a player is dedicated enough, reaching 85 can happen within a week. But with Blizzard now taking notice of this, it makes me wonder how the future of World of Warcraft will look.
Since 4.1, players have begrudgingly droned themselves through Zul'Gurub and Zul'Aman, rehashed raids but scaled down to fit the five-man dungeon setup. Thankfully, Blizzard is reportedly introducing three new dungeons (though not confirmed if the dungeons are brand new) and finally being able to take down Deathwing. The big black dragon needs to be taught a lesson for destroying half of Azeroth and finally players have a chance to do so.
Hopefully this information is credible. Appealing to the player base is something Blizzard desperately needs to do or else other games will soak up the leftover audience. How imperative this is for the future success of WoW is an understatement stupidly downplayed by the company. Therefore, let's all rejoice if this information is true.
August 17, 2011
Notch Versus Bethesda, The Trademark Showdown!
In the age of lawsuits being thrown around like used condoms, it is so refreshing to see a challenge not involving the courts. For the ill-informed, Notch, the almighty creator of Minecraft, is being threatened legally by Bethesda over The Elder Scrolls trademark. Mojang's next project, a collectible card game akin to Dungeons & Dragons (so, nothing like The Elder Scrolls franchise) is called Scrolls and Bethesda feels their trademark is infringed upon.
I hate to admit it, but Bethesda does have a case. But I am confident in saying that the gaming audience can coordinate the differences between both franchises. Arguably, this meaningless debate is only aiding Mojang, making Bethesda look foolish. This case is purely based on the similar timeline: the much-advertised Skyrim and Mojang's follow-up are slated for release on the same day. Yep, November 11, the day we commemorate the loss of fallen soldiers, another battle will be raging.
When Notch first spilled on a news on his Twitter, Bethesda stayed quiet. Then the oddest challenge to settle a dispute came from Notch: Mojang's three best players versus Bethesda's top three players in an old-style Quake 3 match. Mojang wins and Bethesda drops the suit; Bethesda wins and Mojang avoids court hell and changes the name. The most lighthearted approach to a serious allegation I've ever seen.
The original blog post on Notch's blog can be viewed here. No word yet on whether Bethesda will (or should) take the challenge seriously, but if so, the matches better be live-streamed.
Just an update: Hey guys, it's been a slow summer. Unfortunately as is the case every summer in the gaming industry. But I assure everyone the post count will rack up come September. In the meantime, I started a personal blog over on Wordpress that be viewed here. Just a place to rant about certain topics not involved with gaming. Enjoy the blog(s)!
I hate to admit it, but Bethesda does have a case. But I am confident in saying that the gaming audience can coordinate the differences between both franchises. Arguably, this meaningless debate is only aiding Mojang, making Bethesda look foolish. This case is purely based on the similar timeline: the much-advertised Skyrim and Mojang's follow-up are slated for release on the same day. Yep, November 11, the day we commemorate the loss of fallen soldiers, another battle will be raging.
When Notch first spilled on a news on his Twitter, Bethesda stayed quiet. Then the oddest challenge to settle a dispute came from Notch: Mojang's three best players versus Bethesda's top three players in an old-style Quake 3 match. Mojang wins and Bethesda drops the suit; Bethesda wins and Mojang avoids court hell and changes the name. The most lighthearted approach to a serious allegation I've ever seen.
The original blog post on Notch's blog can be viewed here. No word yet on whether Bethesda will (or should) take the challenge seriously, but if so, the matches better be live-streamed.
Just an update: Hey guys, it's been a slow summer. Unfortunately as is the case every summer in the gaming industry. But I assure everyone the post count will rack up come September. In the meantime, I started a personal blog over on Wordpress that be viewed here. Just a place to rant about certain topics not involved with gaming. Enjoy the blog(s)!
August 15, 2011
Silverblade Sunday #4 - It's Hard to Realize The Potential of Cloud Gaming
Back from vacation and ready to get roaring. Hopefully this weekend is the last, so I can work on being college-bound and improving the blog. Entry four of Silverblade Sunday is late but posted as promised, so read on and enjoy. This week focuses on "the cloud".
The storage of information in a remote location accessible anywhere, by anyone, for any means necessary. This is the simple notion behind "the cloud", the next extraordinary innovation in computing. While slowly being fitted for modern machines, the consoles still have yet to adapt. In due time, however, we'll be able to import characters saved on "the cloud" from remote locations anywhere in the world.
The transition, apparently, has already begun. Randy Pitchford, the CEO at Gearbox, let it slip that the studio's newly-announced sequel, Borderlands 2, will pop the Xbox's cloud cherry. For a franchise heavily reliant on co-op gameplay, importing characters is a blessing. Borderlands didn't have the perfect co-op formula, but if this is true, saving to the cloud has put it far above the rest of the field for now.
Companies like Crytek have explored the possibilities of cloud gaming but held off until the technology improves. But the industry is looking up. Start-ups Gankai and OnLive have turned heads with unexpected success, including OnLive partnering with fifty or more publishers. Upon release of OnLive, gaming journalists were ecstatic but skeptical of the execution, noting several lag inconsistencies. Though the technology was received favourably overall.
How the cloud works is rather simple. Instead of the picture running through the computer itself, the picture is rendered to a remote farm and projected back to the computer screen. This reduces the stress on CPU-related tasks, thus allowing any capable computer to play high-end PC games. It's an amazing bit of technology, and if marketed precisely, could become the future method of online gaming.
Remember those annoying 13-year-old kids who scream and flail their arms when dying in Halo and blaming lag? Well I can't guarantee the kids will disappear, but small children can now rest easy because the cloud is here to save the day. Because everyone's connection is broadcasting from the same server, all players are competing on the same transmission. Same Internet speed, no lag. Simple as pie. And delicious too. I like lag-free games. (Insert obligatory "pie in the sky" quip here.)
E3 was a dud this year, but the announcement of cloud gaming on the consoles is a huge leap forward for the industry. And this is just the beginning. As OnLive and competitors add users, more innovation is necessary to expand the player base. Then consoles are surely to follow.
Do you guys like the implementation of the cloud as the new standard for online gaming? If not, what are some ways you would improve online gaming?
The storage of information in a remote location accessible anywhere, by anyone, for any means necessary. This is the simple notion behind "the cloud", the next extraordinary innovation in computing. While slowly being fitted for modern machines, the consoles still have yet to adapt. In due time, however, we'll be able to import characters saved on "the cloud" from remote locations anywhere in the world.
The transition, apparently, has already begun. Randy Pitchford, the CEO at Gearbox, let it slip that the studio's newly-announced sequel, Borderlands 2, will pop the Xbox's cloud cherry. For a franchise heavily reliant on co-op gameplay, importing characters is a blessing. Borderlands didn't have the perfect co-op formula, but if this is true, saving to the cloud has put it far above the rest of the field for now.
Companies like Crytek have explored the possibilities of cloud gaming but held off until the technology improves. But the industry is looking up. Start-ups Gankai and OnLive have turned heads with unexpected success, including OnLive partnering with fifty or more publishers. Upon release of OnLive, gaming journalists were ecstatic but skeptical of the execution, noting several lag inconsistencies. Though the technology was received favourably overall.
How the cloud works is rather simple. Instead of the picture running through the computer itself, the picture is rendered to a remote farm and projected back to the computer screen. This reduces the stress on CPU-related tasks, thus allowing any capable computer to play high-end PC games. It's an amazing bit of technology, and if marketed precisely, could become the future method of online gaming.
Remember those annoying 13-year-old kids who scream and flail their arms when dying in Halo and blaming lag? Well I can't guarantee the kids will disappear, but small children can now rest easy because the cloud is here to save the day. Because everyone's connection is broadcasting from the same server, all players are competing on the same transmission. Same Internet speed, no lag. Simple as pie. And delicious too. I like lag-free games. (Insert obligatory "pie in the sky" quip here.)
E3 was a dud this year, but the announcement of cloud gaming on the consoles is a huge leap forward for the industry. And this is just the beginning. As OnLive and competitors add users, more innovation is necessary to expand the player base. Then consoles are surely to follow.
Do you guys like the implementation of the cloud as the new standard for online gaming? If not, what are some ways you would improve online gaming?
August 11, 2011
Another Design Change
Hey guys, just flipping through certain designs. I got some feedback about the previous theme and how it didn't appropriately reflect video gaming. I've toned it down to something simple and basic, and honestly, I am not the best at this. So, for my regular readers or just the people stopping in for a visit, could you throw my way a tidbit of advice on what you wish to see when you first open the blog?
I've considered moving to Wordpress because they do offer better design choices, and Blogger seemingly makes things extremely difficult. When I first got into blogging, I never realized how demoralizing and time-consuming designing a website could be. The plan is to try and keep things relatively simple while not blatantly imitating the big video game sites.
Please please please leave a comment, or preferably shoot me an email on certain design choices you like, and even what "widgets" you want to see on the sidebar. I have the essentials, but I want to give you guys the most interactive and pleasing experience while you spend time here. Any and all emails can be sent here or to filthcardia@gmail.com
Thank you!
I've considered moving to Wordpress because they do offer better design choices, and Blogger seemingly makes things extremely difficult. When I first got into blogging, I never realized how demoralizing and time-consuming designing a website could be. The plan is to try and keep things relatively simple while not blatantly imitating the big video game sites.
Please please please leave a comment, or preferably shoot me an email on certain design choices you like, and even what "widgets" you want to see on the sidebar. I have the essentials, but I want to give you guys the most interactive and pleasing experience while you spend time here. Any and all emails can be sent here or to filthcardia@gmail.com
Thank you!
August 10, 2011
Cliffnotes From The Borderlands 2 Reveal
GameInformer scans have just been posted online, and I took the courtesy of going through the article and making notes. The game sounds awesome!
Set five years after the original Borderlands, a dictator named Handsome Jack purchased the Hyperion Corporation outright and takes credit for the efforts of the original vault hunters. The new batch of colourful characters must compete in an arena-style format from the bottom rank to win the grand loot. As the group wins, Handsome Jack realizes the fearsome foursome is a threat and leaves them to die on the icy tundra somewhere on Pandora. After five long years the original cast has gone their separate ways, and the new heroes must seek out their guidance (as quest-givers) to save Pandora from ultimate destruction.
Instead of being faceless templates, NPCs will be more active this time around. For example, Marcus will fiddle with a radio and play darts with throwing knives. They'll even respond to the player's actions. Gearbox is aiming to give the player a richer experience while not forcing cutscenes or "other elements that take players out of the action." Quest-givers may also provide dialogue on quest objectives and aid or criticize the player when accepting a quest. The developer is making towns more lively. Quests will be more dynamic as well, leading to twists and turns from the original objective.
An early mission lets the player rescue Roland, the soldier, who has run afoul with a gang who worships guns. Handsome Jack sends in an army of mechs to destroy the gang, so it's the player's task to interrupt the invasion and save Roland in the process. Salvador the Gunzerker is given a proper introduction, a proper twist on the Berserker class, a character whose special ability is to dual wield any two weapons in the game. The character will enter a similar daze like Brick and for a certain amount of time he'll be able to unleash carnage with both weapons.
Adding insult to injury, Handsome Jack has built a moon base and will watch the player's actions throughout the adventure regardless of where they are. Enemy robots and supply crates will rain down from the base as well, and crush anything in the landing zone.
The lack of story in the original Borderlands was met with outcry of fans, so Gearbox was prompted to actually beef up the plot this go-around. The player's actions change the plot drastically, like taking too long to achieve an objective could affect the player's standing down the road. A more interactive story is what Gearbox is planning and one I am welcoming.
According to Gearbox, smarter AI will lead to more difficult enemy encounters. Enemies will actually duck and take cover unlike the bullet sponges from the first game. Also, enemies can communicate, making fights more dynamic.
A big complaint of the first game was the utter maniacal driving mechanics, and vehicles are getting a much needed overhaul come the sequel. Four seats is the new standard "so no one gets left behind", more detailed resolutions, the ability to powerslide, and thankfully, better collision detection.
The RPG aspect of Borderlands is getting a boost. The three-tier skill tree is back, but skills are refined and more useful to the player, instead of simple stat upgrades. For example, Salvador can increase his fire rate so long as the player keeps the gun firing.
Borderlands give players the fun advantage of possessing billions of dollars. This time, Eridium, a mysterious substance is the new currency on Pandora, which also doubles as a weapon enhancer. It leaves a nice trade-off early on, and gives players the choice of upgrading weapons early on or hoarding Eridium and going after the big guns later. Eridium can also give the player a temporary boost in health, shield and damage. Artifacts do make a welcome return, and are more fitted to gameplay tweaks. For example, some can put a healing aura around the player or make it so there's a small chance that bullets don't cost ammo.
And best of all, after a failed revolution, Claptrap is back. Time to rejoice.
Lots of details! If you guys want to read all the information for yourselves, just click here. Now I will drink my coffee and cry because Borderlands 2 isn't coming out until next year.
Set five years after the original Borderlands, a dictator named Handsome Jack purchased the Hyperion Corporation outright and takes credit for the efforts of the original vault hunters. The new batch of colourful characters must compete in an arena-style format from the bottom rank to win the grand loot. As the group wins, Handsome Jack realizes the fearsome foursome is a threat and leaves them to die on the icy tundra somewhere on Pandora. After five long years the original cast has gone their separate ways, and the new heroes must seek out their guidance (as quest-givers) to save Pandora from ultimate destruction.
Instead of being faceless templates, NPCs will be more active this time around. For example, Marcus will fiddle with a radio and play darts with throwing knives. They'll even respond to the player's actions. Gearbox is aiming to give the player a richer experience while not forcing cutscenes or "other elements that take players out of the action." Quest-givers may also provide dialogue on quest objectives and aid or criticize the player when accepting a quest. The developer is making towns more lively. Quests will be more dynamic as well, leading to twists and turns from the original objective.
An early mission lets the player rescue Roland, the soldier, who has run afoul with a gang who worships guns. Handsome Jack sends in an army of mechs to destroy the gang, so it's the player's task to interrupt the invasion and save Roland in the process. Salvador the Gunzerker is given a proper introduction, a proper twist on the Berserker class, a character whose special ability is to dual wield any two weapons in the game. The character will enter a similar daze like Brick and for a certain amount of time he'll be able to unleash carnage with both weapons.
Adding insult to injury, Handsome Jack has built a moon base and will watch the player's actions throughout the adventure regardless of where they are. Enemy robots and supply crates will rain down from the base as well, and crush anything in the landing zone.
The lack of story in the original Borderlands was met with outcry of fans, so Gearbox was prompted to actually beef up the plot this go-around. The player's actions change the plot drastically, like taking too long to achieve an objective could affect the player's standing down the road. A more interactive story is what Gearbox is planning and one I am welcoming.
According to Gearbox, smarter AI will lead to more difficult enemy encounters. Enemies will actually duck and take cover unlike the bullet sponges from the first game. Also, enemies can communicate, making fights more dynamic.
A big complaint of the first game was the utter maniacal driving mechanics, and vehicles are getting a much needed overhaul come the sequel. Four seats is the new standard "so no one gets left behind", more detailed resolutions, the ability to powerslide, and thankfully, better collision detection.
The RPG aspect of Borderlands is getting a boost. The three-tier skill tree is back, but skills are refined and more useful to the player, instead of simple stat upgrades. For example, Salvador can increase his fire rate so long as the player keeps the gun firing.
Borderlands give players the fun advantage of possessing billions of dollars. This time, Eridium, a mysterious substance is the new currency on Pandora, which also doubles as a weapon enhancer. It leaves a nice trade-off early on, and gives players the choice of upgrading weapons early on or hoarding Eridium and going after the big guns later. Eridium can also give the player a temporary boost in health, shield and damage. Artifacts do make a welcome return, and are more fitted to gameplay tweaks. For example, some can put a healing aura around the player or make it so there's a small chance that bullets don't cost ammo.
And best of all, after a failed revolution, Claptrap is back. Time to rejoice.
Lots of details! If you guys want to read all the information for yourselves, just click here. Now I will drink my coffee and cry because Borderlands 2 isn't coming out until next year.
August 9, 2011
The Addiction of Hunting For Achievements and Trophies
"Those people are rather unsightly, gross, hounding for attention. Pathetic is an understatement." When Stallion83 broke the 500,000 gamerscore milestone, I was in GameStop discussing the feat with a good friend of mine and an employee. Just casually praising his efforts and dedication and how much hard work it possibly took to accumulate such a high total. Then the strangest thing happened. An older woman, maybe mid-forties and apparently a gaming fan, came in and said the above quote. That Stallion83 was a homely attention-seeker with no future. Actually, he's married, holds a steady job and clean shaven. I can't blame the woman, and while we can get into the whole debate of the perception of our beloved industry in society, my initial thought upon hearing the 500,000 gamerscore feat was just "Woah."
Being the world record holder, I feel obligated to use him as an example for the topic at hand. What he's doing is amicable and a completionist's wet dream, but is he addicted or purely a hardcore gaming fan? I just sent him an email requesting an interview, and all of his efforts can be found at http://www.1milliongamerscore.com.
When Microsoft first brought forward this idea of "achievements", certain feats in games measured by a collective score, people were skeptical. Tons of words were thrown around: innovative, stupid, useless, productive; take your pick. The gaming masses were vocal and heavily questioned Microsoft's intention. Back in 2005, I can't remember the website but I vividly remember a debate raging on for thousands of comments about the whole subject and seemingly the audience was split. Half embraced the new concept, saying it will increase the life of certain games, while others cited the potential addictiveness of the new concept and how it will slowly destroy gaming.
Five years later, the debate has quieted but the questions still haven't been answered. How exactly has the notion of achievements affected the gaming populous? Was the implementation actually harmful for our state of mind? Have gaming fanatics taken the idea way overboard? To a certain extent, yes.
Achievements tell the player about game mechanics they probably didn't know existed, and let them wholly experience what the developer has laid on the table. But in specific cases these mechanics are annoying, some unplayable, or maybe too difficult for the player to enjoy. And every game enthusiast is a completionist somehow, so we fill almost obligated to fulfill the task necessary to get the achievement. Doing so takes the fun right out of the game and it's a cheap tactic by developers to keep people playing.
The addition of achievements, I think, has made many of us (myself included) lazy and/or easily frustrated. Doing painstakingly repetitious acts for the sake of an invisible number just so we can boast. Putting it that way makes it sound pathetic. We've become slaves, mindless zombies, hungry for a higher total, willing to sacrifice our precious time and resources for a brief moment of satisfaction. Once the alert disappears, we drop quickly from our ethereal standpoint and realize how much time we've wasted.
Being close to maxing out gamerscore is like an unquenchable thirst. What we need to realize is it's not our responsibility to slave ourselves into acting this way. Some achievements are near impossible (like achieving the number one spot on the global leaderboard or beating Ninja Gaiden on the hardest difficulty). Simply, there are some challenges not worth the trouble.
Being the world record holder, I feel obligated to use him as an example for the topic at hand. What he's doing is amicable and a completionist's wet dream, but is he addicted or purely a hardcore gaming fan? I just sent him an email requesting an interview, and all of his efforts can be found at http://www.1milliongamerscore.com.
When Microsoft first brought forward this idea of "achievements", certain feats in games measured by a collective score, people were skeptical. Tons of words were thrown around: innovative, stupid, useless, productive; take your pick. The gaming masses were vocal and heavily questioned Microsoft's intention. Back in 2005, I can't remember the website but I vividly remember a debate raging on for thousands of comments about the whole subject and seemingly the audience was split. Half embraced the new concept, saying it will increase the life of certain games, while others cited the potential addictiveness of the new concept and how it will slowly destroy gaming.
Five years later, the debate has quieted but the questions still haven't been answered. How exactly has the notion of achievements affected the gaming populous? Was the implementation actually harmful for our state of mind? Have gaming fanatics taken the idea way overboard? To a certain extent, yes.
Achievements tell the player about game mechanics they probably didn't know existed, and let them wholly experience what the developer has laid on the table. But in specific cases these mechanics are annoying, some unplayable, or maybe too difficult for the player to enjoy. And every game enthusiast is a completionist somehow, so we fill almost obligated to fulfill the task necessary to get the achievement. Doing so takes the fun right out of the game and it's a cheap tactic by developers to keep people playing.
The addition of achievements, I think, has made many of us (myself included) lazy and/or easily frustrated. Doing painstakingly repetitious acts for the sake of an invisible number just so we can boast. Putting it that way makes it sound pathetic. We've become slaves, mindless zombies, hungry for a higher total, willing to sacrifice our precious time and resources for a brief moment of satisfaction. Once the alert disappears, we drop quickly from our ethereal standpoint and realize how much time we've wasted.
Being close to maxing out gamerscore is like an unquenchable thirst. What we need to realize is it's not our responsibility to slave ourselves into acting this way. Some achievements are near impossible (like achieving the number one spot on the global leaderboard or beating Ninja Gaiden on the hardest difficulty). Simply, there are some challenges not worth the trouble.
August 5, 2011
Minecraft Finally Sells Three Million Copies
Three million copies before the game releases a final version. Extraordinary numbers, and what Minecraft has been so proficient at is showing the true potential of word-of-mouth and the power of social networking and video sharing websites. Frankly, without the bigwigs of gaming on YouTube acknowledged the game's existence, Minecraft would still be another struggling indie game.
The strong sale count made the game's creator, Markus 'Notch' Persson, an overnight success story, solidifying his role as a leading figurehead of the indie movement. He went on to create Mojang, a small studio based in Sweden now employing ten people and working hard improving Minecraft and the recently revealed Scrolls, a card-based board game similar to Dungeons & Dragons. Minecraft is expected to ship its full version on 11/11/11, competing directly with The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and other games.
The game raised to another level of popularity when 'MineCon' was announced, securing Minecraft's role as a cultural icon. The conference, hosted by the Mandalay in Las Vegas, will host potentially tens of thousands of fans, dressing up as every manner of creature. I'm expecting to see some very colourful and unique concepts given the uniqueness of the game, so November will be fun. Too bad I won't be going.
No game I've played gives the player true, unconditioned freedom. Minecraft comes to the threshold of that, but there's one main idea behind gameplay: to survive. As legions of ferocious monsters roam freely during the night, it is the player's immediate responsibility to find wood, coal, and build a shelter. Usually in the side of a mountain, anywhere to shield from the hordes of enemies. But oftentimes players ignore the leagues of blood-thirsty creatures and just start building massive contraptions, especially through the multiplayer where entire scenes of famous games have been recreated. Extravagant mods are now daily fodder for the gaming press, further exposing the game to the world.
So, Notch, I bid you a hearty Congratulations. You've shown indie hits can have universal success, and that success will explode once Minecraft hits consoles. Enjoy the success, swim half-naked in your pool of money, but don't forget we'd like to see more games in the future.
The strong sale count made the game's creator, Markus 'Notch' Persson, an overnight success story, solidifying his role as a leading figurehead of the indie movement. He went on to create Mojang, a small studio based in Sweden now employing ten people and working hard improving Minecraft and the recently revealed Scrolls, a card-based board game similar to Dungeons & Dragons. Minecraft is expected to ship its full version on 11/11/11, competing directly with The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and other games.
The game raised to another level of popularity when 'MineCon' was announced, securing Minecraft's role as a cultural icon. The conference, hosted by the Mandalay in Las Vegas, will host potentially tens of thousands of fans, dressing up as every manner of creature. I'm expecting to see some very colourful and unique concepts given the uniqueness of the game, so November will be fun. Too bad I won't be going.
No game I've played gives the player true, unconditioned freedom. Minecraft comes to the threshold of that, but there's one main idea behind gameplay: to survive. As legions of ferocious monsters roam freely during the night, it is the player's immediate responsibility to find wood, coal, and build a shelter. Usually in the side of a mountain, anywhere to shield from the hordes of enemies. But oftentimes players ignore the leagues of blood-thirsty creatures and just start building massive contraptions, especially through the multiplayer where entire scenes of famous games have been recreated. Extravagant mods are now daily fodder for the gaming press, further exposing the game to the world.
So, Notch, I bid you a hearty Congratulations. You've shown indie hits can have universal success, and that success will explode once Minecraft hits consoles. Enjoy the success, swim half-naked in your pool of money, but don't forget we'd like to see more games in the future.
August 4, 2011
The 200 Post Hall of Fame Extravaganza!
First time to one hundred page views! THIS IS BIG NEWS GUYS! And then with this post, I'll reach two hundred posts! Two hundred posts! 2-0-0 posts! That's 199 + 1 = 200! (Sorry, I'm excited).
Judging by the introduction, I must tone it down on the caffeine. With my arms flailing in happiness I could poke someone's eyes out. And for that, I apologize. I just want to thank everyone who has ever taken a glance at my lovely blog, and especially to those who have subscribed or re-tweeted any posts. Without you guys, well my blog would be nowhere. I'll continue to provide the utmost commentary on the beloved industry, hopefully for years to come.
For the double-century post, I thought I would take the time to detail my favourite posts from the last eight months. A Hall of Fame marker, if you will. Enjoy!
1. The Future of MMOs After World of Warcraft
This was a difficult post for me to write. Not because I am such a WoW fan, but because it's hard to imagine another game leading the genre. The last seven years other MMO studios have been trying to take down Blizzard's masterpiece and the end is near. It shall be fun to see what ideas are lingering after all the clones are dead-and-buried.
2. Anyone Tired of Assassin's Creed?
While this post didn't catch the eye of many, I received one awesome quip from a good friend of mine. He said: "I love to hate this series. But I also hate that I love this series. I don't want it to end, but I do so I finally know what the f**k happens."
3. World of Warcraft: The Challenge of Holding Two Audiences
Another World of Warcraft post. Sometimes I just can't help myself! I love this one because it really saw me flirt with the idea of large exposure, and this post still receives a lot of page views.
4. E3 2011: A Disgrace or Just A Disappointment?
The botched presentations from the Big Three console makers forced me to write this post. It's impossible for any three conferences to suck harder, notably because the biggest announcements were leaked early. Good job guys.
5. The China Conundrum: The Rise of Gold Farming
As with many posts here, the more technical ones get more page views, and this one was no exception. A keen issue plaguing the MMO genre, it's hard to deny the seriousness of the issue, and companies are feeling it.
6. Woah! I Can See Myself Through The Wall - Portal 2 Review
Limited funds force me to only write so many reviews, but with a game as stellar as Valve's creative puzzler, it was an opportunity I couldn't pass up. The best game before the Christmas rush, and still a strong candidate for any Game of the Year awards.
7. Is Buying Pre-owned Bad For The Industry?
A completely serious topic affecting the industry today, and one developers and publishers are struggling to deal with. This post gave me a boost in readership and brought a mad rush of people to the blog.
8. Gears 3 Beta Rewards
The shortest post on this list, but one I had to mention. Once this was posted (minutes after IGN detailed the beta rewards), interest shot up and it gave me almost 10 Google followers and email subscribers in a matter of hours. That's a lot for a small blog like mine.
9. My Eyes Are Melting Inside My Face - Marvel vs. Capcom 3 Review
As I wrote before, reviews are really fun! Learning about a new game and possibly even a genre is always an intriguing experience. And a few friends had a laugh at the title as well. The game was extremely colourful.
10. Gameloft: The Porn Studio of Video Games
Last but certainly not least, I feel obligated to mention the Gameloft article that made me realize why I love blogging. First, I can make a title like that with no consequence. Second, there is always one of you who searches "porn studio video games" and I get the click. Thanks for being legendary ripoff artists Gameloft. :D
And there you have it! Ten of my favourite posts over the past eight months. I'd like to thank the Academy, Google for making an accessible blogging service, my friend who suggested I start blogging, and the video game industry for giving me something to rant about.
Judging by the introduction, I must tone it down on the caffeine. With my arms flailing in happiness I could poke someone's eyes out. And for that, I apologize. I just want to thank everyone who has ever taken a glance at my lovely blog, and especially to those who have subscribed or re-tweeted any posts. Without you guys, well my blog would be nowhere. I'll continue to provide the utmost commentary on the beloved industry, hopefully for years to come.
For the double-century post, I thought I would take the time to detail my favourite posts from the last eight months. A Hall of Fame marker, if you will. Enjoy!
1. The Future of MMOs After World of Warcraft
This was a difficult post for me to write. Not because I am such a WoW fan, but because it's hard to imagine another game leading the genre. The last seven years other MMO studios have been trying to take down Blizzard's masterpiece and the end is near. It shall be fun to see what ideas are lingering after all the clones are dead-and-buried.
2. Anyone Tired of Assassin's Creed?
While this post didn't catch the eye of many, I received one awesome quip from a good friend of mine. He said: "I love to hate this series. But I also hate that I love this series. I don't want it to end, but I do so I finally know what the f**k happens."
3. World of Warcraft: The Challenge of Holding Two Audiences
Another World of Warcraft post. Sometimes I just can't help myself! I love this one because it really saw me flirt with the idea of large exposure, and this post still receives a lot of page views.
4. E3 2011: A Disgrace or Just A Disappointment?
The botched presentations from the Big Three console makers forced me to write this post. It's impossible for any three conferences to suck harder, notably because the biggest announcements were leaked early. Good job guys.
5. The China Conundrum: The Rise of Gold Farming
As with many posts here, the more technical ones get more page views, and this one was no exception. A keen issue plaguing the MMO genre, it's hard to deny the seriousness of the issue, and companies are feeling it.
6. Woah! I Can See Myself Through The Wall - Portal 2 Review
Limited funds force me to only write so many reviews, but with a game as stellar as Valve's creative puzzler, it was an opportunity I couldn't pass up. The best game before the Christmas rush, and still a strong candidate for any Game of the Year awards.
7. Is Buying Pre-owned Bad For The Industry?
A completely serious topic affecting the industry today, and one developers and publishers are struggling to deal with. This post gave me a boost in readership and brought a mad rush of people to the blog.
8. Gears 3 Beta Rewards
The shortest post on this list, but one I had to mention. Once this was posted (minutes after IGN detailed the beta rewards), interest shot up and it gave me almost 10 Google followers and email subscribers in a matter of hours. That's a lot for a small blog like mine.
9. My Eyes Are Melting Inside My Face - Marvel vs. Capcom 3 Review
As I wrote before, reviews are really fun! Learning about a new game and possibly even a genre is always an intriguing experience. And a few friends had a laugh at the title as well. The game was extremely colourful.
10. Gameloft: The Porn Studio of Video Games
Last but certainly not least, I feel obligated to mention the Gameloft article that made me realize why I love blogging. First, I can make a title like that with no consequence. Second, there is always one of you who searches "porn studio video games" and I get the click. Thanks for being legendary ripoff artists Gameloft. :D
And there you have it! Ten of my favourite posts over the past eight months. I'd like to thank the Academy, Google for making an accessible blogging service, my friend who suggested I start blogging, and the video game industry for giving me something to rant about.
Bioware Advertising Female Shepard Will Have No Mass Effect
A poll voted on by fans of the Mass Effect franchise recently unearthed the female model Bioware will be using to advertise the third installment. While giving fans the choice is certainly noble, I find it difficult to understand why the developer is taking these steps now, considering the trilogy ends next year. Players have the option of importing characters from previous games, so obviously there are quite a few living the adventure as a female Shepard.
We can get into the whole debate about the misrepresentation of genders in games or the sexuality of female characters for the sake of sales, but this issue is about Bioware's failure to realize the true potential of advertising both sexes immediately. From a business perspective, emphasizing the option to play as either male or female appeals to literally everyone, leaving prospective (female) consumers interested in the series feeling like Mass Effect is tailored to a male audience. From a gaming perspective, those unfamiliar with the games won't realize playing as a female yields different results and an entirely different play-through from the male counterpart.
The always-reliable Fox News Channel aired a segment regarding sexuality in the first Mass Effect and took issue with the sex scene involving Liara. Understandable for a conservative news channel. Cooper Lawrence, a psychologist, was brought on to argue against the scene, claiming kids would be mindlessly paralyzed by seeing it. From 2:13 forward, she claims the game objectifies women sexually, and that "it's a man in this game deciding who he wants to be with." Without playing the game, Cooper wouldn't have prerequisite knowledge that Commander Shepard can be both male and female because a male model of the character is the only one advertised. And that presumed sexism fueled controversy from parents, and probably helped sales. Bioware shot themselves in the foot, though the developer isn't necessarily in the good graces of everyone being a video game developer.
The bad press surrounding the cutscene obviously deterred many parents from letting their children purchase the game, but also left many women asking questions. Bioware could have easily avoided this by advertising a female counterpart to the well-known male character. Even for Mass Effect 2 would be remotely forgivable, but the inability of the developer to wait until the last game is just atrocious behaviour. It doesn't help anyone, especially the industry.
In a vote monitored by Bioware, fans had the option of picking the female Shepard from a possible six choices. The female character would receive her own trailer and a spot on the Collector's Edition of Mass Effect 3. The winner, choice number five, can be viewed here. A badass blonde bombshell, the fantasy of many a nerd who voted. Based on all of the choices, option five was clearly the best one fans would pick. The new FemShep (as the fans have named her) dominated the voting process by more than 18,000 votes. GayGamer.net editor Denis Farr told Kotaku the process was like a "beauty pageant," and through the article other journalists voice their displeasure as well.
It's hard to rail against Bioware because the Mass Effect franchise shows why gaming is truly remarkable as a medium. But sadly, some flaws outweigh the overwhelming positives, and the female Shepard speaks to how lost the industry is in not only appealing to women but developing them as well. I hope other developers are watching, because these mistakes will surely be made again, but we can all learn collectively as to what works and what doesn't.
We can get into the whole debate about the misrepresentation of genders in games or the sexuality of female characters for the sake of sales, but this issue is about Bioware's failure to realize the true potential of advertising both sexes immediately. From a business perspective, emphasizing the option to play as either male or female appeals to literally everyone, leaving prospective (female) consumers interested in the series feeling like Mass Effect is tailored to a male audience. From a gaming perspective, those unfamiliar with the games won't realize playing as a female yields different results and an entirely different play-through from the male counterpart.
The always-reliable Fox News Channel aired a segment regarding sexuality in the first Mass Effect and took issue with the sex scene involving Liara. Understandable for a conservative news channel. Cooper Lawrence, a psychologist, was brought on to argue against the scene, claiming kids would be mindlessly paralyzed by seeing it. From 2:13 forward, she claims the game objectifies women sexually, and that "it's a man in this game deciding who he wants to be with." Without playing the game, Cooper wouldn't have prerequisite knowledge that Commander Shepard can be both male and female because a male model of the character is the only one advertised. And that presumed sexism fueled controversy from parents, and probably helped sales. Bioware shot themselves in the foot, though the developer isn't necessarily in the good graces of everyone being a video game developer.
The bad press surrounding the cutscene obviously deterred many parents from letting their children purchase the game, but also left many women asking questions. Bioware could have easily avoided this by advertising a female counterpart to the well-known male character. Even for Mass Effect 2 would be remotely forgivable, but the inability of the developer to wait until the last game is just atrocious behaviour. It doesn't help anyone, especially the industry.
In a vote monitored by Bioware, fans had the option of picking the female Shepard from a possible six choices. The female character would receive her own trailer and a spot on the Collector's Edition of Mass Effect 3. The winner, choice number five, can be viewed here. A badass blonde bombshell, the fantasy of many a nerd who voted. Based on all of the choices, option five was clearly the best one fans would pick. The new FemShep (as the fans have named her) dominated the voting process by more than 18,000 votes. GayGamer.net editor Denis Farr told Kotaku the process was like a "beauty pageant," and through the article other journalists voice their displeasure as well.
It's hard to rail against Bioware because the Mass Effect franchise shows why gaming is truly remarkable as a medium. But sadly, some flaws outweigh the overwhelming positives, and the female Shepard speaks to how lost the industry is in not only appealing to women but developing them as well. I hope other developers are watching, because these mistakes will surely be made again, but we can all learn collectively as to what works and what doesn't.
August 3, 2011
Borderlands 2 or... Borderworlds? What I Want To See
The world of Pandora was a very desolate place, one of hopelessness and anguish, where dreams go to die. Gangs rule supreme and decent people trying to make a living fear for their lives. Innocent robots are trampled on and used as target practice and are given presumptuous names. Why torture the Claptraps? They were created for the sole purpose of giving people a punching bag and surely they will be even more frequent in the inevitable sequel to my GOTY of 2009, Borderlands.
I put too much time into this game. What made the game so great was the co-op and the complete package the game was. Literally, you could encounter thousands of weapons and even more were added with each piece of downloadable content. It was a thrill, a rush of adrenaline, to kill Crawmerax and see what amazing weapons would drop - and it made all those times dying even sweeter (which was fine because I was rich). When I first heard about it, it looked like one of those pointless releases that caught the attention of very few and then set aside for the other major releases of the pre-Christmas period; boy, was I wrong.
Since the year has now changed, and it is common practice for games to have a two-year development cycle, we can expect some kind of announcement about a sequel. Earlier last year, it was unveiled that Gearbox had registered the name Borderworlds. Could we be seeing different moons or different planets? Expanding the universe would be great for the franchise, and that means even more guns and more characters and more locations. And more bosses to kill. And, hopefully a better story. I do realize the story was only used a device to advance the game, but there is potential for moving on to other planets. A chance for Gearbox to redeem themselves, I guess.
But the one thing we all care about - the guns. The millions of guns. I want to see billions, trillions, quadrillions. I want to see the craziest, most colourful, most obscene guns that Gearbox can come up with. Sniper rifles that shoot rockets; rocket launchers that blast everything but rockets; even the ability to launch the characters themselves through a weapon. If Gearbox could make that work, that would be badass. And on that note, I also want a weapon bank. The one in the Underdome was disappointing, and I don't know how Gearbox couldn't have anticipated people actually wanting to collect the millions of guns as the number was advertised. When I saw that number on the commercial, I saw a trophy case of the rarest guns in all the universe and my reflection in the glass smiling with glee. This bank should have unlimited space and be included with the original copy of the game, not in sub-par DLC. Also on that note, I would love to see some kind of auction house where other players connected online could place bids on different guns and this would add an MMO feel to the gameplay. Gearbox promoted co-operative gameplay, and if the developer could work in a better form of competitive multiplayer, a sequel could be something else altogether.
The cast of characters - Roland, Mordecai, Lilith and Brick - each had their own personality and Gearbox had fun making them. But with Pandora unlikely as the setting, I think they should include the colourful batch from the first game, but also expand it to include other characters as well. I can't think of any examples but hopefully Gearbox won't disappoint. Pandora itself wasn't a character, but played a big part in setting the mood of the game. A change of environment would be nice - maybe some colours other than brown or grey or anything that's not depressing? It'd be appreciated. Also keep Cage The Elephant as the theme - the band is great and their new record I'm sure has the song perfect for the new game.
For the sequel, Gearbox doesn't have to do much. The formula was sound and worked incredibly well when played in co-op. In reading other articles like this, lots of these and more were mentioned, and I hope Gearbox is listening. I really do. I can't wait to kill Crawmerax 2.0 over the Christmas holidays in 2011.
Update: Eurogamer reports that, as expected, a sequel is being developed by Gearbox for release in 2012. An official announcement should be coming shortly. Yay Gearbox!
I put too much time into this game. What made the game so great was the co-op and the complete package the game was. Literally, you could encounter thousands of weapons and even more were added with each piece of downloadable content. It was a thrill, a rush of adrenaline, to kill Crawmerax and see what amazing weapons would drop - and it made all those times dying even sweeter (which was fine because I was rich). When I first heard about it, it looked like one of those pointless releases that caught the attention of very few and then set aside for the other major releases of the pre-Christmas period; boy, was I wrong.
Since the year has now changed, and it is common practice for games to have a two-year development cycle, we can expect some kind of announcement about a sequel. Earlier last year, it was unveiled that Gearbox had registered the name Borderworlds. Could we be seeing different moons or different planets? Expanding the universe would be great for the franchise, and that means even more guns and more characters and more locations. And more bosses to kill. And, hopefully a better story. I do realize the story was only used a device to advance the game, but there is potential for moving on to other planets. A chance for Gearbox to redeem themselves, I guess.
But the one thing we all care about - the guns. The millions of guns. I want to see billions, trillions, quadrillions. I want to see the craziest, most colourful, most obscene guns that Gearbox can come up with. Sniper rifles that shoot rockets; rocket launchers that blast everything but rockets; even the ability to launch the characters themselves through a weapon. If Gearbox could make that work, that would be badass. And on that note, I also want a weapon bank. The one in the Underdome was disappointing, and I don't know how Gearbox couldn't have anticipated people actually wanting to collect the millions of guns as the number was advertised. When I saw that number on the commercial, I saw a trophy case of the rarest guns in all the universe and my reflection in the glass smiling with glee. This bank should have unlimited space and be included with the original copy of the game, not in sub-par DLC. Also on that note, I would love to see some kind of auction house where other players connected online could place bids on different guns and this would add an MMO feel to the gameplay. Gearbox promoted co-operative gameplay, and if the developer could work in a better form of competitive multiplayer, a sequel could be something else altogether.
The cast of characters - Roland, Mordecai, Lilith and Brick - each had their own personality and Gearbox had fun making them. But with Pandora unlikely as the setting, I think they should include the colourful batch from the first game, but also expand it to include other characters as well. I can't think of any examples but hopefully Gearbox won't disappoint. Pandora itself wasn't a character, but played a big part in setting the mood of the game. A change of environment would be nice - maybe some colours other than brown or grey or anything that's not depressing? It'd be appreciated. Also keep Cage The Elephant as the theme - the band is great and their new record I'm sure has the song perfect for the new game.
For the sequel, Gearbox doesn't have to do much. The formula was sound and worked incredibly well when played in co-op. In reading other articles like this, lots of these and more were mentioned, and I hope Gearbox is listening. I really do. I can't wait to kill Crawmerax 2.0 over the Christmas holidays in 2011.
Update: Eurogamer reports that, as expected, a sequel is being developed by Gearbox for release in 2012. An official announcement should be coming shortly. Yay Gearbox!
The Future of MMORPGs After World of Warcraft
Possibly the most peculiar title I've ever written for a blog topic. Seven years and fans of the genre are appropriating funds elsewhere. The impending demise of World of Warcraft is a well-documented fable, debated on countless times in the Blizzard forums, everyone playing the blame game. Some peg Blizzard as the culprit, vastly "improving" the game over time to cater to multiple audiences. Accusations aside, the king of MMOs cannot rule forever. Eventually, the nostalgia factor will die out as more clones are brought into the fold and World of Warcraft will be seen as antiquated. Therefore, for a genre built on the coexistence of communities, could there be a new king on the horizon?
Arguably, Blizzard's crown jewel single-handedly made the genre the roaring success it is today. Multiple communities had existed before, starting with Ultima Online in 1997, but WoW has amassed a player base of twelve million, unrivaled by any single release. Blizzard's process was one of great ingenuity, contriving a masterpiece by blatantly copying aspects of previously successful games and further establishing brand recognition through one of the company's legendary franchises. But, as was the case in 2004, the times have changed. Many games employing the same tactics as Blizzard are making a splash in the genre, namely Aion Online, TERA and RIFT. The term "WoW-killer" has been thrown around one too many times to describe such games. Though common practice currently, Blizzard seems virtually unfazed by the rise in competition.
Amongst the player base, the large migration from World of Warcraft to RIFT was much talked about, offering bouts of disappointment about the head honcho directly from RIFT's developer Trion Worlds. The attacks received much attention from the gaming press, and around the time of the release of RIFT, sites dedicated to the genre heavily localized their articles targeting the game and what it offered. This brought even more attention, and through smart marketing techniques, the game quickly flourished. And most importantly, shifted the focus temporarily from its biggest competitor. In late May, RIFT reached two million accounts, a milestone for any new project, and a true testament that new games can succeed in a crowded genre. While it can still be debated why Trion Worlds has garnered so many sales, the success of RIFT and previous "WoW-killers" shows the vulnerability of Blizzard.
When World of Warcraft first launched, Vanilla as the early days are now called, the game was fitted for the hardcore. The leveling process took several rigourous months to complete, raids were unfriendly and very technical, and gear was a prideful possession. As the population grew, Blizzard realized not all players had the time or effort like their unemployed counterparts to see every piece of content. Systemically, the hardcore players were drowned out in favour of easing the hardships for the larger casual fanbase, sharply simplifying the process of attaining levels and gear. The game became so easy, the arduous task of leveling that previously took a few months could be done within a week.
Original players shifted loyalties to this similar bunch of games, the aptly named "WoW-killers", a trend likely to continue until the game meets its demise. And that's the core philosophy behind the idea that Blizzard is slowly killing its own creation. While true to a degree, something happened to World of Warcraft had no one anticipated. Back in 2004, the days of Vanilla WoW, there was no talk of FarmVille or motion control or smartphone gaming. Hell, Facebook was a novelty. Slowly but surely, the accessibility of Facebook and smartphones gave rise to a new type of gamer, the casual gamer, someone whom only sees gaming as a passive activity. And like everyone in the industry, Blizzard was caught off-guard.
The genre was unprepared for the mass rush of new players over the next couple years. Previously seen as inaccessible by many of the non-hardcore crowd, Blizzard scrambled and made World of Warcraft progressively easier as the money started rolling in. The outcome was a financially viable formula for Blizzard, but left a disdained hardcore audience looking for answers. The problem still continues today, and the lasting days of Cataclysm will likely decide the fate of the future for Blizzard. But the ending days of Cataclysm will also reveal the true potential of a casual-driven MMO, and whether Blizzard's efforts put WoW on borrowed time.
The failure of managing Star Wars Galaxies by Sony Online Entertainment left fans dissatisfied and aching for more. Another game from a different company, executed properly to suit the demanding needs of an audience. When word broke of a possible new MMO set in the universe, Star Wars geeks and the whole gaming universe leaped joyously. Electronic Arts then awarded Bioware the responsibility of restoring the credibility of the great franchise at their discretion. Colourful graphics and full voice acting for every cutscene have become the main selling points, and Star Wars: The Old Republic has taken the industry by storm. Expectations are soaring ahead of its projected Christmas release, and everyone is excited.
Fans are so restless in fact, SWTOR holds the record for the highest pre-order total ever accumulated by EA. Some serious numbers that could significantly challenge World of Warcraft's reign. It's still undetermined how triumphant Bioware's first MMO will be, or if the game will match the sustained success of Blizzard, but the buzz is a telltale sign of how the industry is shaping.
The genre can play follow the leader as much as it likes, but someday World of Warcraft will fall and what will be left is an industry trying to re-identify itself. Past the days of the Horde against the Alliance, MMOs will be available in greater variety and we are already seeing evidence of this. Facebook games like Mafia Wars have brought the capabilities of social gaming to the forefront, and once-monthly-fee heavyweights like Lord of the Rings Online are showing free-to-play can be successful as well. For a genre moving forward so quickly, it sure took a while.
Arguably, Blizzard's crown jewel single-handedly made the genre the roaring success it is today. Multiple communities had existed before, starting with Ultima Online in 1997, but WoW has amassed a player base of twelve million, unrivaled by any single release. Blizzard's process was one of great ingenuity, contriving a masterpiece by blatantly copying aspects of previously successful games and further establishing brand recognition through one of the company's legendary franchises. But, as was the case in 2004, the times have changed. Many games employing the same tactics as Blizzard are making a splash in the genre, namely Aion Online, TERA and RIFT. The term "WoW-killer" has been thrown around one too many times to describe such games. Though common practice currently, Blizzard seems virtually unfazed by the rise in competition.
Amongst the player base, the large migration from World of Warcraft to RIFT was much talked about, offering bouts of disappointment about the head honcho directly from RIFT's developer Trion Worlds. The attacks received much attention from the gaming press, and around the time of the release of RIFT, sites dedicated to the genre heavily localized their articles targeting the game and what it offered. This brought even more attention, and through smart marketing techniques, the game quickly flourished. And most importantly, shifted the focus temporarily from its biggest competitor. In late May, RIFT reached two million accounts, a milestone for any new project, and a true testament that new games can succeed in a crowded genre. While it can still be debated why Trion Worlds has garnered so many sales, the success of RIFT and previous "WoW-killers" shows the vulnerability of Blizzard.
When World of Warcraft first launched, Vanilla as the early days are now called, the game was fitted for the hardcore. The leveling process took several rigourous months to complete, raids were unfriendly and very technical, and gear was a prideful possession. As the population grew, Blizzard realized not all players had the time or effort like their unemployed counterparts to see every piece of content. Systemically, the hardcore players were drowned out in favour of easing the hardships for the larger casual fanbase, sharply simplifying the process of attaining levels and gear. The game became so easy, the arduous task of leveling that previously took a few months could be done within a week.
Original players shifted loyalties to this similar bunch of games, the aptly named "WoW-killers", a trend likely to continue until the game meets its demise. And that's the core philosophy behind the idea that Blizzard is slowly killing its own creation. While true to a degree, something happened to World of Warcraft had no one anticipated. Back in 2004, the days of Vanilla WoW, there was no talk of FarmVille or motion control or smartphone gaming. Hell, Facebook was a novelty. Slowly but surely, the accessibility of Facebook and smartphones gave rise to a new type of gamer, the casual gamer, someone whom only sees gaming as a passive activity. And like everyone in the industry, Blizzard was caught off-guard.
The genre was unprepared for the mass rush of new players over the next couple years. Previously seen as inaccessible by many of the non-hardcore crowd, Blizzard scrambled and made World of Warcraft progressively easier as the money started rolling in. The outcome was a financially viable formula for Blizzard, but left a disdained hardcore audience looking for answers. The problem still continues today, and the lasting days of Cataclysm will likely decide the fate of the future for Blizzard. But the ending days of Cataclysm will also reveal the true potential of a casual-driven MMO, and whether Blizzard's efforts put WoW on borrowed time.
The failure of managing Star Wars Galaxies by Sony Online Entertainment left fans dissatisfied and aching for more. Another game from a different company, executed properly to suit the demanding needs of an audience. When word broke of a possible new MMO set in the universe, Star Wars geeks and the whole gaming universe leaped joyously. Electronic Arts then awarded Bioware the responsibility of restoring the credibility of the great franchise at their discretion. Colourful graphics and full voice acting for every cutscene have become the main selling points, and Star Wars: The Old Republic has taken the industry by storm. Expectations are soaring ahead of its projected Christmas release, and everyone is excited.
Fans are so restless in fact, SWTOR holds the record for the highest pre-order total ever accumulated by EA. Some serious numbers that could significantly challenge World of Warcraft's reign. It's still undetermined how triumphant Bioware's first MMO will be, or if the game will match the sustained success of Blizzard, but the buzz is a telltale sign of how the industry is shaping.
The genre can play follow the leader as much as it likes, but someday World of Warcraft will fall and what will be left is an industry trying to re-identify itself. Past the days of the Horde against the Alliance, MMOs will be available in greater variety and we are already seeing evidence of this. Facebook games like Mafia Wars have brought the capabilities of social gaming to the forefront, and once-monthly-fee heavyweights like Lord of the Rings Online are showing free-to-play can be successful as well. For a genre moving forward so quickly, it sure took a while.
August 2, 2011
Guest-blog: Dylan's Used Game Debacle
Many gamers often buy video games pre-owned, but why? One of the main reason is of course, it’s cheaper. But then sometimes we tend to go to the pre-owned section because we have heard bad things about the game, we still want to play it and we don’t want to pay that £50 price tag.
Recently pre-owned games have been making headlines amongst video game websites and they have been receiving a lot of bad press from developers claiming that they are losing out money because of pre-owned games, which they are. I have tried my hardest not to do this but I have to mention them. GameStop, who are the biggest profit hoarders from pre-owned games, are also receiving bad press for simply just selling them. Really? You can’t give out to a company for trying to make some money, especially in today’s economic climate. Actually today’s economic climate has probably helped the sale of pre-owned games as us gamers simply do not have the cash to buy all these awesome games brand new. I can give you an example of when GameStop are going to reap in some major cash in just one word, November.
The amount of amazing games that are coming out this November is astounding. Call of Duty, Skyrim, Arkham City just to name a few. I for one can’t afford £50 a go for all these games. There are roughly ten games on my list for October and November alone, that’s £500. This is where the game of waiting for a week or two until someone trades the game in and going to pick it up for £30, saving me £20 to put towards my next game.
Developers are trying to get back the sales they are losing through pre-owned games by putting ’online-passes’ in the box when bought new. If you buy the game at a discounted price however you will not have access to the online game until you buy the pass via Playstation Network or Xbox Live. Giving the developer an extra £5 in their pocket.
I have no problem with this. Actually I think it is a brilliant idea. Fans of online get to play the game, but for a discounted price. And fans of the story mode, whether they just want to play the story or simply can’t play online for some reason, also get to play the game for a discounted price and not having to pay an extra £20 for something they will not use.
However, if I am a fan of the series like Batman: Arkham City, I will buy this game brand new even if it is £20 cheaper. I more then likely will even pre-order this game and maybe even get the Collectors' Edition, because I am a big fan of the developers work. Though, when I am done with the game, either in a few weeks, a few months or even a few years I will trade this game in to get money to put towards the next game I want and this cycle will go on.
One story I read recently was about a video games journalist, I won’t say this person’s name, who was trading in games that he received for free from publishers and was getting money out of it. This is wrong. I am sure people would not have been as upset if he was trading them in towards other games so that he could review them, but he was simply trading them in for cash. However, this is a very rare case, so do not think all us journos do this because we don’t. To be honest 90% of the time we simply couldn’t. Most of the copies of games I personally receive from publishers have “promotional copy” splashed across the cover and the actual disk. Making it pretty impossible to get rid of. I am not going to lie, I sold a game recently I received from a publisher which I wasn’t actually doing a review on and I put that money towards a game I am now playing for review. This I feel is okay. Maybe I am mistaken, please let me know, but I think it is okay because I am doing it to get more games to review.
Looking at it from another point. When games journalists receive a copy of a game from a publisher it is essentially theirs to do as they feel with it. Whether that be play it and review, trade it in for money or to get more games to review or even throwing it at the kids outside your window making noise while you are trying to write this piece! (Note: I didn’t actually throw a game at them, I wouldn‘t do that to the game. I chased them down the road with a baseball bat.)
One of the reasons I wanted to write this was to understand why people trade in games. Many people who I asked said they simply just do it to save money to put towards more games.
But the point of this article is not to just tell you how much money you can save buying pre-owned games. The point of this article is to figure out what is the point of them. I trade in games to save money to put towards more games, but why do you trade in games? Let me know in the comments below.
View Dylan's other work at DylanVarian.blogspot.com or on twitter @dylan365v.
Guest-blog: Jenko's Predictions for GOTY 2011
Hello there! I have a long, boring name, but you can call me Jenko. I am writing this blog post, all the way from sunny England, with the honour of being Jeff’s guest blogger (thanks Jeff!). Many of you will be aware of the overwhelming flow of shiny, new and exciting video games that we see every November. At the turn of the New Year all leading publications and websites give out their awards (or “Game of the Years”) for the highlights of the year. So what better topic for my blogging debut than to give my own thoughts, and eventually predictions of this year’s cream of the crop.
Before I discuss the clash of the titans we have in the coming months, let’s have a quick peek at the worthy contenders we’ve had so far this year. All the way back in January we had the delightfully creative platformer Little Big Planet 2, which was met with sufficient praise from the media – including a 9.0 review score from IGN. We’ve also seen the return of sci-fi shooter Killzone,
and a personal favourite of mine Portal 2, the tricky puzzler that probably had you tearing your own hair out (in a good way, if you deem that possible). Another name worthy of putting into the fray is L.A. Noire, the detective thriller from the makers of Grand Theft Auto. All great games in their own right; and may prove competition for the games released later this year.
Moving on to the climax of every video game calendar, (no, I personally don’t own one), we have a rather monumental battle of perhaps the two largest franchises in by far the largest genre, the first-person shooter. In the red corner is the current champion of the world (sorry about the boxing references) Call of Duty with their new action packed edition in the massively popular Modern Warfare series. We then have the feisty challenger, Battlefield 3, who for years has cowered into the February release date, avoiding Call of Duty altogether. This is a rather large battle in itself, so it makes us think what a grand scale the Game of they Year awards are actually on.
More big games this year include breathtaking RPG Elder Scrolls 5: Skyrim, which features dragons that randomly swoop in and battle you to the death (hopefully they’ll be slightly more manageable than deathclaws in Fallout), the superhero brawler Batman: Arkham City, Naughty Dog’s return of their third franchise in Uncharted 3: Drake’s Deception, the return of everyone’s favourite Italian assassin in Assassins Creed: Revelations, and the return of the limbless wonder in Rayman Origins.
So what will take the grand prize? Uncharted 3 seems the favourite at the moment with practically everyone giving its second installment Game of the Year in 2009, but the more we see of Battlefield 3, the more stronger its case becomes. My overall prediction, however, is going to be Elder Scrolls, as it is shaping up to have by far the most content, and the gameplay we saw at this year’s E3 seems to show they’ve fixed the problems of Fallout: New Vegas.
Thanks for reading, and obviously this is a topic where you will have your wonderful, enlightening opinions (sarcasm not intended), so please e-mail me your thoughts at jenko1996@gmail.com, and I’ll even include your thoughts in future blogs. Thanks for reading, Jenko OUT!
Before I discuss the clash of the titans we have in the coming months, let’s have a quick peek at the worthy contenders we’ve had so far this year. All the way back in January we had the delightfully creative platformer Little Big Planet 2, which was met with sufficient praise from the media – including a 9.0 review score from IGN. We’ve also seen the return of sci-fi shooter Killzone,
and a personal favourite of mine Portal 2, the tricky puzzler that probably had you tearing your own hair out (in a good way, if you deem that possible). Another name worthy of putting into the fray is L.A. Noire, the detective thriller from the makers of Grand Theft Auto. All great games in their own right; and may prove competition for the games released later this year.
Moving on to the climax of every video game calendar, (no, I personally don’t own one), we have a rather monumental battle of perhaps the two largest franchises in by far the largest genre, the first-person shooter. In the red corner is the current champion of the world (sorry about the boxing references) Call of Duty with their new action packed edition in the massively popular Modern Warfare series. We then have the feisty challenger, Battlefield 3, who for years has cowered into the February release date, avoiding Call of Duty altogether. This is a rather large battle in itself, so it makes us think what a grand scale the Game of they Year awards are actually on.
More big games this year include breathtaking RPG Elder Scrolls 5: Skyrim, which features dragons that randomly swoop in and battle you to the death (hopefully they’ll be slightly more manageable than deathclaws in Fallout), the superhero brawler Batman: Arkham City, Naughty Dog’s return of their third franchise in Uncharted 3: Drake’s Deception, the return of everyone’s favourite Italian assassin in Assassins Creed: Revelations, and the return of the limbless wonder in Rayman Origins.
So what will take the grand prize? Uncharted 3 seems the favourite at the moment with practically everyone giving its second installment Game of the Year in 2009, but the more we see of Battlefield 3, the more stronger its case becomes. My overall prediction, however, is going to be Elder Scrolls, as it is shaping up to have by far the most content, and the gameplay we saw at this year’s E3 seems to show they’ve fixed the problems of Fallout: New Vegas.
Thanks for reading, and obviously this is a topic where you will have your wonderful, enlightening opinions (sarcasm not intended), so please e-mail me your thoughts at jenko1996@gmail.com, and I’ll even include your thoughts in future blogs. Thanks for reading, Jenko OUT!
August 1, 2011
Battlefield 3/Modern Warfare 3 - A Rivalry Ruining A Genre
A topic I wanted to avoid because it's been debated enough, but approaching the release date of both games, this argument seriously needs to be addressed. Modern Warfare 3 and Battlefield 3 are two of the biggest releases of the year, and yes, both games are in the same genre. That's been clarified. But not all first-person shooters are Call of Duty knockoffs. Bulletstorm, Fallout 3, GoldenEye; all first-person shooters and in a completely different league of the genre. So why is Battlefield, a realistic military simulator clumped in with Modern Warfare 3, an easily-accessible, run-and-gun arcade shooter?
This petty debate has been raging ever since DICE unveiled the third installment in its long-running series. And what's pathetic is this debate hasn't been perpetuated by the community even in the slightest. The classic battle between genre heavyweights has been heavily detailed by gaming sites looking for an easy boost in readership. Supporters of both games can bicker all they want, but this argument is getting increasingly ridiculous as each day passes.
The allure of comparing military shooters is appealing, sure, but each game is on the farthest end of the spectrum. There couldn't possibly be two more opposing games in a genre than Modern Warfare 3 and Battlefield 3. Activision has prided its prized franchise with record-setting sales and marking a new standard in online multiplayer. The publisher did that through accessible multiplayer, where anyone can pick up a controller and have a whale of a time. It's the run-and-gun formula exercised perfectly and that formula has been massively successful. Battlefield is the complete opposite; a squad-based military simulator created specifically for the hardcore fan. For example, sniping from far away will produce no hit marker so the player needs to accurately gauge where the bullet hit. DICE is knocking heads with realism while Activision stretches the laws of imagination. Both games (from what we've seen) play exceptionally well, and fans have been catered to understand what each game brings to the table.
Another key difference which is rarely mentioned is the success on different platforms. Call of Duty has made its mark on the consoles, whereas Battlefield has imprinted its superiority on PC. On Xbox Live in the average week, four Call of Duty games reached the top ten while Bad Company 2 can barely hold a spot in the top twenty. Now I'm no mathematician, but if one franchise has three games more frequented than one game in a series, it's kicking ass. Especially on consoles, where three-year-old games rarely achieve continued success. Battlefield, however, dominates the PC realm. One of the main selling points for Battlefield when this needless rivalry began was the inclusion of free, player-controlled servers. Activision punished the PC audience by not including such servers and the franchise's sales on the platform dropped considerably.
Clearly, the rivalry will favour one or both franchises. Passionate fans will turn out in droves to purchase each game, driven by the debate or not, and both games will be the better for it. Sources can speculate all they want on which game will dominate the success, but the community won't get hard numbers until after Christmas. So keep bickering, keep driving up sales, and after the release dates pass, can we please not look like children and move on?
This petty debate has been raging ever since DICE unveiled the third installment in its long-running series. And what's pathetic is this debate hasn't been perpetuated by the community even in the slightest. The classic battle between genre heavyweights has been heavily detailed by gaming sites looking for an easy boost in readership. Supporters of both games can bicker all they want, but this argument is getting increasingly ridiculous as each day passes.
The allure of comparing military shooters is appealing, sure, but each game is on the farthest end of the spectrum. There couldn't possibly be two more opposing games in a genre than Modern Warfare 3 and Battlefield 3. Activision has prided its prized franchise with record-setting sales and marking a new standard in online multiplayer. The publisher did that through accessible multiplayer, where anyone can pick up a controller and have a whale of a time. It's the run-and-gun formula exercised perfectly and that formula has been massively successful. Battlefield is the complete opposite; a squad-based military simulator created specifically for the hardcore fan. For example, sniping from far away will produce no hit marker so the player needs to accurately gauge where the bullet hit. DICE is knocking heads with realism while Activision stretches the laws of imagination. Both games (from what we've seen) play exceptionally well, and fans have been catered to understand what each game brings to the table.
Another key difference which is rarely mentioned is the success on different platforms. Call of Duty has made its mark on the consoles, whereas Battlefield has imprinted its superiority on PC. On Xbox Live in the average week, four Call of Duty games reached the top ten while Bad Company 2 can barely hold a spot in the top twenty. Now I'm no mathematician, but if one franchise has three games more frequented than one game in a series, it's kicking ass. Especially on consoles, where three-year-old games rarely achieve continued success. Battlefield, however, dominates the PC realm. One of the main selling points for Battlefield when this needless rivalry began was the inclusion of free, player-controlled servers. Activision punished the PC audience by not including such servers and the franchise's sales on the platform dropped considerably.
Clearly, the rivalry will favour one or both franchises. Passionate fans will turn out in droves to purchase each game, driven by the debate or not, and both games will be the better for it. Sources can speculate all they want on which game will dominate the success, but the community won't get hard numbers until after Christmas. So keep bickering, keep driving up sales, and after the release dates pass, can we please not look like children and move on?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)