Gaming by GlossGreen

I just got my issue of PlayStation: The Official Magazine today, and I'm happy to say that I'm really stoked. Flipping through the pages, I gaze in wonder at the newest games to be released and revealed in this glossy tome. I can honestly, and probably for the first time, say that I'm really excited about the coming year for the PS3. My only complaint? That I have to wait a damn year to play some of these games. Which games am I talking about? What am I looking forward to? None of your business! Just kidding, here's what's got me pumped.

All things Final Fantasy. I can't believe it. A game spin-off from FF VII that I actually want to play. No offense to Dirge of Cerberus, well, maybe a little. The game did suck after all. Crisis Core seems to have it all. The return of Cloud (different from the one we all grew to like), Sephiroth, Aerith (or Aeris for all us English-speaking types), and Zack (the unsung hero of Final Fantasy VII). Why is he so important to this story? If you have to ask, go play the game again. Taking too long? OK, here's the short version. Zack and Cloud were both in the same military unit. Zack was in Soldier, and Cloud was a basic bullet catcher type. When he witnesses Zack get killed by Sephiroth, Cloud goes a little crazy and ends up adopting Zack's personality as his own. Later Cloud goes to Midgar and ends up working for Avalanche against Shinra. It's kinda confusing, but makes for a great game. Hopefully this prequel will be just as good. Also, it wouldn't hurt to actually learn who Zack really is. We know a little bit about him, but not enough. My only problem with this game is that I have to buy a damn PSP to play it. I guess there are worse things to have to put up with.

Crisis Core is not the only FF love we may be getting this year. A real numbered game is in the works. Final Fantasy XIII is due to come out sometime this year...or next. We don't quite know when it's coming out, but it will be released eventually. One thing we can count on though, is that it will be good and very polished. What I do like seeing is a return to the sci-fi type feel that X had. In fact, my favorite games of the series so far are VII, VIII, and X. All had decidedly futuristic settings and technology. The fantasy stuff just never really sat well with me, just couldn't get into it. The other FF XIII game coming out next year is Versus. Again, another one that I am hopelessly anticipating.

Now, here's a series that I've never had any real interest in playing. Tomb Raider. Sure, there have been some good games in the series, but not any of what I've wanted to play. I've never been one for third-person platforming games, but one game recently changed that for me. Uncharted: Drake's Fortune. That one game has opened my eyes to this genre. The only thing I expect now for Tomb Raider is for it to be as good as Uncharted. If it isn't it'll lose me and a lot of fans and potential fans forever. So far, it does look promising. But, looks are only half of the equation. It has to play good too.

There are also a couple of other games that have caught my eye. One is The Force Unleashed. That is a game that seems to have a lot of potential. Intriguing story, interesting characters, empowering abilities, and eye-popping visuals. It won't be out for a while, but It's got my attention. The last game is that damn Turok game. Everywhere I look I see these huge 2 page spreads for it. I've also played the demo. Good environments, fluid controls, and of course, the dinosaurs look plenty menacing. Can't wait to see the bigger ones later in the game. Taking a bow and arrow to the T-rex will be pretty hopeless, but looks like a hell of a lot of fun. Being a fan of the N64 series, this is one game I have to get.

Well, that's my list for what really has me excited this year. Of course, there are many other games coming out that look great, but these are the top of my list. For now. So, what did I miss that you are really looking forward to? Drop me a line and let me know.

And Speculation.

Last month I gave my thoughts on the upcoming year for all the consoles. I thought the PS3 and 360 could have a strong year. I also wrote that I thought the Wii was on shaky ground. Now we are hearing news and speculation from some of the other media outlets. Was I on the right track? Will the PS3 make a comeback? Can the Wii maintain it's momentum? Let's see what the experts are saying.

First up with the big announcements is EA. We all know EA is fond of making grand statements with regards to its competitors and partners. So them coming out with a statement from left field is nothing new. This is what they had to say about the coming year. EA thinks that the Wii will stay on top in 08, not much of a surprise there with the Wii's current sales figures. What is surprising is EA's prediction that the PS3 will outsell the 360 in the upcoming year. But, should that really be surprising at all? According to sarcasticgamer.com, the PS3 has already outsold the 360. Check out their article to see how they came up with the numbers.

If what they say is true, the PS3 outsold the 360 by 1.53 million in 07. If that comes as a surprise to you, join the club. All we've heard this year is how the 360 is trouncing the PS3. Are we being lied to or is this just something that no one has really paid any attention to? If it's a case of the first, I get that. Microsoft definitely does not want this to get out. But, if it's a case of the second, now that's a problem. We all know the ignorance the mainstream media has in regards to videogames, but what about the typical gaming media outlets? Why is this being reported only by sarcasticgamer.com? Are they way off base, or are they onto a story that has yet to break big? Definitely something to keep an eye on in the coming weeks.

As far as the Wii goes though, EA's assessment is not the only one out there. Microsoft has it's own ideas. Jeff Bell of Microsoft has said that the Wii is kinda like a gateway device to the world of gaming. His thoughts are that the Wii is getting people into gaming that may not have thought about owning a console before. Unfortunately for Nintendo, Microsoft doesn't think people will stick with it for the long haul, and will be looking for a new system when they grow out of the Wii. This is simplifying Jeff's statements quite a bit. Read the full interview with him here. Does his theory hold water? In a way it does. The theory of the Nintendo bubble bursting has been making its rounds on the internet lately and has been getting a lot of attention and speculation.

What? You haven't heard of the Nintendo bubble theory? Well here it is: The latest thoughts are that the Wii's game line-up can't support the sales the console have achieved as of late. What this means is that the gamers will realize that all there is to play on the Wii are the typical Mario, Zelda, and Metroid games, plus lots of crappy third party games. In the past Nintendo has had the problem of not being able to get consistent third party support. Nintendo doesn't have that problem this time. The new problem is all the really bad third party games that are on the console now. Aunt Trudy may buy that cool looking game for little Timmy, not realizing it's a complete disaster and pretty much unplayable. This may lead to a backlash of people not purchasing third party games, even the good ones, and stick to the first party games. That in turn, could lead to the third party developers pulling their support. The result being a drought of good third party games similar to what the N64 and and Gamecube were plagued with. The result will be less game sales, and then less console sales. The bubble, being the currently huge sales numbers, will eventually burst.

Overall, I think my ideas were pretty close to some of those in the industry. I was surprised about the bit of PS3 outselling the 360, but the Nintendo bubble bursting idea didn't surprise me at all. It just doesn't seem to have the credentials to hang with it's competitors. Game-wise, Nintendo doesn't have the library. Tech-wise, there's no contest to either platform by its competition. Even if it adds DVD support this year, I don't think it'll be able to maintain the top spot past 2008. I may be wrong, after all, I'm just the average gamer.

So you think you have it so bad here in the good ol' U.S of A. Well, you are wrong, very wrong. "Oh, poor us. We have to pay $400 for a 40 gig PS3. Boohoo, games cost $60 each, they used to only cost $50 for a new game. We are being ripped off". First off, quit your whining, I'm tired of hearing it. Games are more expensive to make, hence, more expensive to buy. Second, we don't have it as bad as those blokes in Great Britain, or where I am, Germany have it.

I've lived here about a year and a half now. I'll probably be here for a couple of more years. Yesterday I after reading an article on the price of the next gen consoles in merry old England, I decided to see what the good people in Deutschland have to pay for their gaming experience. I can't say I was surprised, I did expected higher prices. I'm just disappointed.

Here's what I found. First, it was hard to find a system that wasn't bundled with one or two (or in the 360's case, 3) games. Granted, the games themselves were quality games, but you had to buy them with the console just to get what you wanted in the first place. (Kinda makes me wonder if these situations are taken in account when the industry compiles it's sales numbers. If you are forced to buy a game you may not want should it count as a sale, or should it not be counted at all?) Second, the prices for the PS3 and the 360 were not much different. The base 40 gig PS3 was 400 euro, no games included. The 360 bundle (no 360s were sold without games) with Halo 3, PES6 and Forza was also 400 euro. Because I couldn't find a single 360 console without a game bundle I had to consider the prices pretty equal. Sure, you get 3 games, but what if you didn't want those games. And yes, some people out there do not want to play Halo. 400 euros, not bad right? Wrong. The euro currently has a higher exchange rate then our almighty dollar. Right now you get about $1.30 for one euro. This figure is not exact (the exchange rate is closer to .68 but using .70 is just easier). That is bad people. What that means is for every 100 euro of price, add 30 to it to get the dollar amount. So, 400 euro equals $520 dollars. And you thought we had it bad.

Games also have inflated prices. The average for a new PS3 or 360 game is between 59-69 euro. That would be about $78-$91 for us. Wii games are 49-59 euro or $65-$78. Still feel like complaining? I sure don't. From what I understand, England has it worse then this. Sucks to be a gamer in Europe doesn't it? Price isn't the only thing that the Old World gets shafted on. Oftentimes, games are released here months after their Japanese or American releases. Why? Transferring the game to the PAL system may be a reason, but is it a valid one? I don't think so.

I'm trying to figure out if the game companies and console makers hate these guys or if it's something else. I've heard a lot of excuses, from it being a smaller market to tariffs and other import taxes. Is it actually the European governments' fault? Is it the console and game makers fault? I really don't care. Just get it fixed people so all gamers can pay a reasonable price to play the games they love.

May I Have Another?

I've had Call Of Duty 4 sitting on my shelf for a while. I was putting off playing it for a few days. I had planned on playing a couple of other games first, but I just couldn't put if off any longer. Why, you ask, would I put off playing a game like COD4? Why didn't I play the game the first day I got it? Am I crazy, or just plain stupid? No, I'm not crazy, and I happen to be as intelligent as the next guy, I think. The reason is simple. I know myself.

Alright, most of you know nothing about me, so I'll let you in on a little secret. Certain games tend to suck me in. Not just any game, just the real special ones. FF VII was one of those games. I put in over 140 hours on that one game. The second time I played it. I played for 70 the first time.

I had a feeling Call Of Duty would be one of those games. It wasn't the actual game that I was worried about. It was the multiplayer. Anyone whose read my stuff before has seen the post I did a while back about my first adventures with multiplayer. The experience wasn't all bad, and I've never been really good at flight games anyway. First person shooters tend to be my thing. COD4 seemed right up my alley, and from everything I've read and heard about this game, I was prepared to be sucked in.

I first put the disc in my PlayStation three days ago. I've had a chance to build up my stats and unlock a few things. My stats aren't that impressive right now, but they're improving. I have a score rank of 736,554, a win rank of 929,362, a kill rank of 624,681, and a accuracy rank of 694,407. Today I managed to advance to 2nd lieutenant and I have unlocked all of the game modes. And just how long did these momentous take to achieve? 16 hours and 23 minutes. That's 16 hours and 23 minutes of actual play time, not counting the time in between matches and in the lobby tweaking my loadout. I have a problem, I know. That's why I was putting it off.

There is only one cure for this affliction of mine, and any kid (or adult, I know there's more then a few closet players out there over the age of 12) that's ever played Pokemon knows what I'm talking about. I have to get them all. By all, I mean all the weapons, perks, accessories, max out my rank, and complete all the challenges. The challenges are by far the most time consuming of all these tasks. First, each weapon in each of the five weapons classes has it's own challenges to unlock extras. Then there are the boot camp challenges. the operations challenges, the killer challenges, the humiliation challenges, and the elite challenges. 16 hours and 23 minutes in and I've only completed 2 of the weapons challenges and almost all of the boot camp challenges. At this rate, I'll be doing this for another month, at least. At least I have a fun addiction.

I don't have an Xbox yet, but this still hasn't prevented me from becoming a PS3 trophy whore. Games like Uncharted, The Darkness, and Folklore have had me hooked due to the collecting and achievements that you can get in those games. Uncharted has the challenges and collecting the treasure. The Darkness has challenges and collecting of papers. Folklore has the challenges and the collecting of the folks themselves. Notice a trend here? Having games with these types of added features really does (at least for me) add to the enjoyment of the game. There is nothing as satisfying as collecting everything there is to get. The only downside is the amount of time required to complete it all. My family definitely doesn't like that. However, I still manage to get out of the house to get some air. A nice long walk on a cool clear winter day is the best. Oh, and work. Of course all this is all secondary to actually completing the game itself. It's just a real nice extra to make the game a little deeper.

I feel bad for my family, I really do. This is just something that when I start, I just have to finish. Many other people have symptoms like mine. Most of the time they revolve around illegal drug use, but still, mines legal. And I only ignore my family for a few hours a day. I don't know if I should get an Xbox now. I may never be seen or heard from again.

If anyone happens to see me on PSN, say hi. I'd be more than happy to swap bullets and grenades with anyone interested.

I recently finished playing through Uncharted. There were so many things about that game that just impressed the hell out of me. The attention to detail in the environments, the character models and animation, the control scheme, and last but not least, the incredible voice acting. All the characters had interesting and believable dialog, delivered with perfection by the actors themselves. I just couldn't believe how good of a job they did and how much it added to the characters and story.

Nathan Drake truly came alive during that game. His movements and every other detail were great, but would you have been as interested in Nathan if he didn't speak? Would the game have been as compelling? Would you have been so involved in his quest if he never uttered a word? How would you even know who he was, really know, if he didn't speak? I don't think the game would have been anywhere as interesting as it was if Nathan was silent. From the first cut-scene, you really get a feel for all the characters. You get to see his sense of humor, his concerns, and how he reacts to the situation he's in. Instead of the other characters just talking to him, they talked to each other. To me, this was an important detail to add immersion and concern for the character to the game. This brings me to another character in another popular game, Gordan Freeman from the Half-life series.

I like the Half-life games, but I'm just not as deeply involved with them as I was with Uncharted. Granted, they do have some compelling characters. Eli and Alyx Vance are great, and I am interested in what happens to them, but the main character himself? I really couldn't care less. Gordon has no voice. Hell, he doesn't even have a face. How are we supposed to get into the character if you never get a feeling for his personality? I've played through two Half-life games, the first episode, and halfway through the second, and I still have no idea if I like the guy I'm playing. I can't tell if he has emotions, a sense of humor, trepidation of his mission in life, what he thinks of the creepy guy that's dragging him all over the place, or anything else about him. Hell, I'd be happy just hearing some pointless banter between him and Alyx. And just once, I'd like to hear Gordan ask, "Why me?".

Games have come a long way since the first of the Half-life games were released. At the time, the story, art direction, and graphics were all top notch. Today however, the standard is much higher. The Darkness is a recent first person shooter of note. This game has something that Gordon will never have--a personality. You feel what he is going through. You understand his struggle with The Darkness. You feel his pain when he sees the fate of his girlfriend. You want him to have his revenge. You want him to make Pauly and Shrote suffer. You feel the characters pain. You get none of that with Half-life. In episode 2 something very bad happens to Alyx. There is no reaction from Gordon, and because of that the Half-life series will never seem compete. It just feels half done.

I'll still play the Half-life games. The story is interesting. The world is full of life and conflict. The supporting cast of characters is amazing and they really do seem alive. I'm just not going to play because of the main character. I'll play because I want to know what happens to Alyx and Eli. I want to see where Barney goes from here. I want to see if the Combine get what's coming to them. Heck, I even want to see Dr. Kleiner and his damn headcrab. It's just a shame that I can't care about Gordon the same way. The lack of a voice for Gordon is the only reason I can't say Half-life is the best game out there. It just doesn't have the impact.

Today's word of the day* is HARD-CORE. Let us begin with the formal definition provided by Dictionary.com

hard-core [hahrd-kawr, -kohr]
-adjective

1. unswervingly committed; uncompromising; dedicated: a hard-core segregationist.

2. pruriently explicit; graphically depicted: hard-core pornography.

3. being so without apparent change or remedy; chronic: hard-core inflation.

Most gamers will know immediately what I mean by hard-core. I consider myself to be a hard-core gamer. I am dedicated to gaming and the gaming culture. I am uncompromising in my videogame consumption. I have to play. I go through withdrawals if I don't. Am I addicted? Hell yes. But I'm not the only one.

Gamers have been serious about their gaming habits since the beginning, starting with Pong and continuing to the MMO games of today. Spending hours a day in front of the TV or computer monitor, sacrificing a life outside in the real world, is something that hard-core gamers are willing to do in order to finish that level, or gain a few more experience points for their character. Not all gamers have that dedication though. And that brings me to the subject of this post.

In the beginning was hard-core and all was good. Then something happened. Games for people that didn't like games started showing up. The Mom that didn't really understand games started to play. My own Mother loved -and still loves- Ms. Pac-man. She didn't play all the time, nor did she even feel a need to finish a game or get very far. Then came the birth of mini-games. These are small games with little to no story and very simple controls. Soon, there were games released that were only collections of mini-games with a simple story to tie them together. Select a game, play for a few minutes, then leave without any thoughts of completing it or returning to it. We have a name for these people. They are the Casual Gamer.

Being a casual gamer is not a bad thing, but bad things tend to happen to the casual gamer. Oftentimes a game that just isn't good enough or too short to be a good gaming experience is marketed to the casual gamer. These games are very basic and frequently frustrating to play. The reason. The developers and publishers are looking to make a quick buck. Slap Mario or Sonic on a crappy game and chances are you'll make your money back off of it. We are seeing more and more titles that are just plain bad and a lot of those are on the Wii.

Is there anything the casual gamer can do to ensure they get a quality game, and not a cheap poorly designed product? First, do not buy a game just because it's cheap. Little Timmy might like that cheap game about dinosaurs, but not if his dinosaur dies every 5 seconds due to bad controls. Second, do a little research. There are plenty of gaming websites online and many magazines that will help sort out the crud from the gold. Granted, a lot of these sources are geared to the hard-core or mainstream gamer, but it is still presented in a way that most people will understand. Third, if you've done your research and have become familiar with the companies putting out games it'll be easier to find a quality product. Don't buy a game from the XYZ Fly-by-night game publisher. They are just out for the quick buck and their games are generally very basic and not worth any cost. Fourth, don't buy a game just because it's sold well. You very we may find a shovelware game that has squeaked past quality control.

The Wii is not the only console to suffer this blight of poor quality games. They are everywhere from the PS2 to the DS to the Xbox 360 and even cellphones. No system is safe from these shotty shovelware games. They are called shovelware due to the fact that the publisher will just shovel it out onto the market no matter the quality. With a little knowledge, you can prevent yourself from being taken advantage of. Look for first party software, being games that are published by the console manufacturer. Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo all put out quality games. Buzz is a quiz game that is very popular right now, and is available for most systems. Ask your friends what they play and play together. Have fun with games, but be careful what you buy.

*Disclaimer: In using the phrase "word of the day" I am not stating that I will, in fact, write about a word every day. It just sounded better than "word of the week" or "word of the whenever the hell I feel like writing about a word".