Being a Hero Sucks

The country of Ferelden is in a state of civil war. Amidst the tumultuous bloodshed and conflict, the horrid Darkspawn have waged a war against all sentient life. Seeking to plunge the world into ever casting darkness. You are a Grey Warden, a soldier who safeguards the world from evil. The nations of the world have fallen out of grace with your order. You are seen as sycophants and manipulators. It falls on you, however to sacrifice your life to save the world. You must lose all you love, all you cherish, to save the hypocrites of the world. Being a hero sucks.

Dragon Age: Origins is the latest game from Bioware. The company that brought you Jade Empire, Knights of the Republic, and the Baldur's Gate Franchise. I make note of this as Dragon Age borrows heavily from Bioware's past titles. It also still carries the numerous flaws of a Bioware game. The item management and quest log is as awkward and unwieldy as ever. Enemies die in awkward positions, coupled with the amazing frame rate hiccups and random game ending bugs. Yet even with all those problems, Dragon Age is an amazing game. It borrows all the great things from its past games, and improves upon them greatly. This is true fantasy Role Playing brought to life.





Taking its cue from High and Dark fantasy, Dragon Age is a tale of good vs. evil ultimately. Yet it moves into unfamiliar territory of the RPG genre; the morally grey. Dragon Age transcends the usual expectations of the series and diverts from the traditional angel v. devil points motif. You aren't docked points every time you commit an evil or good action. Instead, you simply face your consequences. Do you side with the crafty but beautiful Morrigan? or do you side with the ever chivalrous Allistar? Morrigan makes comments that are very true; people are petty and altruistic. What is a few of their lives worth in the end? You don't have time for their petty squabbles, you have the world to save. Yet Allistar and the others of your party tell you that you must act with civility and grace, save those who are in need, be a hero. The world of Ferelden is the embodiment of your choices, selfless or otherwise.



With that in mind, Bioware has truly created an amazing fantasy world. Ferelden is a land awash with its cut-throat politics and its seedy underbellies. Prostitutes proposition themselves to passing onlookers, thieves run unopposed through the streets. The true accomplishment is the well written dialogue and rich history. It breathes life into the world and adds weight and dimension to player choice and character development. The lore and background history breathe to life the essence of the game. Every character is multi-faceted, each pertaining to very human flaws. They are people, not lines of code, mirroring your decisions. Some believ in a higher power, many have hopes and dreams. They have experienced war, famine, poverty and devastation. It is not the fantasy world you imagined when you were a child, but rather the one that exposes the faulty lines within the modern world that we inhabit.



Akin to the overall story is the game play. The game play follows traditional RPG mechanics. You control one member of your four player party at a time. You may switch between any of them, at any time. Combat is handled in real time, or you have the option of pausing. You are allowed to pause at any point during the combat. Which means you can cue up one action for your party after every pause. This allows you freedom in deciding how each battle plays out and furthers your understanding of the game rules. After combat, each of your characters recieve experience points. Earn enough, and you level up, unlocking new abilites and spells. The stronger the enemy you face, the better loot and gear you gain for that fight.

Pretty standard fare for an RPG game. Yet there is absolutely nothing wrong with this formula. There is absolutely no grinding in Dragon Age Origins, opting instead of letting your prowess in combat rely on your skills as player. Bioware has trimmed the fat of the needless time sinks found in RPGs and show you the more combat driven side. You as a player determine all your characters strengths and how well they do in combat. The tricky nature behind the combat is ultimately what determines the "fun" factor. At its most base form, you can simply move your character around the room and press the A button until your party does all the work. On the flip side, you may opt to completely plan out the course of every battle. Learning to use your characters strengths to their full advantage. Understanding all the weak spots and blind points in a boss. Using the vast compendium of spells at your disposal to better dispose of your enemies. Or simply equipping the strongest armor and the most powerful weapon. Subsequently the combat is as deep or as simplistic as you desire it to be.



Dragon Age: Origins is an amazing experience, from start to finish. It is a wonderfully crafted RPG that you'll play through multiple times. Yet Dragon Age is not for everyone. It is an old school Role Playing Game, a game so deeply entrenched in its own lore and history. If you are willing to look past that, you will find a complex world full of betrayal, honor, loss and love. A world where you can indulge in fanciful dream fulfillment. Or you know you can slay Dragons, that's pretty cool too.
9/10 (I dont personally believe in score attachment, but it is here for those that do not wish to read the full review)

That was Controversy?

Hailed by Fox media and right wing news sites, as a "terrorist" simulator, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 is the game to talk about this year. Of course the controversy stems from the one mission 2 hours into the game that places you as an undercover CIA agent charged with infiltrating a Russian crime cell. This situation escalates with you and your compatriots rushing into a Moscow Airport, shooting civilians by the dozens. As a civilian cries for mercy, you desist to pour boxes of bullets into said person's skull. No, of course that isn't how it is.



It simply is just melodrama that appears to support either the "games are art" or the "violent video games are negative" argument. The game supports neither, and the journalistic fallout is appalling. Multiple, if not all game publications have labeled this experience as "intense" and emotionally groundbreaking. While I will not name drop,(cough GameSpot, GameInformer cough) this behavior only strengthens the publicity that this game receives. Seriously? You are stabbing a knife into someones neck while seeing the whites of their eyes staring at you. You kill upwards of 200-300 people in your trek to stop the ultra nationalist psychos from taking over the United States.

The entire game is just one anthetamean based over the top action story. It may look photo realistic, but the actual story and scenarios are far from it. There is nothing realistic about the scenarios placed in Call of Duty and as such, no it does not operate in a morally grey area. Modern Warfare 2 is simply just The Rock: the video game.


So placed with the absurdity of the overall game, we choose to cry foul at this one airport level? We as gamers don't have a problem gunning down digital men and women clothed in army fatigues. But oh no, give them a plaid shirt, denim jeans and suddenly we are despicable evil men. Give me a break. Point being, there is no controversy in Modern Warfare 2, so shut up.

The More You Know......

http://www.cracked.com/article_14979_6-most-terrifying-foods-in-world.html

http://www.cracked.com/article_15982_5-horrifying-food-additives-youve-probably-eaten-today.html

http://www.cracked.com/article/113_6-fake-foods-you-will-wish-you-didnt-have-in-your-kitchen_p2


I'm going to assume that after this, you are going to view certain of your foods with apprehension. If not then I would say you are special to say the least. But we are still a culture of consumers. I think I'm off fast food for at least 5 years now. I hope you are too. "I'm Lovin it".

LOL

What is it?

The Senmurv is a wolf/eagle hybrid invented, without question, by someone with a dreamcatcher hanging from the rear-view mirror of their pickup truck. Each successful attack deals 1d6 of freedom.

Where it Went Wrong:

The Senmurv is what Toby Keith becomes every full moon, and as such it fails to impress us on every conceivable level. The only thing more ridiculous than picturing this beast clawing feebly through the sky like a Technicolor ValueJet, is imagining it trying to stand upright on two hind legs never meant for the task.

Actually, more ridiculous still is imagining this beast's conception, which apparently involved a wolf, a giant tropical bird and painful screeches from within a cloud of neon feathers.

-Cracked.com, http://www.cracked.com/article_17455_15-retarded-dungeons-dragons-monsters.html



AHAHAHAHAHAHA, this is hilarous. Yes I am now devoting less then a sentence, I will post a more thoughtful post to come but OMG. I know, Dungeons and Dragons inside joke. For more retarded creatures, please check out the link above. And if you don't get the joke, well maybe someone should expand their horizons.

Omg Totally

To the like what? four readers of this blog. Two are my family, the third is my girlfriend and you, yes you. You know who you are.The one who reads this out of pity for me. What am I saying? you are all reading this out of pity or you have nothing else better to do. Thanks anyway though for your continued and prolonged support. I will be writing for Technorati.org soon, which is kinda cool. You get to read my sycophantic somewhat professional rantings over there as well. What am I kidding? None of my work is professional.

Does John Die @ the End?

"Society is doomed for one very simple reason: it takes dozens of men working months with millions of dollars in materials to build a building, but only one dumb-ass with a bomb to bring it down."

I lol'd

if you haven't done so, please read a copy of John Dies @ the End by David Wong. You can find a copy at your nearest bookstore where ever that is located. I would argue that it is the best book ever written, however my standards are pretty shoddy so that isn't saying very much. Seriously, though, you should read it.

http://www.amazon.com/John-Dies-End-David-Wong/dp/031255513X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1255203748&sr=8-1

Are you Confused?

Preorder bonuses for games are cool. If you are already going to purchase a new game, why not get something for your troubles? Getting a cool piece of in-game content is definetly worth shelling out 5 dollars or even 10 dollars towards your purchase. However it seems that nowadays the entire preorder landscape of games is just a muddled mess. Albeit an almost desperate attempt for retailers to corner away a share of the audience.

Dragon Age Origins, Bioware's upcoming fantasy RPG is a good descripter of this problem. For at least 3-4 different retailers, there is a special "pre-order" bonus item avaliable. THAT IS CONFUSING! I just want to buy a copy of your damn game and play it. Not this stupid bullcrap of getting an item here and an item there. Yes the argument is very valid that I can not care and just buy a regular copy of the game. However in some way it feels like being screwed over immensly. 2ks Borderlands shares this same problem by offering "special" guns for preorder bonus.

As stated before, I like preorder in-game items. (to be finished)

I can has DLC?

The landscape of the gaming industry has changed. Retail is no longer the beast it once was. With the growing popularity of services like Netflix, the idea of digital distribution is becoming commonplace. Gaming is starting to take that route as Steam has been increasingly popular, offering an online platform for indie and triple A titles. Why then does the concept only apply to PC titles? Why can't it be integrated into all the consoles.

Well simply put, the consumer base isn't there. No person wants to pay the same amount of money for a digital copy then for a hard disk copy. With the current setup of internet security, digital distribution has not moved to the point where you feel safe and secure possessing a digital copy. Services like I-tunes consistently lose account data, causing people to repurchase something they already payed for.

With the wonky and unfriendly user interface that Microsoft uses with Xbox Live, apprehension is to be expected. I bring up Microsoft as they are the biggest contender for success of this model but the biggest offender to its failures. Recently Valve has announced why their DLC has to have a charge point. Essentially Microsoft's model forces them to have a price point for their DLC. So the new update is 7 dollars on Xbox Live and free on Steam for users with a PC. This creates such a wonderful message for Microsoft and their overall agenda to consumers everywhere. Why is it that I as a consumer am forced to pay for something that has always been free to me on the PC for the past ten years?

Well to put it simply, Microsoft believes in charging for everything, it was the way they operated in making PCs and software, its how they operate in terms of gaming. Their argument is that the prices create an economy and the prices regulated the growing economy on Xbox Live. That is a bunch of BullS@#t. You just can't admit openly that you love charging everyone for everything on the Xbox Live Marketplace. Five dollars for a Halo marine costume for your avatar? Seriously? If that is the landscape of things then I might as well buy all my games on the PC. Where at least I won't get charged pitons for all the services that have been free for the past seven to eight years. Thanks Microsoft.

The Updates, Where are They?

As you are no doubt aware, I have not updated the world on my deeply insightful thoughts for at least a week. Rest assured you will be reading about something no doubt either entirely frivolous or pointless in nature. Of course by the time you read this, I will have no doubt updated something slightly more interesting then this footnote. Funny picture to hold you over until then. Oh you should also definitely catch me on Twitter, if you are THAT bored. Seriously, if you are, that's pretty damn pathetic. "Base!"

Rasberries AND Blueberries!

Tower defense games are somewhat of an acquired taste. My girlfriend likens them to watching a generic action film. You create the scenario and watch it unfold ultimately. With Defense Grid, Xbox Live finally gets it's tower defense game. While it doesn't break any new ground, it improves on the concept of other TD games and offers a very solid and addictive experience.

The game play is relatively simple. You create towers along a path while enemies show up from numerous locations, grab a power core and then proceed to the exit. Let every power core escape and you lose the game. It is your job to construct virtually a maze of death to stop them and their diabolical schemes of taking over the world. Now along with deciding which one of ten towers to use, you are given the option to upgrade them invariably. Once upgraded they cause carnage on a massive scale. So you are a given a choice, build more towers to maze your enemies effectively or upgrade your cannons to level 3 to decimate any boss monster that haplessly crosses its path.

The single player campaign alone is 20 levels, not including about five to six challenge modes for each level. The Xbox live version also contains 5 new maps entitled "Borderlands" along with their respective challenge modes as well. While it doesn't offer any multi player modes, the resulting experience should last you ten-fifteen hours. Given the truly addictive nature of the game, there isn't anything too horrific with that.

On an aesthetic level, Defense Grid is beautiful. I can't exactly place it, but the level design, the monsters up to the tower animations look and sound amazing. The towers rise up from the ground as they are slowly being constructed, the aliens cast long shadows as they move monotonously from one side of the map to the other. It isn't next-gen technology, but it still proves to be a visual vista for the eyes.

Overall, Defense Grid isn't an innovation in the tower defense genre. However it is perhaps one of the most solid strategy games on the Xbox Live Arcade system. Made even better for half the price of the PC version plus five bonus maps. If you are a tower defense fan, a strategy fan or just a fan of addictive games, then this game is definitely for you. Yes Rasberries are totally awesome.

(score is for arbituary reasons, I do not really place a gameplay experience on a rudimentary number system. However, if you just want to know the simplfied version of my opinion, please read on)
Eight out of Ten

Dying (No it is not emo, shut up)

Dying in video games is common place in our experience. Back in the 8-bit era you would die almost constantly for clearly outlined reasons. "Oh you didn't jump there, or Oh yeah that guy does a special move on his 4th move that kills you if you don't move out of the way." Arguably, I would say that it is a good thing that gaming has moved beyond the punitive memorization era. However, it seems more and more common that games today are just frustrating and do not offer a clear definition of player failure and player death.

First and foremost, it is true, no one likes dying in a video game. On that same vein, no one enjoys failing and having to re-invest more time sinks into a game. On par with that concept, that idea of difficulty and how often you die directly correlates with how much fun you have with a game. Which creates this question of difficulty. Why does it really need to exist? Why do developers need to infuriate their players to a point of frustration just to make their game? Are they so sadistic and cruel by nature?

Well of course not, or I would hope not as the situation may warrant. Difficulty needs to exist to add gravity to a players actions and add to his overall motivation for playing. If you were essentially steam rolling content, you wouldn't have fun for very long now would you? However the alternative proves itself even worse off. By creating experiences that are simply cheap and frustrating to a player, you create an alienation and complete disregard for your game altogether. While you as a developer believe you are hiding behind the concept of "challenging" the player.

Players should only fail because of his or her own skill level and understanding of the game's logic. Failure should never be related to a technical mishap that the programmer couldn't accomplish. These things should never happen or occur.

There should always be a clear outlined reason and purpose for why you failed. This gap also shouldn't be hunkered down by a long wait period either. There should be a instant and immediate response time from the point of where you failed and the time it takes for you to retry essentially. No one wants to spend two hours attempting to break your crappy game design in addition to watching that same unskippable cut scene fifty times in a row.

"Oh my god, my game is so difficult, I'm a cutting edge developer because I present challenge in my games. My games is sweet." No it ceases to become challenging, its just poor level and game design. Stop that, stop it now. Dying should be the means of failure in a game, not the adjective that describes your game experience.

WAAAAHHHH Call the WAMbulance.

Recently, Fable 2 creative director Peter Molyneux discussed his game's ending. Like many I had high hopes of Fable 2, believing it to be the Illiad of video games: A grand masterpiece just waiting to be experienced even if it was hated at the time. Of course this isn't true and it comes off neither great nor terrible. Ostensibly Molyneux received an overwhelming amount of hate mail concerning the games ending.

For those of you that don't know the ending, SPOILER ALERT, your dog dies at the end of Fable 2. So you are posed with the ultimate question concerning your ethics and moral standing. Do you choose to be the hero and save the innocents who died at the hands of the villain, revive your dead sister and your dog, or do you forsake them all for infinite wealth and power?
These letters were complaining that the choice was too hard. That they were too emotionally vested in both the dog and being a hero. Seriously? Wow, if you can't make such a simple altruistic choice then maybe games nowadays are perfect for you.

That choice isn't difficult in the slightest. Yes that is subjective opinion as everyone is different. However the choice directly filters into a simple A, B, C methodology. There is no emotional connect between your dog that makes you feel emotionally tied to him. He really is just bits of data that renders as a dog on a virtual plane.

What is more annoying is that Molyneux caved to the fan mail and resurrected the player's inscrutable mutt in the DLC. Quit your whining seriously. The concept of moral ambiguity is a serious one and needs to protected in these games. We aren't devolved to a baby status that we cannot make the difficult choices in life.

I almost felt insulted at how easy the choices that were asked of you throughout the game. It almost baby coddles you into believing that you are the piece of the world that affects its moral standing. As a developer you have the responsbility to defend every aspect of your game no matter the critical reception. That is what makes you a great developer. Obviously years of broken promises have fallen short. Thanks again, Peter Molyneux

For the article, please vist: http://kotaku.com/5343721/molyneux-hate-mail-changed-fable-ii-dlc

Awww is it too hard for you? (sad face)

(Hes smiling because your about to spend 5 hours dying in his game. His name is 'Splosion man and you can find him on XBLA for ten dollars. Oh hes also hilarious and loves cake, but that's besides the point)

An argument found more and more common these days is how difficult games are today. This argument usually stems from the older generation of gamers addressing the new line of "hardcore" gamers.
Typically it unfolds with us sounding like old cronies talking about the "golden" age in gaming. "Back in my day, we didn't have checkpoints , infinite tries and save points. We had to beat all our games in one go, with the twenty to thirty tries the game allotted us. And it was the greatest time ever time dumping hundreds of hours into one game".

Of course that argument falls through when games are deemed as "artistic" or experience pieces. Then the concept of difficulty is tossed aside because your target audience can't "experience" your game in its entirety. More and more as the argument grows I start to wonder why its completely relevant.
I used to be on the side of the fence that argued that games today are too easy. Giving my little melodramatic speech about the eruption of the casual game. However I think game difficulty hasn't necessarily vanished, its just gotten more annoying. Games haven't necessarily gotten easier, just cheaper in their design philosophy.


(This is Braid, Jonathan Blow's awesome artistic experience. Its a poignant and melancholy take on the hero story. It's not supposed to be fun BTW, you should play it. )

A disturbing trend is the approach to difficulty that developers have followed in the past decade. Lets make an Easy, Normal and a Hard mode. Maybe attach a very easy or very hard/impossible mode just for kicks. The casual players will gravitate towards the "easy" mode, the hardcore to the normal and hard modes and every ones happy, right? Not necessarily, as both experiences are just cosmetically different.
The first gamer will cruise through the experience, unlocking the ending and moving on with their lives. The second one will curse about ten thousand times, break three controllers and swear a vendetta on the developers. However in the end the two gamers experienced the same cut scenes and endings. Why would anyone want to be the second gamer then? Because gamers are stupid, duh.



(Achievements, the reason anyone does anything retarded and stupid in games. For reasons you don't even know. Yes you are just as bad, you people that get Trophies, yes you PS3 people. )

Attaching arbitrary numerical values to a game isn't great game design, its stupid. No one wants to play your game to the point of memorization just to beat it. And no it is not cool when that one dude you made out on the far corner of the screen just shot you, meaning you just lost an hour of your life. That of course referring to not understanding at all why you even failed or lost the game. Too often have I played a first person shooter only to die randomly because some magic "bullet" curved its way into my face.

You as developer cannot create a gaming experience and then completely shift numbers and call it a change in difficulties.
As in you cannot just make player A do X less amount of damage where as the computer controlled enemies do X times more damage to the player. The result is the controller through the TV because people don't want to play that. They don't want to play something that accounts for 99.99% luck and .1% skill. If you do, well then stop reading, you probably have a better lease on life. Go have fun playing Megaman for a hundred hours.


(He looks so happy for someone that's about to die like a thousand times just to beat his game. He is totally awesome though. His game was hard as hell, but he still is awesome.)

However for people that aren't like that. Me, for instance. I rather have an experience tailored towards how I play. What I mean by that is a game that stems from your skill as a player and not how well I as a developer created this for you.
Often times developers will create an experience that is meant to reinforce how awesome of a gamer you are. This is a very common practice and exists in practically every game today. No, I am not saying I want like thirty more of those experiences.

Why can't we have an ounce of realism without tarnishing the overall experience? I don't want to be a super soldier who saves the world at the end. Why can't I just be a guy trying to live in the world and trying to get by? Why must I be engulfed in fake fights and battles just to reinforce my status as a gamer?

What I as a gamer want is just to have a genuinely realistic experience. I want puzzles that are actually mind-bending puzzles. I want a racing game that grants me adrenaline when I'm truly racing against other cars. Of course I want an RPG that provides me with a deep profound experience that rivals a McCarthy novel or a Kubrick film. I don't want to be tricked into believing that I'm accomplishing all these things when I'm truly not.


(Honestly, I talk about Kotor 2 in almost every single argument. This picture is pretty cool though. It has nice symbolism, sort of. Yeah I have to stop using this picture for like everything.)

All joking aside, why do we need these archaic design philosophies? Why can't we differentiate difficulty scaling and offer a drastically radical experience?
Say for instance you are playing an Role Playing Game where you are mitigated to making choices for your character.
Now these choices filter down into your overall game experience and how you play the game ultimately. Why then can't the "easy" mode subject the player to all the "easy" decisions and blot out all the negative choices for them?
That way, they finish the game in more or less in an ignorant fashion. Which would be fine because they opted for a vastly different experience and didn't need to dump hundreds and hundreds of hours into it.


(A casual game like Wii Sports Resort. The most groundbreaking innovation for gaming. By the time I write this I'm sure its sold like 500 gazillion units. Simple, Fun and Awesome. Well, maybe just simple.)

Now for the other gamer, who values something more from the game, you can create that element as well. Giving them the "normal" mode gives you a vastly different tone and atmosphere to the game. Where your choices are more severe and your experience is the result of the deep consequences of your choices in the game world.
As such you spend more time experiencing a more poignant and enlightening experience over the casual gamer. Now of course the two experiences are different, but you offer players a choice instead of spoon feeding them arbitrary number crunches. The end result is similar to the difference from Twilight and Pride and Prejudice. One offers a very condensed literary masterpiece while the other is simply entertaining. Which very much differentiates between the "casual" and "hardcore audience."


(Infamous, the story about you and how evil or how good you want to be. It brings dramatic weight to your decisions and adds a layer of depth to the gaming world. We need more of these in our landscape of games. We need the darker shade of grey on the morality scale.What you thought I was going to make a sarcastic quip?)

Of course this concept is far from perfect or entirely fleshed out. There are also numerous problems with it. However, my point is why does difficulty scaling even need to exist? Why do developers need to account for the casual gamers at all times of the day. You alienate the people that thirst for more in your game. Yes that one guy on the message forum bitched for an hour about how much he hated your game. So what? doesn't mean you need to take out dying for your game.


(This is Bioshock, Kevin Levine's pet project about a underwater Randian dystopia. The game where you can't die at all. So your supposed to be terrified at the madness and hysteria that mankind can erupt into. Yet you can't die, and there is no consequence for failure. Have fun?)

You as a developer have the responsibility to foster and care for your game. If you conveyed what you meant to show then more power to you. You can't make everyone in the world like your game. Just like everything else in this world. So create the experience that shows people fun and awesomeness on a realistic level. Don't subject them to just simple visual explosions all over their face like Peggle and Super Smash Bros. Show them just a realistic expression of your medium.


(Yes Peggle is awesome I know, but its tailor made awesomeness in a cup. As much as I hate railing on Peggle, it is barley even a game. Its addicting and fun, but its 99.99% luck and .1% skill. I also feel bad for not mentioning the myriad number of games that each would have carried valid points. Maybe next time. If you read this far congratulations, you are either totally awesome and care about what I had to say or you just want a cookie. You don't get a cookie.)

And At Last You Saw...........

Video games have often carried a heavy burden since their inception. Before they were viewed as primarily a form of pure entertainment and joy, offering an expierence away from the stressfull recesses of life. Over the years, technology has changed alongside artistic direction and the scale of games. Games can bring about the weight of emotion in conjuction with its grandious scale. It is unfair to hail Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords as a monumental achievement in games. It carries its inane flaws both aesthetically and performance wise.

BeSt PicTure EVer

Nuff Said. (title is weird on purpose, duh) More E3 ramblings to come. For like the three people that read this blog, thank you for your continuing support and wasting your valuable time on mindless ramblings. You will get a free tote bag from me in the mail. (P.S., I am out of tote bags)

Microsoft Press Conference at E3

So after a pretty awkward opening with the Beatles Rock Band demonstration, the Microsoft press Conference was underway. There were some very impressive games being shown off: Alan Wake, SplinterCell Conviction, Halo ODST, Left4Dead2, Modern Warefare 2, and better Netflix support. The true gaming news came directly after, when Microsoft officially won E3 with this bombshell.

Twitter and Facebook are now coming to Xbox Live. Now something that is mitigated to your PC and cellular device can now be infected into your console. Aren't you glad now? Truly now gaming will evolve into the forced awkward community it so sorely needs to be. The future of gaming is not charging fifty dollars a year for people to use your Internet service. Obviously it isn't for you to reassure your consumers on the integrity of your console. Lastly it isn't about greater support for community XNA titles and those rare "good" games. The future of gaming is Twitter and Facebook, on my 360. Wonderful.

Because War Never Changes

The much anticipated of the three DLC packs for Fallout has finally come out. Broken Steel allows you to continue your adventure and raises the level cap to level 30. Does it owe up to its long wait or is it simply hiding behind its level cap? The answer of course is no. Broken Steel(more later)

Wow...............

I'm not normally very subjective when it comes to movies, but what a crappy movie. The new Wolverine movie was a horrid waste of ten dollars. Yes, that piece of bland and unoriginal tripe was ten dollars.

While I am in no way a comic book fan or have ever been, I think they ruined the Deadpool character. Ryan Renolds was decent up until the last thirty minutes of the movie. You do not take a character that has great reflexes and no superpowers and turn him into a superpower toting freak. As my friend earlier today stated, the movie used too many powers just for the sake of using powers. The effects come off as bland and just plain showy, my eyes started bleeding towards the end. There barely exists any human aspect for the characters and it just turns into who can perform the crappy special effects better then the other person. Honestly, even as pure entertainment I would not recommend this for anyone, unless you love Hugh Jackman.(yes he is seriously ripped)

Huh?

Wow, I haven't written in a long time. Needless to say I have died of course and will not be writing anymore. No just kidding, just been busy and not filling the Internets with non-relevant garbage. Do not worry, I will soon be writing stupid articles that you should not care about whatsoever. Five people in the world cares about this at all. I am one of them.

Oh and I would like to plug the web comic Dr. Mcninja. He is the single greatest hero/ninja ever. You may find him and his hilarious antics at drmcninja.com. So please support the artists and writers responsible and read it please. Plus how could you say no to a ninja whose also a doctor? Oh and he has a receptionist named Judy whose a gorilla. BASE!

The Real Step Towards Human Emotion

It seems pretentious to say a game made five years ago can surpass a game made one year ago. Visually and aesthetically, the argument is unfounded. Fable 2 looks and sounds vastly superior then its predecessor. With a new age in HD graphics, the beautiful world is brought to life right before your eyes. With full support for Dolby Digital Surround Sound, the sound is marvelous. Delivering you the breath of life to the fantastical world of Albion. There is almost no deterrent to your overall experience on a technical level whatsoever. This is perhaps the only revolutionary step for the genre to be found in your ten hour experience in Fable 2.
To further add to the overall experience, the way your quest starts out and the general structure of the game are very similar. First and foremost, the two games are very similar to one another. You can find many of the same wonderfully orchestrated scores entwined in the same places. Whether you are shopping, visiting a temple or fighting bandits, the music is virtually identical in both games. Who cares? So I've just stated that a sequel is similar to the original game. Wheres the validity in stating that?

Well, despite having so many features in common, the "newer" Fable lacks emotional depth. Yes, Peter Moloneux has stated often before this game's release that he wanted real human emotion in his game. Like many developers before him, his intention was to include an outlet to further validate your choices as a good and evil character. By giving the player more attachments, the developer can weigh your morality choices in a more profound manner. As a result, you are given a dog and a family that morphs into your morality alignment. Be it good or evil, the "world" changes based on your actions and decisions. Its been done multiple times before and often times its done with shallow panache. This time it seemed that Peter Moloneux would succeed, thus driving forth a revolutionary new concept in the RPG genre.

It however did not accomplish or fill any of these lofty expectations. Instead, the player is forced to care for an annoying furry animal. Yes, it saves you in the very beginning of the game and it adds nostalgic value, but that is the extent of its usefulness. It exists as nothing more then a glorified item finder, and as such is a very detached character from the overall game play. Even your family exists as nothing more then a virtual high five. They applaud your good deeds and condemn your evil actions. How am I supposed to pour care and devotion to something that feels so cold and robotic?
The first game does away with these superfluous concepts. It offers an often times cliched childhood story of revenge but it does so with emotional weight. (to be continued)

Would You Kindly?

As the spiritual successor to the System Shock series, Bioshock has an enumerate amount of expectations to fill. However if you haven't even heard of the System Shock series, it doesn't really matter either. Bioshock exists as a glimmer of hope for the future of the industry as a whole. Although you will garnish mixed feelings concerning the overall conclusion; you will discover why morality games exist at all.
Your journey begins as your plane crash lands in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. As damnation and doom envelop your lungs, you discover a building off in the distance. Desperate, you swim to it and find shelter. Within minutes you discover the city of Rapture and the man who created it. The city where only your potential can stop you. Lo and behold this motto has turned the city into objectivist hell. (to be continued)

Capcom DLC

While I do realize that many publications have made numerous arguments on the problems with DLC lately, I feel that the topic needs to be addressed again. Lately one of the easiest targets for the arrival of "cheap" DLC has been Capcom. Capcom has been taking flak lately for poor support of Street Fighter Four. Instead of thanking loyal paying fans for their devotion to a long standing series, they decide to slap in extra costumes for around fifteen dollars in total.
Now they have achieved another faux pas in their DLC approach.
That being the newly released VS modes for Resident Evil 5. If Capcom charged five dollars for a very solid multi player experience then there would be no point to gripe. However the former is simply not true. Capcom sees fit to charge five dollars for two modes that are seemingly broken. The overall control scheme of Resident Evil should never support competitive multi player. Four players compete and try to shoot each other or other zombies to beat each other through scores. On top of which Resident Evil 5 has a very awkward control scheme to begin with. So in the end you just have four players standing in a circle trying to shoot each other. After several years of the same corridor shooter, you find it fair to introduce competitive multi player? There is no overall rewards for the game play and after multi player experiences like Left4dead and the zombie mode in Call of Duty: World At War, this is inexcusable.

Its almost funny in a sense to consider how greedy companies like Capcom are. While I agree that paying ten dollars for three maps is a travesty, charging obscene amounts for your fan base is ridiculous. The limited editions for both Resident Evil 5 and Street Fighter IV both cost thirty dollars over the retail version and were filled with useless junk. No, not memorabilia that is nostalgic, just useless crap. If this is the future of community support, then I believe it is a future I do not want a part of. Unfortunetly as I write this, there are probably dozens of people downloading the new costumes and playing the Versus mode. So Capcom and other developers can continue charging ridiculous amounts of money for DLC.

Really?

Not that anyone should care, but the PS3 is going up in price. According to an article at cheapassgamer the PS3 will have a 499.99 model and a 599.99 model come May 5th. It will feature backwards compatibility and have a 250 GB and a 500 GB Hardrive respectively. According to the marketing VP Jack Devaney states " Increasing storage capacity helps us better communicate the value inherent in the PS3. Combined with built in Blu-ray, Wi-Fi, and full backwards compatibility, no other system can match our value proposition. One of the great things about the PS3 is that if you buy it today you can be confident it's going to be the centerpiece of your entertainment for the next 10 years. Economically, that's a great value. "
Really? I assume PS3s are already flying off the shelves nowadays. I hardly believe people are willing to buy a 499.99 system or even a 599.99 system if they weren't buying a 399.99 and 499.99 model. On top of which their exclusive games line-up does not warrant such an exuberant price. They also can no longer hide behind the fact that they are the cheapest Blue-ray player anymore. So what do they have that they can use as selling points?
What are you going to save on 250GBs or even 500GBs? I assume your going to use that space for the massive game library that Sony has wonderfully provided ever since the system's launch. Plus, Sony has been touting its ten year plan for far too long now. Hardly anyone in this current gaming generation thinks about their consoles as "investments". We don't buy our consoles because we know it will last for ten years, we buy it to be entertained now. I bet in ten years they will still be desperately trying to break even with their investment. Good job Sony, you learn a new way to kick yourself in the face just as your about to catch up.

The Way Morality In Games Should Be

Ever since the dawn of gaming there have been morality games. In general, they have existed primarily in the small pocket of RPGs. As this concept became more and more popular; it has begun to be carelessly induced in every small niche of gaming. I will be honest, the first true mortality game that I played was Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic. It was a very well made game for its time period and I believe it offered some very keen insights on the future of western RPGs. It is now five years later and the formula has remained the same; for better or for worse. The formula has remained intact to say the least; there is always a definable line between good and evil. Albeit, your choices are very linear in this regard. Your selfish actions means you are evil while being benevolent and kind is the negation to that. Fundamentally however, it seems that we have forgotten why this system is crucial to the RPG experience.
It wasn't until I played the second SW: KOTR game that I realized that I craved for something different. In that game, there where a few key moments where it is brought to your attention just how "good" you were. By helping and being charitable, you were dooming people to a life of dependency. It created the good shade of Grey that morality truly is. In that form we can then express our motivations as gamers. As gamers we make choices based on our perceived social norms. We play the "good" character because there is no challenge in playing as an "evil" character. In that way developers cannot truly simulate desperation in this console's generation. Without desperation, the concept of morality falls completely apart.
On that note many games of this generation within the morality genre contain "difficult" choices. Irrevocably these are choices that are often the splinter group of the two common moral choices. These choices are laid out very routinely; they revolve either around an evil concept that is too repulsive to put into practice even in a digital world, or a very morally grey issue that is the lesser of two evils. These bring about a generally genre defining experience. However, I beg to ask the question; what if all your choices were difficult? Not having three or four difficult choices in the scope of the ten hour experience, but a genuine thought provoking experience? No, what if every choice was not a black and white cutout. What if the gaming world that you crafted was as morally questionable as everything else in the world? To not be the savior or the harbinger of doom but your own person. Just an average Joe or Jane trying to make it through the day. Making these choices as that person, not as the stereotypical action game character who is capable of godlike feats. There exists only you, and the people that you interact with. The world and its values are defined through your actions and how you perceive it. Essentially taking out the proverbial hand-slap that developers give us when we commit an act of indecency. Gamers don't need developers telling them how to play their games. If you want to ransack a village and burn the place to the ground, that is your prerogative. We don't need good and bad smiley faces telling us that we are "bad" people.
Though games are nowadays a point of contention on many issues relating to art and culture; they are above all a form of entertainment. That is why as gamers we have come to overlook the difficult choices that are associated with games. We have come to a point where we cannot push the boundaries of the norms now accepted for the video game industry. If we are to show brutal acts of violence, why can't we include sex that expresses love? However, that is an issue for another time. Beyond the realms of Peggle and 99 cents I-phone games there exists the triple A titles. This is the world that morality resides in. As the industry begins to grow we have to understand why these games exist. They exist for the sole purpose of reminding you just how human you are.

Welcome to Pittsburgh!

Immeasurably Fallout 3 has always existed as a world of grey and even more morally grey choices. Entrenched throughout the lore of Fallout are stories of survival and deep moral choices. The Pitt, Bethesda's latest DLC for Fallout, continues this trend. As the name elegantly suggests, the DLC sends you to Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh carries the honor of being one of the few cities in Fallout lore not to be directly ravaged by nuclear warfare. However, over the years the city has become a breeding ground for slavery and mass disease. Similar to the "Operation Anchorage" DLC, players must wait for a broadcast signal to access the content in the Pitt. From there you are thrust into the city with naught save your wits and must make do to survive in the city. However, if you are level 20 to which I assume most people are, there is little to no challenge in the combat.
Presentation is top notch as it was with the previous DLC pack. The city looks absolutely infested with Trogs, disease, Slavers and the cancerous fumes from the industry. Bethesda has done a wonderful job of nailing the overall presentation. The city looks truly dilapidated as it seems that each instrinsic detail of destruction was painted throughout your environment. You'll explore smoking ruins, brave diseased tunnels and recoil in horror witnessing the slaves being treated like vermin. Achieving a greater sense of immersion with the overall dreary and depressing atmosphere.
The game play is still very much intact from the main game. If you enjoyed the combat in the main game, then this is a very natural and easy transition for you. However, you have two new weapons at your disposal; the Auto Axe and the Infiltrator. The Auto Axe is a wondrously crude chainsaw like blade that eviscerates enemies horrifically. The latter is a small submachine gun with an afixed scope to make combat outside of the system of VATs slightly easier. You'll be using plenty of these weapons throughout the course of Pitt's four to five hour experience. While it doesn't change the game-play in any significant fashion, it provides an innumerous amount of fun.
The story of the Pitt is a wonderfully crafted, albeit predictable tale of freedom and salvation. It provides the series staple of showing gamers the grey side of morality. Good and evil are definable concepts to you. There is no angel or devil to judge your actions, no large consequence for your overall actions. Fallout is a world where the rules of your actions governs who lives and dies in the end. Not to spoil anything, but the big reveal at the end of the Pitt is incredibly intelligent in the support of both the "good" and "bad" karma routes. This leads to one of the "better" quests of Fallout showing you there is almost no "proper" way to finish the quest. Each outcome will make you feel a little remorseful in the end. I believe this to be a brilliant approach to the overall style of Fallout and captures the very essence of the series.
This results in a fair amount of replay value seeing the Pitt from the savior of the slaves and the self-glorified bastard. Is it worth 800 Microsoft points? That depends; If your a fan of Fallout 3 this pack is for you. While it may be on the short side, it provides you with a great experience that will hold you over until "Broken Steel" is released. Eight out of Ten

Gunnerkrigg Court

Just like to plug Tom Siddell's web comic: Gunnerkrigg Court. Its a wonderfully intelligent and beautifully drawn web comic. It holds many inferential holds over me and I believe it to be a very mature take on a limited fantasy world. While it would be pretty awesome if I included numerous references to Objectivism and thoughts of "greater" good; that is for you to discover on your own. It tells the story of a young girl named Antimony as she discovers for herself the meaning of the world that is thrust around her. If you are interested in this comic, his website is Gunnerkrigg.com; while his first collection of comics can be purchased from Amazon.com or you're nearest bookstore. Oh and Stacey I'm sorry about tonight, I promise I'll be a better boyfriend tomorrow. Promise.

The Progressive Future of Video Games

As G.D.C continues on this week, many interesting points are being raised or in short, being addressed again. As many people have noticed over the course of the industry is the lack of "progressive" games. I believe in this generation that we have all lost the ability to fear and or view things inferentially. We have become accustomed to being slapped in the face with overall obvious game design and poor scares. Like the newly released Resident Evil 5, fear is certainly not an existing aspect in the game whatsoever. Why should I be afraid of anything when zombies are static bullet sponges, and I have enough firepower and ammo to take over a small country? The lack of a very inferential experience that draws in your most complex emotions and the ability for a game to make you ponder the intrinsic details of their interpretation and meaning.
I believe that over the years we as gamers have lost something very vital in this console generation. The ability to draw from and take our own inference from the overall story and experience that we payed forty to sixty dollars on. Every game offers its own experience and as a whole every gamer draws something from it. However, due to the changing iteration of difficulty, gamers have lost any sense of connection with the overall experience. Albeit, the moments that now capture our attention are drawn out testosterone based explosions and gore. The sense of wonder that existed in the older generation of games has all but evaporated. No challenge exists anymore, turning every single game into an over wraught movie. You press one button or sometimes even two to advance the plot of the game. The result is a lack of deep connection to the entire journey that you shared with this character; all the deaths and failures you endured to reach the end. This emotional undertaking is slowly fading as the new console generation is ushered in. Is it the future of gaming? As it exists now, the industry is certainly embracing it. Will you let it happen?

Role Models

Just finished watching the movie. Yes, I have to admit, there was a large amount of "toilet" humor. Although it wasn't the smartest comedy in existence; it was great for a laugh. It also provided the sappy corny moments that make you realize the awkward side of life. Not to be sentimental, but these moments make you realize just how much you care towards that significant other. Yes, hold back your groaning sighs; you know that singing someone's name is awesome too.

Awesome!

Wheee, I finally have a space to spew out my boring thoughts! Time to blog on the important stuff like movies, games, and life. Practically everything that's essentially important.