8bitdream

Brenda Brathwaite: A salute and a question

2011-04-11T15:48:00.000-07:00

This video created both excitement and a few questions for me; Since I'm at work, I'll try and keep this short.

The enthusiasm ramps you up
The points are actually on point
I wonder what's really being said.

While Brathwaite differentiates the Designs from these Neo-Designers in part of her speech, but also seems to be inclusive of the new nature of Social Gaming.

Shake Ups are Necessary

When something new emerges you either assimilate or find it useless. The fact is Social gaming has found serious traction in these last few years, and rightfully so. No one else is doing it as well as they are.

Metrics and Traditional design are not enemies. Rather, I see a changing industry, where neither rules yet both are important. How can you simply oust Zynga for doing what is a great job? Their methods, while not agreeable to some, show results.

What do I think that means:

it means Game Designers, as they are now, need to begin thinking more methodically from time to time. As Free2Play gains traction with a larger audience and begins to dominate the Facebook Platform, it must seriously be considered.

I don't agree with Churn and Burn. What I do agree with is that this platform had to start somewhere. It didn't just start, it stole a fucking rocket from the Russians, took it to the moon, built a death laser, and started shooting planets and asteroids because they fucking could.

Silliness aside, it set the ground work for what is now an ACTUAL platform. The same can be said for Indies on the SmartPhone movement. We are growing, our roots expanding. Let it grow! In whatever way we can, it will grow and as it does those of us who wish to refine those processes WILL and WILL make great games for everyone on these platforms!

Let us take each other's hands, and learn.

My 3DS' identity crisis

2011-03-31T00:25:00.000-07:00

So I managed to get a 3DS, at long last. It is awesome... but it is not without its flaws and a crippling identity crisis. Many video game blogs and news sites are drooling so much over this thing, I'm afraid they might dry out... so instead of doing that, I'm going to give you the real deal on Nintendo's newest handheld. Please make a quick mental note of the underlined sections, and just read ahead, as I will be explaining their meaning later in the post.

First I'm going to start by giving my full impressions on the hardware and the software itself. Put your reading glasses on, folks: It's a long one... but if it's legit, solid, and detailed information along with an honest and thought-provoking conclusion you want, then you're in the right place.

The hardware itself: The pros and cons
After all is said and done, and for what it's worth, this thing really is pretty freakin' awesome. The 3D effect is just as impressive as people say... it will really blow you away when you first lay eyes on it. Does it "get old"? I think it's too early to tell for sure, but I'm already feeling like this is the way games are supposed to be seen, and now that I've put a few hours into playing 3D games on it, I'm not so much "wowed" by the 3D effect as I am "happy that 3D graphics are actually in 3D finally". It does cause some eye strain for me, and adjusting back to real life is weird and... well, it's kinda hard to describe, but I get this same feeling after watching a 3D movie in the theaters. When playing a game on it in 3D, a 30-minute play session is about all I can take, and that is what is recommended by Nintendo. Inclusion of the ability to adjust and even disable the 3D effect was a wise decision, and I find myself playing with the intensity of the 3D effect situationally very often. It's also important to note that anything more than "very slight" movement will cause you to "snap out" of the 3D effect, and I even find this happening whilst sitting still and playing Street Fighter, just from the excited movement of my hands.

The size of the 3D screen on top is pretty nice. I feel like it could've been bigger, and the choice to forgo the normal 16:9 widescreen ratio in favor of 15:9 is puzzling. I wonder what limited its size, though? Was it production constraints? Maybe they wanted it to be uniform height with the bottom screen. For that matter, why are the two screens different sizes at all? That really doesn't make much sense as you're looking at it and playing with it, I must say. Speaking of the bottom screen, it is actually slightly smaller than the DSi's touchscreen, which is also a strange decision and a little disappointing. Overall, the screens are bright and brilliant, and do their respective jobs, but the decisions Nintendo made with this aspect of the hardware are bizarre, to say the least.

The analog slider feels great. This isn't your grandpa's PSP nub, this thing feels really nice under your thumb. Unfortunately, I've yet to use it for any FPS gameplay, but the elasticity of it feels spot-on. I also discovered that the analog slider acts as an optional replacement for the d-pad when playing "normal DS" games, and this made me very happy. Playing some of the slow-and-grindy RPGs that I hold so dear is way more comfortable, and for that I am very grateful. One thing I feel I should mention-- when the analog slider is fully extended in any direction, the "hole" in which it sits becomes exposed. This worries me, because as I carry this thing around, I fear that dirt and other crap will get inside that hole and fuck it up. I guess I'll need to be extra careful with it.

The d-pad included is brilliantly clicky and bouncy, and is one of the best nintendo has ever produced in those categories, but its size and positioning on the front of the console is an absolute joke. Woe was me when I finally got down on some Street Fighter 4 and found that the d-pad was very difficult to work with. When sitting down at my desk at work and playing (heh heh) with my arms rested on my desk, I found the positioning and size to be much less of an issue for me... but whilst standing, crouching, or sitting with my hands in my lap, using the d-pad isn't very comfortable, makes me feel like I'm going to drop my 3DS, and on top of all that, it is difficult to be effective with it while playing an action-packed game such as Street Fighter 4 or Tetris DS. To be clear, the positioning and size of the d-pad is a bummer unless you're chilling in a La-Z-Boy or sitting at a desk.

The card slot for 3DS game insertion is the best one yet. It's not too springy, and I've yet to have my game accidentally pop out on me when walking around, as has happened with my DSi more times than I can count.

The select/home/start buttons are irritating, to say the least. They're smooth and flat, and positioned as part of the screen, but they're not backlit-touchscreen buttons, like the ones on my Droid Incredible, they're... well, they're just... the worst kind of buttons imaginable. They're like little tiny nubs beneath one long piece of thin plastic, so in the dark, you can hardly tell what you're pushing at all. I would've preferred standard stick-out normal analog buttons to these any day of the week. They also moved the stylus to the back of the machine again, and it too has been inconvenient for me to access in the dark, although I appreciate the inclusion of the metal telescopic stylus, as opposed to the old tiny plastic ones.

Whose idea was it to again go with the 0.3 megapixel cameras? Can it possibly be that much cheaper in production than just going with 1 or 2 megapixel cameras at the very least? The cameras are just as bad as the DSi (which is to say that they're horrible), but for the price of the 3DS and the fact that it released in a year where my cell phone includes a stunning 8 megapixel camera... it is unacceptable. Taking 3D pictures is worthless anyway, so hopefully they'll add video support for it later, so that the cameras aren't completely useless.

For some reason, Nintendo saw fit to remove the DS' headphone jack, with the slot for advanced control through the headset, and replace it with a normal headphone jack. I have no idea why, but it bums me out that the official Nintendo DS headset I own is not compatible with the 3DS.

I'm pretty neutral on the "volume slider versus volume buttons" argument, but overall I prefer the buttons of the DSi. The slider provided on the 3DS is tight though, and offers precision control, so I really can't complain... and the same goes for the 3D-effect slider, too.

Wow... it's the same power jack as my DSi! This isn't actually a Nintendo first, but it kinda feels like it is, as they rarely use the same power jack for two pieces of hardware. Either way, I'm pretty happy about not having to buy extra power adapters and a new car adapter. I always like to have extra adapters around. Since I'm accustomed to always having my portable gaming handheld available for play, I never want to have to worry about the battery life... err... battery... battery life...

The battery is absolutely just as terrible as everyone has been saying, and from my personal experience, I find that I'm lucky to get more than 3.5 hours out of the battery before it craps out on me. How about that one? Good thing I keep a bunch of chargers around everywhere... but still... I can already see this issue potentially irritating me severely as time goes on. I assumed the pre-launch battery complaints were exaggerated; they weren't. I was almost worried I got a faulty battery until I started reading more about it online... wow.

Anyway, that's plenty enough about hardware.

The bundled software: WTFLOL
Aside from some of the features of the OS itself, the bundled software is all bad. AR games are worthless after playing one of them for about 10 minutes (and what am I going to do, carry around these cards with me everywhere I go? Nintendo eReader says hi!), Face Raiders is un-fun after about 10 minutes too, and even more crappy because of the 0.3mp camera's blurriness, and the Street Pass feature is useless in America. Even living in Silicon Valley, I rarely see anybody in public with any DS at all, let alone the 3DS. The music app... I mean really, this is another one of those things that is entertaining for all of 10 minutes, too. All in all, I am wishing I could just boot straight to a game without even seeing the crappy OS at all unless I deliberately back out of the game to get to it. Unfortunately, I can tell that this is not going to happen, because when I updated my OS this morning, an OK Go music video appeared on my desktop screen. WTF is that? I do not want that. I do not care about that and do not want it and am irritated by it. Clearly Nintendo sees OS updates as an opportunity to push content on me that I do not want, and I do not agree.

You can make Miis... and I've always loved Miis. I'm happy they included them with the 3DS. Miis are always entertaining, but one especially entertaining thing about the Mii software was the hearty gut-laugh I got when I chose to "create a Mii based on a picture of myself", and my Mii showed up looking absolutely nothing like me, and without any facial hair, either (I have a full beard and moustache).

On a very positive note, however, you can return to the OS screen when you're in the middle of a game, and there is a "notepad" type application which allows you to take notes on the game you're playing and save them. This is way overdue and is a very very cool feature. Supposedly, you'll be able to browse the web on your 3DS in the middle of playing a game (in the future), too, which brings me to my next segment...

The NOT bundled software: WTFLOLAGAIN
Cruising around the 3DS' OS, I have discovered that there is a button for DSiWare, and also a web browser! Awesome! Well, that would be awesome, but neither of those actually useful and desirable applications are included! Yes, that's right... Even though the menu options exist in the OS, clicking on them shockingly results in a system message which shamelessly states, "This feature will be available through a future software update"! Excuse me? Hilariously, it doesn't indicate when these features will become available, either.

Let's get to the point
Overall, I am impressed with the 3DS hardware. It is cool. All of the glaring flaws I mentioned however, make me upset because I thought I was buying Nintendo's new portable handheld, when in fact...

Did I say portable?
This is not a Nintendo portable. Sure, by label it is, but by definition, it is not. Quickly take a moment to remind yourself of the underlined phrases and text above, if you will, and then continue from here:

First, let's take a quick look at the 3 simple things I (and most people) expect from a "portable handheld console", and Nintendo's answers to them with the 3DS' design:

Demand #1:

I want to be able to comfortably see the screen, see it clearly, and also have comfortable/intuitive access to the input mechanisms regardless of my environment or my body's orientation.

Nintendo's answers:

If you have a headache from the visuals or cannot see clearly, turn off the 3D (the biggest new feature).
If you want to play with 3D, please be sure to hold the 3DS straight and 12 to 14 inches directly away from your face only.
If you want to play with 3D, make sure you are stationary, as the vibration of a car, bus, or trolley will make any consistence in viewing the 3D difficult.
Sorry, but refocusing your eyes from the 3D display to the 2D touchscreen display, and back and forth and vice versa is going to be disorienting, not just because of the 3D effect, but because of the difference in screen sizes.
We believe the analog slider is so much more important than a d-pad, that we will design and position the d-pad in a fashion that makes it ineffective unless you're reclined with armrests or sitting at a desk.
We don't consider "playing in the dark" to be important, so making the select/home/start buttons difficult to navigate with nothing but your fingertips is our choice.
We also have decided to put the stylus back where everyone hated it (which caused us to put it in a proper location for the DSi) and make it even more difficult to find with your fingertip while the screens are facing you.

Demand #2:

I want to keep myself entertained for both short and long periods of time while out and about.

Nintendo's answers:

You can only view 3D for 30 minutes at a time, and then we recommend a 10 minute break.
The battery we've included only allows for 3-4 hours of play time, possibly 5 if you turn all auxiliary features off, the screen brightness down, and play without sound.
We will not include any additional power options in the box, such as a spare/swappable battery pack, nor will we even include these as first-party options. We will also not even include a car charger or a USB charger in the box either.

Demand #3:

I need to feel confident that my hardware was designed to be durable and resistant to nature.

Nintendo's answers:

We will make the casing of the device shiny and glossy again, despite using the more durable matte finish on the DSi.
We will include a big hole beneath the highly-sensitive analog slider, so you can risk ruining it permanently with every gust of wind you encounter.
We will not make any obvious improvements to our hinge design, despite all the problems our customers have had with them in the past.

I don't believe this machine should be considered a "portable handheld console", nor do I believe it should wear the "DS" name. The fact that it has two screens that are so completely different both in size and in functionality is ridiculous the more I think about it, and hardware/functionality-wise, this thing is "3 steps back" from where they left off with the DSi, in terms of providing a proper "portable handheld console" experience.

What's my mothafuckin' name?

There are just so many obvious and subtle/small reasons why the 3DS' identity crisis has crippled its design. I won't repeat everything, but think back to all of the underlined stuff I mentioned earlier.

In the end, I would've much preferred they make their 3D machine a single-screen handheld, named, designed, and marketed around delivering 3D content to you primarily while you are in the comfort of your own home. Here is what could've been, if it weren't for the shoehorned-in DS branding:

This is obviously my quick-n-dirty mockup, but the fact is; without branding as a "portable" device, and without hijacking the DS name for marketing purposes, we could've ended up with a far superior product that didn't suffer from a severe identity crisis:

One large, brilliant 3D display that spans the whole height of its casing
No off-sized non-3D second screen to confuse your eyes and mind, and inflate the price
A thicker case altogether, to make it easier to hold
"Playing-while-plugged-in" design fundamental in mind from inception through production
A proper d-pad and buttons
A delicate look and feel for an expensive and not-very-portable machine

Overall, ditching the DS branding and marketing this device as something to be enjoyed more like a laptop than a gameboy would've provided a much better end-product for the consumers it's targeting.

In conclusion

I love my 3DS, and I just can't wait for more awesome new software to come out for it... and fortunately for me, I don't ride in the back seats of cars or ride the bus often, I don't get out much because I'm always working or at home... and many of the other "non-portable-nature" issues about the 3DS don't have a major impact on me. The battery life annoys me, but it's very rare that I'm without a charger for any of my devices for more than a few hours. All the flaws that make it non-portable are actually mostly non-issues for me personally. I also have a DSi for long trips, and an awesome Android to keep me entertained otherwise... and because I have 2 portable handheld devices that do their jobs properly, I wish my 3DS was designed with only 1 idea in mind... To deliver 3D content, and not to try and be something it isn't: a DS.

Zelda 4: Minecraft

2011-01-10T13:35:00.000-08:00

Hey Guys,

Sorry myself and Tactics haven't been posting for anyone still paying attention. As it turns out, money and time are things that we seem to have less of these days. Thankfully, we have shiny new jobs that give us weekends off.

I wanted to make a post on something Tactics and I had a small discussion about, spurned from the rather depressing display by our Nintendo brothers that has, progressively, been getting worse.

While some might contend with me, 3DS seems to be coming to a slow in it's excitement. I wasn't very happy when I read the following.

There's more, of which Tactics will eventually articulate -- the short version of which is that we'd better see some great stuff at E3, or we're in for another Gamecube roller coaster.

That said, lets get to Zelda.

Zelda 4: Minecraft

If you haven't heard of Minecraft (and you have) do yourself a favor and pay homage to people who know more about games than Nintendo: Meet Minecraft

Let me give you some background to how this came about. I love zelda. A lot. Or did, anyway. An excerpt of our discussion:

Atlas: Do you know what's depressing? When I had an NES, you know the first game I played was Zelda. Well, I didn't have an SNES for a long time. The first time I saw, or even KNEW about it was at a party center. You'd go there, rent out a section of this warehouse for a few hours for a kid's party, and let them play around At this place, you could play SNES, Sega, etc. Well, I went up to a table that had SNES and saw that they had another zelda game. I was SO ecstatic. Legend of Zelda, A link to the past. This was my birthday party. And instead of playing with my friends, I played that game. The whole fucking time. When my parents got that for us for christmas....That's the game they got me. That's how excited I was for Zelda after that. I have never had that same feeling since. Z64 was fun, for sure. And I was excited for it...

Tactics: /nods

Atlas: But I haven;t been into zelda since

Atlas: And then I read REGGIE of all people, someone who I think has better sense than Iwata, and Miyamoto, and all those fucks

Tactics: /nods

Atlas: and he tells me that Zelda is this premiere title I want?

Tactics: he's got business sense though.

Tactics: he doesn't understand zelda.

Tactics: and neither does aonuma.

Atlas: No one does

Atlas: no one in nintendo understands zelda

Tactics: and miyamoto is just "beyond that career-wise"

Tactics: which sucks balls.

Atlas: And donkey kong, I haven't played

Atlas: there's only 2 wii titles (of the recent release) that I want

Atlas: Golden Eye and DK

Atlas: And both are apparently lack-luster to the Nintendo Fanboys

Atlas: which worries me

Atlas: Because those fanboys know what I like

Atlas: They really do

Atlas: EVen the small bits of epic mickey I played got a little...meh.

Atlas: You'll see when we play it.

Tactics: /sigh

Atlas: I just don't get it dude

Atlas: I just don't.

Atlas: The platform is fun

Atlas: And no outside dev team is making quality ass games

Atlas: so who do we turn to?

Atlas: Nintendo

Atlas: And they shit on me for it

Tactics: /sigh

Tactics: i know bro

Tactics: this is why i'm saying that e3 is literally their last chance

Tactics: or wii is dead.

Atlas: And so, I stay in computers. Because it's an open platform that I still have control over.

Atlas: I can reward companies and make an impact on PC, dude

Atlas: And PC, making it's comeback

Atlas: From farmville to fucking Minecraft

Atlas: Minecraft has more zelda in it than zelda does

Atlas: w

Atlas: t

Atlas: f

Tactics: YEP

Tactics: minecraft is zelda 4

Tactics: as far as i'm concerned

So, as coined by Tactics, Zelda 4 = Minecraft. And that's sad.

But beautiful at the same time. I love PC as an open platform. On a whim I crush and reward those who bring me joy in my relaxation time with video games. It's apart of the core, and the expanded audience -- you can customize it for what you play; although it is expensive.

Computer propaganda aside, what is it that has Nintendo believe that it's fall back should be it well known titles?

Mario, Link, Donkey Kong, Samus, Kirby...these characters of Yesteryear have seen better days, and while they've aged and maintained career better than most Child Actors their usefulness should not be that of a constant resource.

I'm not excited for Zleda anymore. most of the time that I hear about a new Zelda, I forget about it in a day or two. There's no hype for me there. After beating Darksiders the other night, I've been more excited for Darksiders 2, and the prospect there, then a Zelda game -- and that's sad because Darksiders gameplay was as lackluster as it gets.

Why is minecraft better than almost every Nintendo title I've played for the last few years?

Re-playability

What Minecraft does best is allow the player to create. The world is an open canvas for a player to express themselves upon. but it's not just that simple. I used to play games three times over because each section of the game was WORTH my time in doing it again. Like a...egh....good book or movie (not to be compared to these mediums in any other way) I liked key aspects of these games that kept me playing.

You replayed Mario, or Zelda, not just because of challenge, but because of those levels you liked, or the remembrance of achievement, or to try something differently. In minecraft, your re-playability is only stifled by your own imagination. And sometimes, that imagination can be scary. I've built towering keeps, villages, port towns...I've dug deep within the earth, made secret chambers...

And at some points you feel truly alone -- a man left to his cruel devices for eternity in eden, with only animals and the undead to be as friends. And when even those forces are gone you are alone. And that is a truly terrifying experience. That can only be found in a game like minecraft. Emotional Re-playability is truly something interesting.

Exploration

I have been rewarded time and time again in games for exploration. My fondest memories were Final Fantasy1 and Zelda (the original), in which exploring the overworld yielded secret treasures, hidden caves, and so forth, to probe the imagination. It has been since that this feature of exploration continually becomes more and more of what the industry deems an 'unneeded' portion of their games -- this faux 'we know what players want' mentality that is more about cutting the old, wonderful features for some inane mini game or puzzle sequence.

More on point, the simplest feature is that minecraft is huge. The world you make is literally larger than the earth. Resources, although technically limited, are pretty much limitless for just one person. It's not just the expanse, however. Countless caves, mountains, valleys, and now new LAND TYPES are available -- you can find a desert, or stumble upon a hidden lake in a cave.

Not only that, but reward is given the lower you go. Material needed to create can be found deep within the earth -- materials needed for your constant building and protection.

Player-Driven

The easiest bit, is that players drive the modification of the game. You can modify how things look, etc. But these are just mods. When I say player driven, I mean both your personal story and your drive.

Players create their own story simply by giving yourself an objective. I want to build a mud hut. I'm dissatified with this hut. I will make it a castle! But I also want a garden...some secret passages...some minecrats.....

And it grows so quickly from there, where you begin building everything your mind can imagine for only the purpose of doing it to complete the task. This bleeds into DRIVE, you perpetually push yourself into creation. You never seem to stop until pure boredom sets in or until you actually have to do something in the real world because HOURS have passed.

Single player/Multiplayer

I can choose. That's a fundamental. The game, in it's gameplay, doesn't change if I'm in Multiplayer or Singleplayer, other than the emotional exploration (you don't really freak out when there are 2 other people around); What I can say is this: something that Zelda, I feel, can never do is Multiplayer.

This game executes that with a flawless precision that is, above all else, spectacular. It becomes a new game, with new objectives and ideas. Suddenly more than just a one-man-eden you watch as statues and buildings of other design erect around you as your friends build and blend design. The game never ends, truly, but the fun is still there, waiting for me.

Oh, and you can make swords and armor. Talk about nostalgia. I even re-skinned my character to be link as soon as I found an appropriate one.

Don't take this at face value -- "Zelda should be legos" mentality. The fundamentals of the game are there. The gameplay elements are there. What we've been missing in our yesteryear games...is there. And this dude has literally made something like a few million off of this game. You tell me that Nintendo couldn't use similar fundamentals and make a boatload more.

Take a page, Nintendo. It's the most I can hope for.

-Atlas out

A Reasonable Bump

2010-08-09T10:57:00.000-07:00

Sorry for the lack of content guys. Life does catch up to us from time to time. What I can say though is that in the mean time, I have something for you to see.

I don't much go to the escapist anymore. When I do, it's for one reason.

Movie Bob.

While most people obsess over Yahtzee, his reviews (at least the videos) tend to be one-dimensional. Funny guy, though. However, what most people MISS is Movie Bob.

Bob knows movies. Like, Really knows them. He is what Journalists should strive to be. Yeah, a little biased sometimes (within reason), funny, insightful, and dissects the work based on the merits of it's industry and expectations. At the end, he tells you his opinion if you should see it or not. Some times he'll even give you alternative movies to watch for a better understanding or simply just a better telling of the story. All-in-all it's great.

But he's not who I'm trying to Bump. No, it's these guys.

While relatively new to Escapist, they're actually tearing down the veil of gaming, something few Journalists do. I look forward to seeing how they evolve on their new site, and hope you all check out their videos. So far, I've been impressed with the insightful work.

-Atlas Out

The hype around the 3DS anti-piracy system, and why it WILL be cracked

2010-07-29T20:32:00.000-07:00

I've been hearing a lot of rumors flying around about the 3DS copyright protection system. It seems that the most common belief right now is that each individual Nintendo 3DS game cart will have an encrypted "key" stored within which, upon its first insertion into a 3DS unit, will "pair" itself to the console. After that, using 3DS' cloud-like networking structure, it will constantly ping a Nintendo server to verify that the paired key-and-console are legitimate. Nobody has any idea what will happen if the server responds "mismatch", of course. How brutal will Nintendo be with this policy (if in fact this turns out to be true)?

Well it doesn't matter. I'm a pretty strong advocate for open-source, and even piracy in general doesn't bother me too much. Restrictive DRM, however, does bother me. Fortunately for Nintendo, I am at their whim: I will absolutely ignore the ridiculous DRM policies they put in to place for some beautiful 3DS goodness. Nevertheless, I get the feeling that I, and many many many many other people, will be buying 2 3DS' at some point.

I will want to play homebrew with my 3DS. I will want to download 3D movies which are not legally available for the 3DS. I will want to play ROMs of old games that I own on my 3DS. I will even admit that I will certainly want to pirate games on my 3DS.

I am tired of regretting my game purchases. Sick and fucking tired. I am tired of believing in a game, paying 60$ for it, and being left completely flat because the developers of the game were too far up their own conceited asses to give a gamer like me what I *thought* I was going to get from their game. In short, I'm tired of "taking the leap" for games that I end up hating, and ending up with nothing to show for it. What can I do with an opened, already-played game? Sell it to Gamestop for 20% of its original price? I'd rather keep it around as a reminder of what not to do next time.

Anyways, so Nintendo is supposedly developing this hyper-advanced cloud-network that is supposed to keep pirates out for good, and everybody seems to be freaking out over this. What a joke. There is absolutely *nothing* that is going to stop the 3DS from being hacked, cracked, flashed, and pwn3d... and I bet it won't even take more than a few months, absolute tops. Whatever method you'll need to apply to hack it initially? It very well could be as complicated as it was with the Original DS back in the day: Buying a PassMe from Hong Kong, removing the battery cover and using a pin to push down a secret button on the back to flash some custom firmware you downloaded from a shady underground internet forum, all at risk of bricking your DS if your finger slips for a spilt-second... but people will do it. Lots of them will.

Sure it's easy to be confident enough to say "x device will get cracked by hackers! :D" because we all know that the vast majority of electronic devices do sooner or later, but the fact of the matter is that the 3DS is going to be target #1 for hackers upon its release, and I wouldn't even be the slightest bit surprised to find out that hackers already have 3DS dev kits with which they're already testing cracks for it. The fact of the matter is: Whoever cracks the 3DS first has a very unique opportunity to capitalize on it. Whether they will personally or not is anyone's guess, but if they don't? Somebody else will.

In eye-widening, mouth-watering, cock-stiffening, wife-angering 3D, baby.

Oh yes, I went there. The 3DS will be cracked as quickly as humanly possible for one reason: big beautiful boobies. Well, I guess there are a few more reasons in that same vein of thought, but I'll just stop there.

*ahem*

So as I was saying, in a very professional and non-creepy way... >.> *ahemAHEM* 3D pornography. This is the next big entertainment phenomenon (3D is... not pornography-- that's really really old xD), and you can never count porno out. With each new entertainment medium comes the march of the naked and fearless-- Nickelodeons, movie theaters, television, the telephone, VHS, the internet, DVD, HD/BluRay... Every single one as far back as anyone alive can remember came with its share of porn.

Many say that VHS "won" over BetaMax because of porn, and I'm hard-pressed to argue with them. At that time, the only way to get decent porn was to go to a shady sex-store (which were hard to find), buy a magazine at a liquor store (which was "embarrasing"), or go to one of those creepy theaters where Pee Wee Herman whacks it to watch "Deep Throat". VHS came around and changed all that-- video rental stores had "private rooms" curtained-in (remember seeing those as a kid and knowing exactly what they were?), and anonymous mail-order tapes were also a huge huge hit. The point is, pornography can really drive an entertainment medium, especially when that entertainment medium offers some very unique values. Why didn't DVD and HD porn have quite the same impact as VHS porn did? Because they didn't offer much of a significant different in experience....

...but anyone who saw this in 3D inherently understands the advantages presented by the new 3D medium.

So how is this going to happen? Here are my theories:

Crazy topsy-turvy world where Nintendo goes "crazy"
There is a chance-- I know, I know, don't laugh: I'm actually being serious--That Nintendo will see the 3D porn "movement" as an opportunity to further expand into the blue ocean. Nintendo might (however unlikely this is, they just might) actually allow pornography to be available by some special and exclusive means on the "online market" or whatever means they are looking to use for distributing 3D video content. Hahaha... I knowwww... but porn on the 3DS is going to happen anyway. Nintendo might as well embrace it, protect it, and do a whole lot of damage control PR to preserve their family-friendly image.

Nintendo non-chalantly and innocently includes a flash-capable browser
...and the members-only websites start coming. This seems actually much more likely than Nintendo allowing full-scale distribution of porno movies through their online store... but I digress...

Membership-only internet forums
If Nintendo decides not to include either of the two previous options to beat the hackers and porn enthusiasts to the punch, I believe that before the 3DS is even cracked, hacked, and flashed that we're going to see internet forums popping up all around the intert00bz with a similar model: Pay an upfront or monthly fee, join our forums, trade friend codes with us, and we will send 3D pictures, taken with our DSs, of LIVE NAKED HARDCORE TEEN AMATEUR POV COLLEGE SEX ROMPS!!!

Movies shot with the 3DS camera
I believe that once the 3DS gets hacked, they'll figure out how to record video with that little 3D camera, and subsequently figure out how to send videos to each other, even if this must be done ad-hoc. It doesn't matter, people will still get them.

Movies on 3DS carts (or a cart-shaped adapter)
For the next stage, I believe that there will be porn on actual 3DS carts, or a cart-shaped adapter that connects to something else. These carts can be distributed illegally from, you know, wherever, just like the R4 and M3 Real pirate DS carts were, except they'll just have porn on them.

Hacked-up mobile browser
Its pretty likely that, given the graphical prowess and decent CPU/RAM horsepower on-board, that someone will simply create a hacked up mobile web-browser using webkit to create something like SkyFire recently made for mobile phones. Flash on the 3DS is entirely possible once you've rid yourself of that pesky DRM.

Cracked SD card slot
The holy grail of 3DS hacking, of course, will be cracking the SD card slot which will prove to be the most difficult task. This will take the longest, but will be the most sought-after hack for sure. The possibilities are endless when you've got your own media from your home network available to you.

Nintendo might not even know. They may have absolutely no idea how serious this really is. I mean, I know, it's Japan >.> They do tend to watch a lot of porn there, but still. If Nintendo thought they had it bad with DS and DSi hackers breathing down their necks at launch-time... They're going to have a whole new nightmare when the masses get started on the 3DS... The people have spoken, and they want to see fucking.

Hilarious.

2010-07-26T18:01:00.000-07:00

The most popular Free-to-Play MMO in the world could possibly be a side-scrolling fighting game:

http://dungeonfighter.nexon.net/

Apparently, it made some headlines:

2 Million Concurrent Users

Also, a decent read

BUT ATLAS. THIS IS A MICROTRANSACTION MODEL. WE HATE THESE GAMES BECAUSE THEY DO NOT FORCE US TO PAY A MONTHLY COUNTRY CLUB FEE.

I know it's hard for the elites out there to swallow. Trust me, I've been there. As it turns out, people actually like deciding when, where, and how to play their games.

The real trick now is going to be to entice your players to want to spend.

Of course...

It seems...

Like there's a trend.

How strange that an insanely popular game in China is a side-scroller.

Strange indeed.

The Great Content Divide

2010-07-20T22:05:00.001-07:00

There seems to be a great divide in the mentality of various game development companies today. Some developers believe that the ideal way to create a game is to restrict the amount of content that appears within the game in the name of creating an engrossing story that unfolds in a very particular way, and there are other developers that believe that the ideal way to create a game is to give you so many choices, so many options, and so much content, that you barely know what to do with yourself.

Sure, there are developers who fall somewhere in the middle of these two extremes, but my two most recent gaming experiences have been Alan Wake and Dragon Quest IX, and I thought it would be interesting to compare the two, strictly in terms of content, leaving graphic fidelity, music, and interface completely out of the discussion. Certainly, graphic fidelity, music, and interface are a part of the "experience" of the game, and are therefore related to content, but that's not the "content" I'm talking about here-- I'm talking about the actual gameplay experience: The universe in which the game takes place, the story of the game, the replayability of the game, the length of the game, and so on.

Here are some quotes from developers that worked on the game Alan Wake, and my thoughts and interpretation of the quote after each:

"We wanted to make a character and we also wanted to make a story that would be interesting to hardcore gamers, but also people who normally wouldn't be playing an action game"
Note that they are emphasizing their story that they wanted to make. This is what they set out to create from the beginning: A character and a story, with the goal of appealing to a broad range of consumers.

"We decided we wanted a natural storyteller as the main character, and that's where the idea of using a writer... and his writing's coming true, so he's a natural storyteller in the game"
Again, they're emphasizing story-- In fact, they wanted to put so much emphasis on their story that they eventually decided to just make the lead character an author.

"We want a thriller to be more than just a story, so whether it's how we use the camera or how we pace the action, there's several layers of the thriller elements built straight into the gameplay, and we think that's important for the game."
Here they are, stuck on themselves even still: "how we use the camera" or "how we pace the action". The developers of Alan Wake clearly believe, right here form their own mouths, that the way they use the camera and the way that they pace the action are important for the game. They believe that this makes it a "thriller".

"We need to go more linear, control the pacing, and tap into those emotions to get the player's pulse racing. We needed to be able to control the soundscape, we needed to control the environment, the weather, the music, and stuff like that."
After having initially announced the game as a "sandbox-style" game (also known as "open world", like Grand Theft Auto or The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion) they reconsidered this commitment during development of the game. How could they tell their amazing story that everyone was going to love like that?

"When you have the player turning up to a love scene in a monster truck when they should be showing up in a Cadillac you know something's wrong."
Yes, "something is wrong" alright: The story isn't unfolding exactly as you intended. A problem indeed.

All of these quotes demonstrate the developers desire to control the game for the player. Everything is about them and their story that they wrote. This is only half of The Great Content Divide, however, and the evidence of the other half, also found within Alan Wake, is below:

"We are using television series as a model for storytelling"
There they go with the "storytelling" again, but let's focus on the first part now: What is "the television series model"? The television series model is to release content bit-by-bit. To quite literally withhold content that you intend to create, for release at a later time. In other words, to deliberately create an incomplete product.

"From the very beginning, we have intended Alan Wake to go on beyond the first game, so this is the first step, in a way"
More evidence of this can be found here. These developers, believing that their "story" was going to be so appealing to "hardcore gamers, and to people who don't normally play games", that they had a vision of expanding the content of Alan Wake beyond just the "first" game. They are so wrapped up in this mentality that they are actually telling a gaming website this, during an interview, before the game even releases. Also in this interview, (AGAIN: This interview takes place weeks before the game even releases), the developer confirms at least 2 DLC (Downloadable Content) episodes (which they expect you to pay 7$-10$ for on top of your initial $60 purchase) to get additional content, and also discuss the impending Alan Wake 2. They then go on to say this:

"We definitely want to make Alan Wake 2. We have the story mapped out. We know where it's taking us. As I said, season one will be conclusive but there'll be doors left open for a bigger story"

Now they're even referring to... the video game... Alan Wake... as "season one"? Is it just me or does this sound absurd? Not even the Heavy Rain guys had balls like this.

(Source 1) (Source 2)

The opposite side of The Great Content Divide
On the other hand, let's take a look at the mentality behind the developers of another new game, Dragon Quest IX: Sentinels of the Starry Skies. Again, I've compiled some quotes about developing this game, and my commentary will follow.

"[The 'story' is] not that long, in particular."
The developer is commenting on the "ideal length of an RPG", prodded by a popular "game journalist" website. This is very interesting to me, because it is only recently that games have been described in terms of time when asked about their length. This isn't how it used to be many years ago: The "length" of a game was measured by the content, such as how many "levels" there were, or how many "quests" you could do. Nonetheless, he is prodded for an amount of "time", to which he responds, "40 hours [...] for no particular reason. It just sounds like a good number.", seemingly making a mockery of the time-to-length paradigm.

"With Dragon Quest VII it took about 100 hours to complete the game. What we focus on is not the time constraint but the amount of content we put in."
He comments further on the difference between the journalist's way of measuring the length of a game, by "time", to the way that he thinks of measuring the length of a game, by "content". He references the PlayStation entry in the Dragon Quest series, which was Dragon Quest VII (Dragon Warrior VII here in America).

"For Dragon Quest IX one of the biggest things was being able to create your own character, and your party members too. The importance of it is that you can customize the face, the name, or something like that so the party members are really a reflection of you. It becomes more of your own experience. Particularly because of the undefined elements of the characters, we wanted it to become the player's story. "
Here, the developer is demonstrating the polar opposite as their goal with Dragon Quest IX, from what we heard out of the Alan Wake developers. He wants it to "become the players story". He wants the characters and party members in the game to be "a reflection of you", to make it become "your own experience". He doesn't seem too interested in controlling how the camera acts, or how the weather behaves, or how deep the characters in the story are, and instead seems interested in leaving these details to the player to manipulate to their liking, so that the "story" of the game is custom tailored to their interests, created in the player's own head by their own imagination.

"You can vary that experience depending on what type of skill the character has and also sometimes you can build up special skills to increase damage that you do to the monsters."
Again, he is saying that "you" (the player) can "vary the experience depending on [what you want]".

"Oblivion. The Elder Scorlls IV: Oblivion [has been an influence to me recently]. I like that a lot."
This quote comes from Yuji Horii, the creator of Dragon Quest, however in another interview the Producer of Dragon Quest IX, Ichimura-san, also mentions the original Diablo as another source of inspiration. What are the similarities between Diablo, Oblivion, and Dragon Quest IX? I'd say (on a base level, anyway) that freedom, customization, and the motivation to "collect" are the biggest similarities. It is also worth noting that none of these games are "episodic" in nature, like a TV series is. Sure, all three of them offer additional content in some form, but this is not episodic content. None of these games are meant to act as a television series, or a movie; they are meant (if compared to anything other than games) to act much more like a "Choose your own adventure" book-- meaning-- The content is all there, but, how you interact with it, and how the story unfolds, is entirely your choice.

"I believe there is some type of universal message [throughout all Dragon Quest games], like love for humanity, or the importance of keeping on trying. But I don’t really like to come out and push that, or shove it down anyone’s throat."
Here, Horii-san was being pushed by the interviewer to connect all the different Dragon Warrior titles via a common theme or overarching grand story of some sort. Mr. Horii was not interested in doing this, as each title is always developed completely independently from the others as finished products, and do not connect to one-another. This of course means that the story is never open-ended, left open with a sequel in mind, or with additional content pre-planned for the "next installment" in the "franchise". He concludes that he doesn't want to push a message or story down anyone's throats.

"With DS you don’t have to be stuck in front of the TV, you might be laying down… it’s very flexible in the time you can spend playing, and how you can play… so I believe it is fitting to this day and age. "
This is not as much about game content as it is just the mentality of the developers and their desire to give people playing the game as much freedom as possible. I think that the degree of physical freedom provided by a handheld console, as well as the intimacy of having your own speakers and your own screen held within your fingertips, are important factors with how the player absorbs the content, and clearly so does Horii-san.

"When you purchase a game for a few thousand yen (3000 yen = $34), you want to have the value of the game"
Interesting that a game developer is speaking in terms of the value provided to the player in terms of dollars and cents (or Yen in this case). You do not see this often. Interesting... this sounds familar! I believe i just wrote an article with a section on exactly this type of thing (in reference to whether or not a console was "affordable", and differentiating "price" from "value".)

"For kids you really want to have a game they can play for a long time. For adults, maybe they will play for six hours and if the gameplay is good maybe they'll be happy and want to play longer. But for kids, they might only get a couple of games a year and I would like them to continue to be playing."
It seems as though he is saying here that he aspires to do the unthinkable: Pack so much content and so much freedom to control the game in your own way and customize the game to your interests that you could potentially play it for the better part of a year! Sounds like someone spent as much time playing Oblivion as I did ;)

It is also interesting to note that the developers of Dragon Quest IX don't speak in terms of other media. They don't cite television or movies as direct inspirations for the type of gameplay they want to create.

(Source 1) (Source 2) (Source 3) (Source 4)

Old and new schools of thought
A comparison of the two developers reveals some stark differences in history and experience:

**Quick comparison**
Remedy Making games since: 1996 First console: Xbox/Playstation 2 Total number of platforms developed for: 5 Games of note: Max Payne(s), Alan Wake	Square-Enix Making games since: 1986 First console: Nintendo Famicom (NES) Total number of platforms developed for: 20+ Games of note: Final Fantasy(s), Dragon Quest(s), Star Ocean(s), Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, Actraiser(s), and many more

I think it is interesting to question where this difference in game design philosophy originates. It could very well just be a personal preference with no outside influence I suppose, but that's not very interesting. Let's consider that some of the factors mentioned in this comparison may have something to do with it.

It's interesting to note that Remedy's developers started making games 10 years after Square/Enix. Remedy likely grew up playing Square and/or Enix games in their youths, so why take such a drastically different path of development? Perhaps, after playing games that encouraged freedom and imagination (as many of Square and Enix's games did in the 80's and 90's) they felt as though they could create a "better" game using their amazing imaginations for us? It's not clear, but there seems to be a definite difference between many gamers who began in the late 80s and early 90s (we'll call them the NES generation) and the gamers who began in the late 90s and early 00s (we'll call them the PlayStation generation, which coincidentally has a nice ring to it).

I think the facts in the table above speak volumes about experience with creating popular games in itself, and I won't elaborate any more on the differences between the NES and PlayStation generations and their preferences in regards to gameplay mechanics and content delivery. This has been done to death by a friend of 8bitdream, Sean Malstrom, and I don't think I can achieve much more on this subject that he hasn't already written veritable novels about. Nonetheless, this difference in mentality is important when understanding the difference in design philosophies when comparing Yuji Horii and the old Dragon Quest team from Enix, with Remedy and the Alan Wake team.

Mine is better than yours
So which type of game is better? That's not what this post is about, and I don't intend to argue that either is "better" than the other. This post is about demonstrating the divide between games that favor linearity and story progression to games that favor freedom and imagination. It seems to me that I would be a hypocrite if I said that one was "better" than the other, since I personally prefer games that allow me, as the player, to choose what I want from the game. So with that, I allow you, the reader, to choose which you like better from this post :D Certainly, this post is slanted toward freedom and imagination because that is my preference, but there are many gamers who enjoy linearity and story-driven narrative.

A happy medium
Neither of these games, so far, are selling particularly well in America (where they have similar brand power, which is to say, "not much"). This is interesting to me: Advertising, console exclusivity, and many other factors play a role in sales, but ultimately it comes down to content, so I wonder if there is some sort of middle-ground between these two extremes that Americans prefer in regard to "amount of content". More content = more value, but there is certainly something to be said about a game like Dragon Quest IX that has so much content it can almost feel overwhelming at times even for a seasoned veteran of the series like myself.

My experience with these two games
"I am (barely) A. Wake": I was looking for a Resident Evil 4 experience from Alan Wake and did not get it. The mechanics of the flashlight and the guns and the batteries were all cool, and the visual effects were very impressive, but the storyline and cutscenes took over far too often, and I ended up feeling as though I was just on a quick mission to run from cutscene to cutscene. The little bit of auxiliary content, such as the faux-Twilight-Zone videos on screens inside of buildings were fun, but the "manuscript pages" were boring and I lost interest after reading only the first two. I gave up on this game rather quickly, as I realized it was nothing more than "point flashlight, shoot two times, watch another cutscene, lather, rinse, repeat". There was literally nothing else to do aside from collect coffee thermoses with no tangible reward (huh?) and crappy manuscript pages. I quit the game after playing through the first 4 chapters, and ended up severely disappointed with my purchase. There was so little to do in this game, so little to actually experience in my opinion, that I practically fell asleep.

Dragon Quest(s) IX: I was looking for a Dragon Quest III experience from IX, and I got even more than I bargained for. There is so much customization and freedom in the game it can seem overwhelming. The cutesy-4poo and campy style of the cutscenes and scripted characters might be a turn-off for some gamers, but I find it all very charming. The alchemy pot brings a whole new world of discoveries, collecting, and item customizing, and the random treasure maps you can find all around the world add dozens (hundreds?) of new dungeons to the game as you progress. Treasure map dungeons are not part of the "story", they're completely separate and totally optional-- It's just more content for you if you decide to consume it. There are 9 classes/jobs for your characters to train under that I've seen so far, and I expect that there are at least 3 more coming up. I have completed a dozen side-quests and have unlocked a dozen more, and every town I visit is bustling with NPCs that want to give me even more! I am literally avoiding taking on new quests right now. There is so much to do in this game, it can feel overwhelming at times. I'm going to my job tired every day now, because I can't stop myself from staying up past my bedtime to "do just one more thing".

Getting ahead of yourself
The two experiences, as I've said here, were vastly different for me. The real bummer here, for the Alan Wake team, is that even my friends who prefer linear, story-driven narrative-type games also burned out on Alan Wake very quickly because of the severe lack of content presented within. How will Remedy justify creating and releasing their planned DLC packs now? How will they ever get the investor capital to create the already-planned Alan Wake 2? Perhaps Remedy should learn to walk before they try to run: If they'd focused harder on putting all of their ideas for content into the single game (remember? "season one"?), and then considered DLC and a sequel later, they may not have been stuck in this position.

Is content king? Finding the middle-ground
What games do you think would make a good comparison to these two, but sit in the middle-ground in terms of content? Games that are essentially story-driven, but not necessarily "ruled" by the storyline? Games that performed well in America, had little brand power, and had a popular console upon which they were published? I thought of only a couple, but instead of writing about those I thought it would be fun to see if any 8bitdreamers had any in mind. Perhaps I can write a follow-up post at some point using some of your ideas and points?

A Co-Op Gamers' Delight

2010-07-19T16:04:00.000-07:00

Split-Screen. I hate it. How many times have I been cursed to play an awkward shaped half-screen just to enjoy life's simpler pleasure of giving a fistful of boomstick to a Badass Skag with a friend? Sony may just have a solution to our woes. It, of course, isn't cheap. However, in the coming years when 3d becomes more and more affordable, You and you friends may just be able to enjoy full screen co-op play. On the same TV.

Reading the news over at Kotaku earlier and it seems that Sony purchased a patent a YEAR ago to an interesting set of glasses. (But only published last Thursday)

Now, the diagram may not provide much info, so I'll explain. APPARENTLY, these glasses will filter different images out for each player, so Player 1 will see only his screen, and Player 2 will only see theirs. I suppose it was only a matter of time, since the very nature of 3-D is showing different images in each side. It's the next logical step. It's also noteworthy that the glasses have earbuds as well, which means that separate audio isn't out of the question either.

For those of you that LAN multiplayer (I'm looking at you Halo), you now longer have to worry that the other guy is going to find your sniping spot by watching your half. And those of us will more...modestly sized TV's will no longer have to squint and strain to see whats going on in our half, while our friend is being shredded by the enemy.

A fine innovation Sony. And a practical reason to actually wear those ridiculous glasses. Well played. 3-5 years in the future, when they're affordable, I will enjoy it very much.

A Love (?) Letter to Sony

2010-07-17T13:48:00.000-07:00

Alright Sony. I'm going to lay some knowledge on you here. I've been buying your stuff for YEARS, and have been for the most part, quite happy with you. However, as of late, I'm finding more of your business movements perplexing at best and downright stupid at worst. So what I'm about to say, I say out of love.

Do you know what your problem is? You're trying to do what everyone else is doing instead of focusing on fresh ideas. "Hey guys, the Wii has motion control, WE can DO THAT!" Then you'll roll out half-baked games whose sole purpose is to show us that you can, in fact, do that. "GUYS LOOK, Motion control! Did you see it? Did you?" If you insist on pursuing over people's ideas, at least make enough games where it will WORK. So you're making Wii Sports? Oops, sorry 'Sports Champions.' 'Brunswick Pro Bowling?' Shouldn't that come with Wii-er 'Sports Champions?' DDR? I mean, 'Singstar + Dance?' Whats wrong with my dance pad for that? And how the hell do you expect us uncoordinated white devils to both Sing AND Dance at the same time? Can we look forward to Dance Dance Revolution DJ Drum Hero in the future? Releasing a myriad of half-assed games around a copycat 'innovation' is just a BAD idea. Because that's what the games will turn out to be. A showcase for 'your' idea and little else. If however, you've made a game and say 'hey, I think motion would actually bring a lot to this gameplay,' That's another story.

And to that point, I LIKED being able to control Kai's arrows with the Sixaxis in Heavenly Sword. It was FUN. It wasn't detrimental to the rest of the gameplay or clunky. It was nice and fluid, and perfectly suited Kai's levels. DO MORE LIKE THIS. I couldn't name you another title that made good use out of the Sixaxis. It flopped hard, and you did good realizing it, and by not trying to push it any further. But now! Now you're doing the same thing with the Move! You need to stop trying to walk on Nintendo's heels, and cut a path of your own. Your console has certain strengths, it has certain weaknesses. Play to your strengths. I know it's tempting to look at that big old pie that is the Motion control market that Nintendo has gathered. They did it first, and they did it best. That's how they attracted the crowd in the first place. Have you guys even THOUGHT about what games in the future you're going to be putting motion control into, once the launch titles are finished? Is it REALLY a good idea to make, say, Ratchet and Clank Motion Controlled? Or inFamous? Or Far Cry? Or Final Fantasy? Seriously? You don't have enough of the right titles under your belt justify producing this thing. Your launch titles are going to bomb. Thats GOING to happen. Why? Because if we wanted to play Wii Sports, we'd play WII SPORTS. For less money.

Okay, some pros. You have a STELLAR Graphics Processor in these things, and you make good use of it, which is great, but you're letting it become your FOCUS. Built in Blu-ray player, media streaming, nice big hardrive space, some good solid companies behind you for games. You HAVE the tools at your disposal to make great games. UTILIZE THEM. If "It only does Everything", WHATS wrong? You're rolling out the same shit EVERY YEAR. New Resistance, New Killzone, New Uncharted. I LOVE that you're making another inFamous. inFamous was one of the better games I've played on the PS3, it was unique, there was lots to do, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, it was FUN. You could roam around your destroyed city and blow shit up, or you could go around healing any and all kinds of ailments with Cole's equivalent of a defibrillator. You NEED games like this, not more generic shooters every year, in what I like to call Madden syndrome.

3D, 3D, 3D. You're jumping the gun again, Sony. How many people do you suppose can actually AFFORD 3D TV's? And are willing to shell out another $150 for the glasses? I'm sorry Sony, I don't have 5 large sitting in a bank to buy a 3D TV. And I'd be willing to bet most of your audience doesn't. You're half a decade EARLY. Had you shown this bad boy 5-7 years from now, when the technology isn't so new, when its affordable, you would make a KILLING. I love your shit, but its EXPENSIVE.

Final Fantasy XIII: Square, I just have to ask why? We've given you more than two decades of our lives, and our money. Why do you do this to us? I love Final Fantasy. But now its been reduced to a 30 hour walk down a hallway. Interspersed with enough cinematics to make Hideo Kojima wipe a tear from his eye in pride. Yes, the cinematics are lovely, but if I wanted to see a movie, I'd go to the theatre and pay six bucks as opposed to seventy. And when did Final Fantasy become God of War? "Press X to not die." Oops. that's Final Fantasy XII. XIII was 'Constantly Shift Paradigms to not die.'

And what the hell have you guys done with Enix? They released some of the most quirky and fun games to ever see the light of day. Evo: Search for Eden, Illusion of Gaia, Brain Lord, Terranigma, Bust a Groove, Valkyrie Profile, NEED I GO ON? I've haven't seen ANYTHING Enix worthy since you bought them, save for Valkyrie Profile 2. Listen to them Sony, it might just pull you out of your rut.

-Artemis out

Don't Cry For Me Yoshida

2010-07-15T16:52:00.000-07:00

So as it turns out, a recent article was published through Gamasutra from the words of Shuhei Yoshida. He had this to say:

Nintendo of America head Reggie Fils-Aime also poked fun at competing 3D gaming solutions that require glasses, and Sony Computer Entertainment Worldwide Studios president Shuhei Yoshida didn't appreciate the detracting comments.

"I have hope that they have a broader perspective with 3D," Yoshida said in an interview with IGN. Many of Sony's game studios are working on 3D titles for PlayStation 3 that require glasses.

"When you listen to what they are saying about the effect of 3D perspective to the games, they are saying the same message we are, but they don't have to bash some small part of what the other company is doing," he added.

And so Mr. Yoshida, it is with great respect and reverence that I apologize for my American friend, Reggie Fils-Aime. Sometimes he does get carried away, especially when responsible for a very important press event…one that basically swept all of E3. My consolation gift to you is Johnson’s No Tears Shampoo. It’s the least I could do for you and your company especially considering…

This

And this

This too

Oh, and this

Don’t forget this

This as well

This is also something

This one…

…and of course this!

It’s almost as though you and your company have made a habit out of bashing Nintendo for doing something completely different, succeeding, making boatloads of cash, beating you at E3, and then touting that they (as always) win at hand held consoles. It’s almost criminal. And criminals make people cry.

Still, I can’t help but think that maybe Sony is just biting off more they can chew. That perhaps losing some of its licenses to other consoles, attempting to copy cat, being beat at their own 3-D game, and losing in the console wars…maybe those tears are just from some sort of suffocation.

This is Nintendo. They’ve been in the game longer, seen more action, and have more battle scars than Master Chief and Sam Fisher combined. They’re not fucking around, and you have been. Man up:

I said Good Day, Sir.

-Atlas Out

A Blunder from Downunder

2010-07-13T17:41:00.000-07:00

So I try to IGNore most of the big bloaty "game journalist" websites and focus more on smaller blogs when I do my reading, but I came across a quote from this article and I just can't stop myself from making a lengthy and inflammatory response >.>

The author, Patrick Kolan (of IGN Australia... get it?), titles the editorial "Devil's Advocate" so that you'll know he doesn't necessarily believe anything he's writing, he's just saying it... I guess for the fuck of it? I'm really not sure why he did that, actually. Trolling for hits? Out of ideas? Bored of wrestling crocs? Just saying... Anyways, so, playing "Devil's Advocate", he leads in with this:

"From all the glowing praise the Nintendo 3DS has received during and post-E3 2010, you'd be forgiven for thinking this device somehow turns lead to gold, cures cancer, solved the conflict in Iraq and bridged the divide between Xbox 360 and PS3 fans. "

I suppose what he's trying to say (in a very snarky and witty way, lulz) is that everyone who was at E3 and witnessed/played the 3DS for themselves have very high opinion of it with very little doubt in their minds that it will turn out to be super-mega-ultra-amazing. Fair enough: Impressions coming out of E3 were extremely positive. So what is it that Mr. Kolan thinks are potential hindrances to the 3DS' success?

The Price

Yes, he's worried about the price first and foremost, despite that we don't even know what it is yet. Well, that little detail aside, I still have a few things to say.

Ask any learned salesman: Price is never ever ever the issue: Value is always the issue. If a prospect (potential customer) says "The price is too high!" what this prospect is really saying is "The price does not match the value in my mind. Please explain why I should pay $X for the product you offer!"

Nintendo, Mr. Kolan says, has a history of keeping their new launches at an affordable price. Well, while this might be true for Mr. Kolan, this may not be true for... a homeless person? "Affordable" is a strange word, isn't it? "Affordable" is completely ambiguous. A Ferrari is "affordable" to Bill Gates, after all. So let's rephrase it: Nintendo has a history of... building enough value in their new products to match the price for a large number of people around the world, whether that be in Japan, America, or Europe. After all, Nintendo's consoles almost always launch at a higher price in America than they did in Japan, and then an even higher price in the UK and Europe than they did in America. This is, of course, for a lot of reasons-- but the console still sells because of the value they've built for it. Hell, buying a Wii at Christmastime in America back in 2006 or 2007 sure wasn't very "affordable" for many people, but eBay operates on value, just like any other auction, and this is why Wii was sold via eBay for well over double the suggested retail price.

Nintendo will use a very similar strategy when building value for the 3DS that they used when building value for Wii. These are very difficult products for which to demonstrate value via a TV advertisement. Remember Nintendo's "Playing is believing" mantra? This was parroted over and over because Nintendo knew that in order to "sell" a customer on Wii, they had to try it for themselves and feel what the Wii Remote did for gaming in their own hand.

I believe they'll take a similar route with the 3DS. "Seeing is believing" anyone? With Wii, Nintendo put them in every toy store, every electronics store, and even huge 20'x20' playable kiosk areas with multiple consoles in shopping malls. Nintendo also organized "house parties", wherein "Mom" would invite a bunch of friends over, Nintendo would provide a Wii, and they would all "play" and subsequently "believe". Nintendo will have 3DS kiosks everywhere, just like they did with Wii. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see them inside of movie theater lobbies this time around either-- After all, people interested in 3D technology are getting it from movie theaters these days, are they not?

How much does 3DS cost? Let me tell you: (Here is how a salesman's mind might see the 3DS value proposition)

3D you can afford: Skip the $4k television and the dorky glasses. Carry full amazing 3D in your pocket
View amazing (see for yourself!) 3D images in the palm of your hand without the need for intrusive and annoying headgear
Play all your old DS games, as well as all-new games in full 3D
Watch 3D movies in this same fashion
Connect wirelessly to browse the web, download apps and smaller games, or communicate with your friends
Use the 3D camera to take 3D pictures and send them wirelessly, locally or through the internet, to your friends 3DS'
(All the other features of 3DS that we don't even know about yet go here)
From the people who brought you Nintendo Wii-- This is the next big thing! Don't be late to the party!

...Oh yes, yes, you wanted to know the price? Well it's yours today for only $229. I know, incredible, right? I can take cash, check, or credit card.

Excuse me if you think I sound overzealous, but the 3D-without-glasses (and without $4k television) experience holds immense value to many consumers who are interested in 3D. The 3DS absolutely will be the next big entertainment phenomenon, just as the DS and Wii were before it.

A final note on price-- Let's take two products that cost the same, and compare the sales:

PSP Go (America) $249

Wii (America) $249

Was one affordable while the other was not? Well of course not: They're the same price. So why did on sell like crazy and the other fizzled? The value proposition.

True Specs

Mr. Kolan continues by questioning the unknown hardware specifications of the 3DS (and is essentially making the same argument as "price", because all of these factors contribute to the product's value anyway). He raises questions about the following:

Backwards compatibility with old DS games: ...which is already confirmed? I guess he is asking whether or not they'll be "in 3D" or not? He doesn't say. Of course, Nintendo has taken a strong stance on backwards compatibility the last few times they've released hardware (a very strong one if you look at the handheld market specifically) and I see no reason for them to change their tune now. Even if they didn't include any BC at all (and again, they've already confirmed that all current games for the DS models will be supported), this would only serve to decrease the value of the system, forcing Nintendo to adjust the price accordingly.

Region locking: Doesn't every new game system have region locking? Whatever the reasons are, companies who produce gaming hardware have mostly stuck to their guns on this one throughout the past. I could make a list of all the systems that have region-locking enabled, but I don't feel like it: The vast majority of them do. This is nothing new, and since game systems have always been this way it doesn't really detract from the value of the 3DS. Removing this restriction may serve to add value for a small number of consumers, but region-locking isn't and never will be a deal-breaker.

Battery life: Battery life is always a concern with portable electronics, and since we don't have any concrete facts on this matter, we're left only to speculate. According to a post I translated from Disruptive Sketchbook (en espanol), right here, the 3DS is being said to sacrifice the SSAA capabilities of the graphics chip in order to operate on a single GPU rather than a dual GPU setup. Of course, this is currently unconfirmed, but to speculate further let's look at history: Nintendo has always absolutely dominated the handheld gaming market. This is no coincidence: This is a direct result of being really fuckin good at designing handheld gaming systems. Whatever battery life the 3DS will have will certainly be "good enough for most consumers" (which is just them taking another page out of the Blue Ocean Strategy as they tend to often do these days).

The threat of shoddy ports and rush-jobs

I don't have much of a response for this, mostly because it's just dumb. Wii was clearly a victim of these exact "problems", and it was never an issue. If you look to the past, these "problems" also "plagued" the original Playstation and the Playstation 2. The fact of the matter is this: No matter how bad they are, more games are never a bad thing. Ever.

The PSP2 is coming

This is my favorite part of the article, and in fact was the part that inspired me to write this whole post :) Here is one of Mr. Kolan's choice quotes from this section:

"It is foolish to assume that Sony is simply going to drop the PSP brand entirely; while the DS may well have much of the handheld market stitched up worldwide, the PSP still has a strong legion of fans and solid brand recognition in the marketplace"

Let's begin: Is it foolish to think that Sony will drop the PSP brand entirely? Faithful readers of this blog already know how I feel about the Playstation 4, so I won't go too deep into this part of it: Let's examine the reasons why Sony may want to keep the PSP brand instead.

Actually... Let's not. The PSP brand is very heavily tarnished, and is considered by some to be a blemish on the Sony and Playstation names. This is why it is always referred to as "The PSP", and not "Playstation Portable" or "Sony Playstation Portable". It is rarely even called "The Sony PSP" anymore, and this is a deliberate attempt to separate it from the rest of Sony's products, including the Playstation brand. To be clear: Sony's first entry into the handheld market was somewhat of a success-- They succeeded where many have failed before them which was to even begin to compete with Nintendo in the handheld market. That said, the PSP has also been a failure in many regards:

ARRRRRRRRRRRRRrrrrrr: I know quite a few PSP owners. You know how every single one of them perceive their PSPs? "Plays Sexy Porn". That's a joke. Hah. But it's not actually a joke: Everyone I know that owns a PSP regards it as nothing more than a "pirate media gadget", by which they've supplemented with a big phat chunk of flash memory, to store digital media for viewing on-the-go... but you know the real kicker? Every single one of them uses it to play Nintendo games. This is hilarious to me. NES, SNES, and Game Boy emulators (along with pornography) seem to be the primary drivers for their PSP purchases. Let's also remember that Sony's constant fight with the PSP hacking pirate groups has been a long, costly, and dangerous one. All the PSP owners I know "know better" than to update the firmware on their PSPs, as "Sony will ruin it again". Very bad, indeed.

Now... the people I know who own a PSP Go on the other hand... errrr... wait. I don't know anyone with a PSP Go. Shit, I've never even seen one in person... Which brings me to my next point:

PSP Go nowhere: The PSP Go was a joke. Aside from Michael Pachter's "apology", just about every other media source out there lambasted the PSP Go for being a very very clear attempt to wring the PSPs "loyal fanbase" for as much money as possible. It flopped, of course, which will always cause a lot of damage to the brand. Even the most die-hard Sony fans out there (you know who you are) couldn't fight the feeling that Sony was literally trying to rip them off.

Deja Vu: Wasn't Mr. Kolan worried about the value of the 3DS being hindered by battery life and backwards compatibility? Sony has already demonstrated that they care not about either of these value-adders. Will Sony just up-and-decide to design their next handheld properly? That is an extremely bizarre assumption to make only moments after making the assumption that Nintendo won't design their next handheld properly.

Better. Faster. Stronger: Now Mr. Kolan is expressing his believe that 3DS will somehow be hindered by the release of a PSP2 because, he believes, Sony will not only match the capabilities of the 3DS, but also put even more powerful hardware into it. This doesn't seem like a very well-thought-out editorial: These too will change the value/price proposition that he mused would be an issue for DS already. More importantly, Sony is stuck between a rock and a hard place:

Sony is trying to build value for its electronics divisions that have much stronger brand recognition and customer loyalty, their televisions, which require 3D glasses to operate. Nintendo has put Sony in an awkward position. How could Sony release a PSP2? Their options are:

Release a PSP2 that does not include 3D functionality
Release a PSP2 that includes 3D functionality that requires glasses
Release a PSP2 that includes 3D functionality that does not require glasses

This is Sony's conundrum, and I think you can see it for yourself. If they release a PSP2 without 3D functionality, well... they'll look antiquated right out of the gates. This is not a matter of 3DS being "better technology" than PSP2, this is a matter of 3DS' technology literally making the PSP2 irrelevant. What if they release a PSP2 with 3D that requires glasses, like their televisions do? Well, obviously this doesn't work for a handheld at all. People have enough of a problem wearing the silly things in their homes or a darkened movie theater, let alone on the bus or in line at the post office.

How about Sony go with the "best" option and release a PSP2 that includes the same 3D-without-glasses functionality that the 3DS enjoys? This is very dangerous ground for Sony: They're making their televisions and computer monitors look bad first of all... but more importantly let's remember that this would only put them on "even ground" with Nintendo and would not provide any unique value. What happens next? They put a "bigger screen", a "better processor", "more ram", etc, into the machine which serves only to drive up the price (or they play razor-and-blades again, which they cannot afford to do). What does "better" techonology really equate to in the video game market? A quick look at history will tell you that it equates to absolutely nothing. The "most powerful" system never ever prevails. The system with the most games does, and with Nintendo's backwards compatibility confirmed (along with a dozen very strong handheld properties belonging to their first-party alone), as well as the insanely strong line-up of launch-window software announced for 3DS, That's not even bringing into question the extremely strong brand recognition that Nintendo is enjoying at the moment: They are innovators that produce valuable and high-quality products, and they know video games for "everyone". Sony can't really hope to compete with Nintendo in the handheld market this time around: They've already nipped all of Sony's options in the bud.

The dangers of being first to market

What dangers of being first to market? Well Mr. Kolan only points to one: The idea that Sony might copy Nintendo and release a "better" PSP. We just went over that for a few paragraphs, so I'll move on.

Gyroscopic Controls: Why Bother?
We have no idea what Nintendo plans to do with the motion-sensing abilities of the 3DS, but it's silly to forget that games can be played with 3D turned off. Perhaps a game that uses the gyroscope may not need the 3D effect? Perhaps Nintendo intends to surprise us with uses for the motion-controls that we can't even imagine? I'd say that's pretty likely. No matter which way you slice it, though, the prospect of playing games with motion-controls but not... being... able... to see the 3D if you move... well, that's silly. Clearly Nintendo has other ideas.

The launch date

We know only that Nintendo will release the 3DS "before March 2011". This is the official statement. Mr. Kolan argues that this is "confusing and frustrating to consumers and retailers", and I think he's got it way out of proportion (and lacks any understanding of Nintendo's motives). Consumers just want to get their hands on the damn thing. If there is any "frustration" amongst consumers, that's it right there. Retailers, on the other hand, most likely aren't too worried either: "Will Nintendo just sell Wii's and DSi's through me like crazy for another Christmas, or do I get to sell 3DS like crazy this Christmas too?" Sure, the release date is a concern, but it's only July.

What would you have Nintendo do? Say "It's coming this Christmas. Stop buying DSis and DSi XLs now please." By remaining vague-- in July-- they're not giving anyone a concrete reason to stop buying other DS models. Reggie Fils-Aime even "accidentally" said that 3DS was coming "next year" when pushed for a release date announcement on the Jimmy Fallon Show. Anyone who thinks this was accidental doesn't understand Reggie very well ;) This was a deliberate attempt to distort the timeframe of its release so Nintendo doesn't further hinder the little momentum that the 6-year-old DS platform has left.

Maybe Nintendo is actually hoping Sony announces a PSP2 :) After all, Nintendo waited and waited to announce a release date for Wii until after Sony announced the PS3's release date. Nintendo stole all of Sony's thunder. Maybe they're considering doing this again?

Final notes

After the whole article by Mr. Kolack ends, he changes his tune. He goes back to saying that Nintendo will rule, etc. Perhaps the "Devil's Advocate" label wasn't just a cover-up after all? I'm not sure. Perhaps this paragraph was meant to create that uncertainty. Perhaps I was too harsh with my photoshopped kangaroo? Meh... regardless, he ends on this light-hearted note...

"Knock us out and release the thing already, Nintendo!"

...and I'm finally inclined to agree. It just hurts my heart to know that I'll still be waiting at least a few months to play one of these damn things. Grrrrr...

Untapped Potential: Part 1

2010-07-12T16:51:00.001-07:00

Our Contenders:

SimFarm

Harvest Moon

Animal Crossing

FarmVille

FarmTown

What do all of these have in common? If you’ve said farming, you’d be incorrect. Pioneered new territory on their console? Only two I’m afraid. What they all have in common is their ability to tap into something much more rural and much more relaxing, yet still keep the edge needed to make gaming interesting.

These games are able to give players a cavalcade of different objectives and game play bits that seem to enthrall hundreds of thousands even today. On the forefront of recent news is FarmVille and FarmTown who are currently heading up their ‘console’ – Facebook!

But Yesteryear brought us two games that tend to be on the backburner – SimFarm, an interesting and challenging game on the PC, and the fabled, loved, and critically acclaimed Harvest Moon. So, let us start at the beginning.

In the beginning, there was DOS.

SimFarm as with most of the sim craze in the early 90s did not make much of a splash. The game offered a "reality" of seasonal change, the issues of drought, growing crops and tending livestock. The game was not complicated, but compared to its predecessor SimCity, it was certainly not a ground breaking innovator. Overall, it was an attempt at something new and like most attempts it was not recognized.

SNES! …Excuse you.

Harvest Moon was a game created by a rather interesting fellow by the name of Yasuhiro Wada. Generally unknown, Yasuhiro Wada made his way onto the gaming scene in 1996 with the cult classic, Harvest Moon for the SNES. The game, now widely known world-round, has endured countless iterations and even more spin-offs.

While it does not hold the monetary success of some games, its legacy has been one of 14 years, with each year bringing something interesting to the table. Perhaps it is because so much of my childhood was spent waiting for their next push that I feel so inclined this way, but the sheer volume of releases has to be an indicator that there’s a market out there.

Animal Cashcowing: Love, hate, and grind

Moving up from here, the next release of something along these similar lines of untapped potential is, of course, Animal Crossing. Selling nearly 3 million copies world-wide, this Game Cube Game was played by most of its owners at least at some point. With its success, came its follow ups: City Folk and Wild World. Just so you can wrap your head around how popular this series really is, World Wide (the DS copy) has sold 11.26 MILLION COPIES world round since its introduction.

While the game contains no overarching story other than a few tid bits, the player is expected to fill in their own, while affecting the town with what they do, the speed in which they pay off debts, and how they treat the town as a whole. The town itself is a character interacted with tools, plants, and even the occasional dumpster dive.

Still, it has been a stepping stone for success, as without these series of games, we could not have...

The Facebook Phenomenon: Is it really so mysterious?

Whether you love it or hate it, Farmville and their creator Zynga have changed what it means to use facebook. Once a platform for social gathering, it has now been transformed into a secondary console, one of which has been touching deeply on the pulse of the Expanded Audience idea – and they’ve been raking in the cash.

Just to show you how POWERFUL Zynga is, they basically bogarted Facebook early this year. Just for the quick and easy: Zynga didn’t want to pay 30% to Facebook – they threatened to make their own site, thus drawing users away from Facebook. Zynga, financially backed by the same company that backed facebook early in its life, Facebook folded and accepted the new terms. Read for yourself. It was actually really crazy.

So what is it that makes Farmville so appealing? Well, let me make a quick list for you:

Accessibility: With over 400 million active users in one place, it’s hard not to imagine that a game on facebook could be successful. Match that at the 70% they claim actively user the software (games) that’s a whopping 280 million people. The platform is free and simple to use, integrated into a website with minimal needs of download. Anyone anywhere can play Farmville.

Freedom: While lacking in some areas(I’ll get to this later), FarmVille rests on a now steadily growing popular model known as "Free to Play" – meaning there are no monthly fees or upfront costs…simply playing for free yields a harder difficulty curve. There are usually "Item Malls" built into these games, which is a fundamental part of the Micro-transaction model. I.E. It allows you to choose when, where, and how much of your money you spend…if you spend at all!

Addiction: The game itself is noted as a sim game; understandably this is its best category to fit, however…it is appealing to most (as its predecessors) not because of the happy smiling avatar or cute farm animals. No, it is the difficulty curve, the time sink, the grind, the achievement. A good portion of what you find in main stream MMOs you can find in Farmville. And people find that fun.

Not Casual: As the above noted “Addiction” references…this game is a game. An almost solid game. I’ve seen a man play this game for what was 8 hours straight. When I ask people what they think a “Casual” game is, they are generally always called “Easy” and “Something that you do for a few minutes and put down” – i.e. not for the intelligent. This game isn’t casual. It’s the pinnacle of the core…and it’s drawing in the expanded audience!

These are just a few things that make the game an interesting candidate for Untapped Potential.

Of course, I would also like to add one more item to the list, but this is in reference to FarmVille’s competition: FarmTown.

Multiplayer: The game is one such that you may have people visit and tend to your far…you are also able to go to market and barter. This game adds an entirely new layer onto the genre that had not yet been touched.

This is where we will begin. This is Untapped Potential.

Generating Potential for Online Games: Knowing the weakness and strengths

What we have seen since Dos and the SNES is an evolution. From SimFarm we moved to a more character-centric representation of the player (a silent hero, like Link, or Mario). From Harvest Moon we moved to Facebook and Farmville, where accessibility to the genre could be greater amassed, and allowed for no upfront charge…allowing players to choose when and if they pay.

The disruptions to those games were twofold: Animal Crossing and Farm Town. Specifically, Animal Crossing has actually attempted to branch out into new territory with the Wii and DS version being online capable. FarmTown, as noted previously, allows for a semi-indepth multiplayer function.

Where am I going with this? Nintendo is pushing for online capability (within reason) and 'reskin' or 'rehash' games are attempting to push the envelope by adding more layers to the genre.

Animal Crossing limits itself with the Friend Codes. While an interesting concept, they do not allow for a larger online experience -- although that is obviously intended by Nintendo. Most successful sites and programs simply have a signup process. There are plenty of ways to enhance privacy, and I think that if a game were perhaps allowed to do this, there might be something interesting to it.

FarmTown limits itself with lacking features. While the multiplayer aspect is great, there’s a lot more to explore in that space than they allow. It also lacks the extreme popularity and face value of Zynga whom has dominated the gaming market for Facebook.

Massively Multiplayer Online Gardening: The Platform

So where do we go from here? Massively multiplayer games have been a growing genre since the introduction of MUDs. Now, in 2010, we are almost dominated by a slew of tripe, mediocrity, and a small percentage of amazingly crafted (and addicting) games – how odd that it is almost exactly like every other entertainment industry!

As of yet, no Harvest Moon game has been officially slated for MMO release, nor has Animal Crossing really come to bare what it would mean. Facebook’s own Farmville comes the closest. Still, what we need is something that combines all of these games into one.

With the rise of Free to Play and the recognition of MMOs not just being for adults it would make sense to most that a game the revolves around rural lifestyle with a simple to use, difficult to master gameplay style may in fact make an interesting title. We cannot state that features simply make the game, however. Farmville’s success was mostly its accessibility…so what then?

Wii.

Before everyone goes too off handle, let me explain. For a game to be successful on PC it is either a mediocre success (makes its money back and a bit more) or it is a raving success (truckloads of cash). All of these rely on different factors. From personal experience, don’t contend where you can’t win: Subscription based games on PC WILL need to be made by world class producers and developers with money to burn and a proven ROI (Return on Investment).

So, the option that would make the most sense for a niche game such as this is twofold: Free to Play PC (where your audience isn’t necessarily ‘expanded audience’ unless you’re marketing on facebook) and the Wii, which has already established itself with two expanded audience games, Harvest Moon and Animal Crossing.

Mind you, the likelihood of Wii ever having an MMO on it is about as believable as Duke Nukem Forever coming out. So when I say Wii, it is merely to provoke the thought of possibilities.

Massively Multiplayer Online Gardening: The Concept

MMOs on the surface offer a few things for people: socialize, kill, achieve, explore, create

On the more technical side, it must also offer: Grind, reasonable difficulty curves, updating, and incentive.

The concept of creating a game that revolves initially around rural life is one that has not yet been pressed as hard as it could be. What originally grew MMOs into what they are now was the social aspect, and especially roleplay, which has for the most part been factored out of most games. Rural life, or the mentality of small townships, is akin to that need to socialize. Why would people play MMOs over, say, any other single player game? The People.

My concept is simple: The community aspect and ability to influence the town (both NPC and real player) of Animal Crossing, the style and world weary knowledge of addicting harvest moon games, the Expanded Audience gameplay and techniques and achievement systems of FarmVille, and online multiplayer capabilities.

And it’s been done before:

Star Wars Galaxies

A Tale in the Desert

Star Wars Galaxies, and the video I linked to, had a system once that was literally the epitome of Expanded Audience meets MUDs. Everything in that video starting from 2:20 was player made and situated. A town, fully alive, with taxes, town hall meetings, the works.

A Tale in the Desert is something akin to this as well. A small rural community that exists purely off of the enjoyment of simple yet difficult life within the realm of an MMO.

Massively Multiplayer Online Gardening: The Game

I honestly believe something like this can exist. With Harvest Moon's expiraments in Adventure/Farming games such as the DS title Rune Factory which is now going into its thrid title it is not far fetched to believe that even adventurers could be cut into the fold of this farming game.

If the game had some sort of start as an adventure game, where eventually people could branch out into the intricate and different classes needed it could appeal -- Most MMO players are used to running about, sword in hand, slaying monsters. This allows the player to become acclimated and, eventually, branch out into the other classes the game has to offer.

These interconnected classes (Farmer, carpenters, doctors, inventors, cooks, general store owners, etc) would be needed to create a propsperous community that players themselves could band together and make. Slowly players would be able to have say over what their town would look like, festivals they would celebrate, and so forth. The content would be ready-made by developers...but players would be able to CHOOSE from that their own experiences.

To reiterate my most important point, if such a game is to be successful it MUST market to the Expanded Audience. Simple to learn, difficult to master. A game like this will happen again, and the person to do it right will be better off for it. I also think that this is a topic worth discussing. Is it feasible? Will it happen?

How not to screw up Dragon Quest X

2010-07-11T10:36:00.000-07:00

It's Sunday morning in America, and I am (very impatiently) sitting around and waiting for my local retailer to open so I can go pick up my copies of Dragon Quest IX. I'm very excited and needed to kill about an hour and a half, so... here we are :) I've got Dragon Quest on the mind...

So, with the recent re-confirmation of Dragon Quest X's development for Wii, I've been thinking about what this could mean: Square-Enix could screw this up really badly if they're not careful. I hope they plan to really test the home market (Japan) and get customer feedback throughout the development process, as they did with Dragon Quest IX for DS, so they can avoid any serious motion-control faux pas'.

I would love to believe that we're "past" the stage of Wii game development where developers think they need to wrench-in motion controls "just because it has a motion-based controller", and are moving toward the stage of Wii game development where developers are just thinking, "motion controls need to just be intuitive and integrated, and add to the experience". Unfortunately, I'm not exactly sure if we're there yet. It took a long time for developers to "get" that when you develop for Nintendo DS, you don't have to use the touch-screen "just because it has one", or more importantly, that you should "only use the touch-screen when it absolutely makes sense and adds to the experience".

I want to make a little laundry-list of what I want to see and what I don't want to see in Dragon Quest X, when considering the capabilities (and shortcomings) of Wii. I hope others agree with me, and that Square-Enix notices.

Be absolutely sure to include local multi-player. Also, an online option would be a plus, as playing on multiple screens would be great.
Don't make us swing the Wii remote around for 5,000 normal battles in the game. If we wanted that, we'd play Dragon Quest Swords. Give us a casino minigame, or a Pachisi map, or a "training" system (to boost your stats like a "Strength Seed" would) or something else along these lines for Wii remote swordplay. Use Wii Motion Plus for this please.
Don't be cutscene-heavy. I have been re-playing through Dragon Warrior 3 again recently, and it was so refreshing, for example, to bring the King of Portoga the Black Pepper special item and have the response be a 5-second text-box that said "You brought me Black Pepper! This must have been a difficult journey! You are a true hero. Please take my ship." It was over, I was proud of my accomplishment, I had a ship, and I was moving forward. Let's remember that players want to be in control of their game, and that long cutscenes are unwanted and unnecessary.
On that note, please remember that one of Dragon Quest's biggest appeals is that it is book-like and not movie-like. Keep the text, lose the movies. Using my imagination has always been key in Dragon Warrior/Quest games. Don't take that away from me.
Keep puzzles to a minimum. Don't use the Wii remote to do a bunch of stupid puzzles in dungeons. There are two reasons I don't replay Dragon Warrior VII: That stupid opening dungeon with all the puzzles, and the lack of a true overworld.
Dragon Quest can be extremely simple, when considering input methods. The PS2 controller, for Dragon Quest VIII, for example, felt ridiculous because there were 400 buttons that were completely unnecessary. Give us a Wii remote-only option, where we use its pointer to control the whole game one-handed if we choose to. Think of a DS game, and touching the screen to direct your characters around on the map, and using the touch-screen to select menu options during fights. Let us point to drag-and-drop items into the Alchemy Pot. Shoot, why not let us drag-and-drop during fight sequences? Drag the "Fight" option to the enemy or group, let it highlight, and let go to select. This could be extremely intuitive. No more "A button spamming"-- just a few flicks of the wrist.
Integrate with Dragon Quest IX. Incentivize and reward your customers for owning multiple platforms and multiple games that you've published. DS and Wii can integrate together nicely, and I know you can come up with some interesting rewards for people who've put hundreds of hours into Dragon Quest IX (or even IV, V, and VI).
Second quest ideas: Customers want a lot of content and high replayability value out of a Dragon Quest game. A lot of people who play Dragon Quest games do so because of their familiarity with the rest of the series. Why not incentivize them to play through the game a second time? It could be really easy to include options like "Play through again with DQ3's music", or "Play through again with custom characters modeled after Taloon (Torneko) and Yangus". These tiny differences could make 2nd and 3rd playthroughs even more desirable. There is plenty of space on a Wii DVD disk for these tiny content additions. (Attention Square-Enix reps: I have a lot more ideas like this. Hit me up. lulzzz.)
Remember the overworld. The overworld is super-important (exploration and discovery is key!), and with the size of a Wii DVD, it could be HUGE. Make it huge. Give us fun little caves to discover with simple treasures inside. Take a page from DQ3 and model the overworld map to be loosely based on Earth. This kind of familiarity with the overworld is incredibly fun. A slightly-different-but-similar-to-Earth overworld map gets people thinking "Oh... this is probably New Zealand... but it's way over there! It reminds me of Pangea."
Content is not always restricted to the game itself. Include a fold-out map in the box. Give us a detailed full-color manual with the game. Print a chart of spells and skills on the back of the map. Taking the game world outside of the game and into your living room is cruicial to creating a lasting experience-- just ask Bethesda. You could take a lot form the Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion "experience" and make it your own. Also, take a page from Final Fantasy VI: Give the in-game characters default names, but let us change them if we want. I personally enjoy using the names of my friends and family who have passed away, as it gives me the feeling of adventuring with them in the afterlife. This is my favorite thing to do in a JRPG, and it is always a huge disappointment when I don't get the option to rename my characters. This is MY GAME. I don't care what you wanted the characters names to be-- They're mine now. I paid for them, I am going to train and customize and clothe and heal and take care of them. Mine.

It would be great to see the "perfect" Dragon Quest game for Wii. I believe it's the perfect platform to do the job right now. Point-and-click and drag-and-drop seem like completely obvious evolutions for menu-based JRPG games, but it seems that developers are uninterested in using the Wii pointer like a mouse (this is puzzling).

My primary concern is having to swing the damn remote around for every battle. Let's just hope they're at least in-touch with Wii owners enough to know better than that :P

How else could Square-Enix make sure hat Dragon Quest X works well with the Wii's capabilities and shortcomings? I'm interested to hear about what other fans of Wii and the Dragon Quest series have to say. Do you think I'm wrong about any of this stuff? I really want to know what you guys think.

Some information/speculation about how the 3DS operates UPDATE

2010-07-08T19:27:00.000-07:00

I was reading a bit over at Disruptive Sketchbook, and I thought I'd try to translate a recent post about the operation of the 3DS for everyone here, as some of this seems like new information to me. Apparently primary writer of the site, Urian, has some connection with developers that have had a closer look at it. Very interesting stuff! Here is my best shot at translating this article... it's not perfect by any means:

I can not reveal much, because of an NDA, but I'll try to explain the way that the console generates real-time 3D stereo based on talks I've had in the last few weeks with people who are developing for the console.

It turns out that the system is NOT a dual GPU running in parallel as speculated. Instead, the console runs a dual framebuffer (but via a single GPU) to achieve the parallel frames. The system sacrifices the SSAA abilities of the GPU, whose execution time is 8ms.

The 3ds produces its effects as follows:

Each framebuffer generates a new frame intermittently, every 8ms.
Every 16ms the two frames generated are shown on the screen (for stereo 3D without glasses).
The geometric capability is ~16K polygons per frame.
The 3DS framerate, like the original DS and DSi, is fixed at 60fps

The version of the PICA200 which was designed for 3DS is not able to allow direct access to the SSAA *and* generate the second image quickly enough, so Nintendo sacrificed the SSAA in order to generate the second frames without using a second GPU.

Some interesting stuff nonetheless :) I'm not so knowledgeable about all that fancy techno-talk, but I do love me some speculation! I also love me some sexy 3DS :) Thanks for the info Urian!

(Source, Disruptive Sketchbook (en Espanol))

UPDATE: Thanks to the commenters below (kyle_hyde and The CronoLink) for help with the translation! I have updated the main text to reflect these changes as best I could.

UPDATE 2: Urian from Disruptive Sketchbook has commented on this post to provide further information and insight. Here is the additional information provided:

"Hi tactics, I am Urian.

DS and 3DS have their frame rate completely fixed, every 16ms (1/60fps) it copies the information from the frame buffer to the screen, in the case of 3DS some people speculated that the Nintendo would use a second GPU but you don't need a second one if you have the ability to render 2 images in enough time.

Super Sampling AntiAliasing is one of effects that cost more time for a GPU and more when we have a handheld GPU, it is a loss of time to put a second GPU only because you want a little more image quality when because the low resolution that a handheld system has you will have aliasing problems ever.

In other words... why do you need the ability to draw some special FX that only the graphic whores are able to appreciate when with a single GPU you can:

*Reduce Cost.

*Increase Battery Life

*For developers is more easy to program since they don't hace to sync both GPUs

To put a dual GPU is a very bad idea and from the info that I have Nintendo has discarded this approach for the Stereo screen, another subject is the bottom screen that uses an improved version of DS GPU."

It is great to get more additional information! Thank you very much for visiting :)

Arc Rise Fantasia: Where young voice-actors go to die

2010-07-08T16:17:00.000-07:00

Have you ever heard such terrible voice acting in your entire life? This game has been on my radar for like a year or something as a JRPG I had a lot of interest in checking out, but after seeing this video, I am not feeling too good. In fact, I am really wishing I hadn't excitedly clicked to watch this video. Why would anyone even release this? Are they trying to sabotage its sales potential or something?

Is this the kind of "crafstmanship" we can expect from the other parts of the game? I don't understand why they would even waste the little money they did on voice acting if it had to be this horrendous. I have been completely turned off of this game by this video, which is really unfair to the teams that wrote the code and designed the environments.

I may still check this out at some point just because I've been excited about it for so long, but I can't help but think that they just don't care about the game if they're willing to even put voice acting this ridiculous into it. Let's hope, for their sake, that you can toggle voice-acting on-and-off, and that the default is OFF.

Objection! Unsuccessful troll is unsuccessful

2010-07-06T18:46:00.000-07:00

Wedbush Morgan Securities Analyst Michael Pachter has finally been completely exposed.

If you pay much attention to the "news" in the video game industry, you'll most likely know who Michael Pachter is. He's the guy who is always making crazy nonsensical analyses, twisting words and fighting semantics, and seems to be attempting to distort game journalism by creating "distracting" "rumors" by interviewing with gaming sites/blogs, going on TV, and even hosting his own internet "show" called Pach-Attack.

While we're reminiscing, here are my 5 favorite Michael "Manipulate the Market" Pachter moments:

5) Pachter predicts that Microsoft's Project Natal (now known as "Kinect") will release for $50 (Source, October 2009)

4) Pachter calls for Nintendo to unbundle Wii Sports from the retail Wii packaging and lower the price to $199 to increase sales, and actually says this right after christmas 2007 when Wii was still sold out everywhere. (Source, January 2008)

3) Pachter releases a huge report, predicting that PlayStation 3 will control 45 percent of the market, Microsoft will control 35 percent and Nintendo will control just 20 percent through 2010. (Source, May 2006)

2) Pachter proclaims the impending release of a "Wii HD" time after time over a span of 12 months (Nov '08-'09), and then instead of admitting that he was wrong for all that time, instead claims that "PlayStation Move is the Wii HD" (Source, March 2010)

1) Pachter calls the PSP Go a ripoff, but just days later rescinds his comment and formally apologizes to Sony for the "mistake". (Source, June 2009)

Pachter's not just wrong a lot. Pachter's not even just completely wrong a lot. Pachter is so hilariously wrong that anyone paying attention absolutely must question whether or not he has alterior motives. How can someone who is paid (and apparently pretty well) to analyze a market for a living be so consistently and so completely out of touch with reality?

I am so thankful this day, that "professional" "analyst" Michael Pachter has taken precious time out of his busy schedule to send Malstrom this email: It's amazing how a calculated and defensive response can sometimes backfire and be the ultimate admission of guilt.

The glorious return of Dragon Warrior

2010-07-04T10:13:00.000-07:00

Yeah yeah... it's called Dragon "Quest" in America now, I know... but does everyone know that?

Meh... regardless, I am very very excited to have my Dragon (whatever) back where it belongs, on a Nintendo console again, after 18 years.

Sure... we get Dragon Quest Monsters, Slime Mori-Mori, and even Dragon Quest Swords on Nintendo consoles, but come on: That's like saying "You have Final Fantasy!" because we get the shitty Crystal Chronicles abortions every few years. No. I'm talking about the honest-to-goodness, main numbered series of the game. You know, the ones that Squeenix actually cares about and puts some effort into? Yeah, those.

The seeds from which my Dragon Warrior/Quest love grew
I have a long history with Dragon Quest. I'll never forget the TV commercials for the original Dragon Warrior on NES. For an 8 year old, it was empowering. magical, and completely enthralling. At this point, I had already played The Legend of Zelda, Ultima: Exodus, and other simple RPGs-- creating maps and charts, painstakingly detailing my quests and my next goals moving forward, recording strategies for certain bosses/enemies, and being thoroughly delighted with the whole process of doing so. That wasn't something that I would've necessarily undertaken on my own without any prompting as an ADHD-riddled child-brain, but I was fortunate to have the guidance of my Father (Dad) and my Grandmother (Granny) to help keep me excited and focused. I begged and pleaded to get Dragon Warrior for Christmas, and they obliged happily.

The first thing that comes to mind in the love-story saga between DQ and I is always the music. I remember getting a feeling from the music of Dragon Warrior that no other game at that time delivered. Along with the setting, language, and content of the game's universe, it was a truly epic experience that really set me on the path of wanting to read fantasy books, learn to play guitar, and draw dragons and shit on my homework instead of doing the problems. For better or worse :)

Dragon Warrior 2, 3, and 4, would all come out each year for the following 3 years, and the routine was the same (and even more delightful with each new iteration). Any combination of the 3 of us: Myself, my Gran, and my Dad, would gather around the TV with our mechanical pencils and graph paper, and make maps, charts, and strategies to use for the next 100 times we played the games together. Good times. These were not multiplayer games, but were totally multiplayer games for us. We were the heroes/heroines, and we would even name the characters accordingly when given the option.

Back to 2010
Dragon Quest IX is a multiplayer game, and is designed specifically for this purpose. I find it amazing that its taken this long, frankly, but then again, I guess it took "moving to a portable" to really make this a reality anyway. I'll be picking up a copy each for both myself and my Dad on launch day, and I absolutely cannot wait to start our adventure together. It's heartbreakingly unfortunate that Gran passed away years back, and won't be able to join in the adventure with us, as I know that this would've absolutely been the light of her simple life in the year 2010 if she were here.

Marketing to the expanded audience
Square-Enix and Nintendo have made it abundantly clear that they, with Dragon Quest IX, really want to make this game resonate with the American audience in the same way that it does with the Japanese audience. The Dragon Quest series is nothing short of a cultural phenomenon in Japan, and has been for decades. Obviously this is something they would like to replicate in other markets-- the Dragon Quest "slime" is like "Micky Mouse", as far as character recognition goes, in Japan. That's a big deal.

So they want it to become a phenomenon here. Well, they've got a few things right in my humble opinion: Multiplayer and other social aspects in regard to DS connectivity, seemingly tons of content with tons of free DLC content too, highly customizable characters and scenarios, and the classic simple-to-learn formula of the battle-system and gameplay. Demonstrating these to the expanded audience shouldn't be too difficult with print ads and TV/internet video commercials, but I believe that something else is needed.

New Ultimate Plumbing Bros. Wii
With the recent rumor/news that New Super Mario Bros Wii has exceeded 15 million copies sold in just 7 months on the market, it is abundantly clear that the expanded audience is interested in returning to the old-school style and values that gaming once presented many years ago. For Nintendo, it was easy to create the name for this new Mario game-- Naturally, the name "New Super Mario Bros Wii" was very clearly an indication to the expanded audience (and the old-school) that this was a return to classic Super Mario Bros gameplay... so a question about naming the new Dragon Quest comes to mind for me: Does the expanded audience and old-school (like my Dad, for example) even know that Dragon Quest == Dragon Warrior? I'm not sure that they do. Luckily for my Dad, he has me to keep him up to date on this sort of thing, but I'm sure there are a few million people who thoroughly enjoyed at least DW3 and DW4 that have no idea that this is the same series of games.

I believe that if Nintendo wants to successfully market Dragon Quest to the expanded audience, that one of the things they should do is try a TV commercial that clearly demonstrates the connection between Dragon Quest and Dragon Warrior. Many many companies have had to liken new products or services to old ones after going through a name change ("formerly known as... is the new...") and I think it has been successful for a lot of them. I really hope that the marketing firm in charge of producing marketing materials for DQ9 figures this one out, and can create some sort of montage-style commercial that shows the evolution of Dragon Warrior for NES all the way through Dragon Quest for DS, and I hope they're smart enough to use not only the visuals but also the music and sound effects (such as "Casts a Spell!" and "Excellent/Critical Hit!") because these have always been an absolutely vital part of the Dragon Warrior/Quest experience. With the right marketing, I believe that they could reach sales of over 5 million by bringing people from ages 25-65 back into the fold by striking some nostalgia nerves.

Welcome back
I bought a PS1 for Dragon Warrior 7 (which broke and stopped playing games about 6 months after my second-in-a-row playthrough of it), and bought a second-hand PS2 for Dragon Quest 8 (which broke and started getting DREs coincidentally right after I finished DQ8 and was just about to start a second playthrough), and I am thankful that I don't have to buy a whole damn system just to play Dragon Quest 9. I remember at the very start of this console generation, after becoming aware of PS3's "Five-hundred Ninety-Nine US Dollars!" price point being dreadfully frightened that I'd be forced to buy (or hopefully borrow) one for the next true Dragon Quest game. Thanks, Square-Enix-- you made me happy for once :P The decision to bring it to DS, however, was a completely obvious and inevitable one, thanks to, primarily, its runaway success in Japan. Sony can't be happy about that though...

One final note
At least on this one, I won't have to deal with the agonizing pain and suffering that comes along with "dinner being ready" and not being able to get to a save point before my Mom clicked in the power button. Being an adult does have some benefits after all, I guess :)

The shortcomings of camera technology

2010-06-30T18:59:00.000-07:00

As the realities of the technology that lies within Kinect come to light, gamers are starting to realize that this sort of implementation for motion control has some very severe limitations. When "Project Natal" and "Sony's Wand" were first being introduced to the world last year, it seemed everybody in the gaming press was hot to jump on the bandwagon and suggested that "Nintendo would be beaten at their own game". The technology behind these two competing devices seemed so amazing at their first unveiling, from the concept videos that were shown by Microsoft and Sony.

Journalists asked Nintendo what they thought of this technology. Knowingly, Nintendo of America's President, Reggie Fils-Aime, had this to say:

"We have been very familiar with that technology. I have personally seen a lot of iterations of similar technology." (Source: Cubed3)

Nintendo had been looking at this type of technology-- Using cameras to track motion-- for Wii long before it was actually born. You don't think so? Don't forget: Sony's been using EyeToy longer than the Wii's been around. Obviously, with the success of the PS2 still strong in the minds of gamers, this was definitely something Nintendo had looked at.

The problem is, you can't keep a competitive price in-line with strong enough camera hardware to get a great result. So what do you end up with? Specs like the recently revealed ones about Kinect. From Engadget:

Field of view is relatively limited, something we could sense when spending time with Kinect at E3. The unit sees 57 degrees of horizontal and 43 degrees of vertical, with a 27 degree physical tilt to keep you in the action.
Depth of view is similarly strict, ranging from 4 feet to 11.5 feet.
Skeletal tracking is limited to two active players at a time, as we knew, but the system can at least keep its eye on up to six people at once
Resolution, because we know you were wondering, is detailed as well: 320 x 240, 16-bit at 30 fps (we're guessing this is the depth camera), 640 x 480, 32-bit color at 30 fps (yeah, this is the color one), and 16-bit audio at 16 kHz.

So, it costs $150, can only be played while standing up, is only good for 2 people at a time, and can't be played from anywhere but directly in front of the screen within 11 feet? Yes, clearly they're going to beat the Wii at their own game.

While none of these exact limitations are confirmed yet for Sony's Move, expect similar ones. If the thing only costs $99 (and you know they can't afford to play razor-and-blades anymore) then a limited depth-of-view and field-of-view are incoming.

We also already know that Move can't offer "full" four-player local multiplayer support. This, hilariously, has nothing to do with the camera technology, but actually is a product of the limitations of Bluetooth. Sony decided to opt-out of having a cord attaching their remote-and-nunchuk two-handed combo motion controls (for deeper and more complex games) and therefore were forced to use 2 Bluetooth connections per pair. Unfortunately, the PlayStation 3 is limited to a maximum of 7 simultaneous connections.

There are also latency issues with both of the camera-based control setups. Kinect is reported to have a lag of about 1/10 of a second, which is decidedly more lag than Wii, and Sony's Move is reported to lag a bit as well, and is discernably inferior to Wii.

If latency wasn't a problem, and the motion control's latency ability with these two systems were on-par with Wii's barely-noticeable latency, would that be good enough anyway? These systems have "multi-core processors" and "hard drives" and "HD capability"! Surely they can outperform the tiny little Wii in something as "simple" as "casual motion controls"... Right? ...Right???

Microsoft continues with Kinect damage control, more pathetic than ever

2010-06-27T22:23:00.000-07:00

Microsoft's Kinect front-man Kudo Tsunoda (you may know him as the douchebag that wears sunglasses while speaking at press conferences) had some very bizarre things to say during a recent interview about Kinect's launch lineup of games. Continuing to attempt to conceal Kinect's obvious shittiness, Microsoft has apparently resorted to comparing crappy kinect games with... Just read the quotes:

"I just don't think the games gaming press or core gamers would enjoy all necessarily come down to whether you're shooting something. If you think about a game like Mario Bros., would you say Mario Bros. is a core or casual game? That's exactly what we're doing with the Kinect products."

Okay, so you're name-dropping Mario Bros (which your dumb ass kinda has no right to do to begin with, but whatever), but twice in one sentence? Okay, we'll let that slide I guess... Please, continue.

"But if you look at River Rush, from Kinect Adventures, that in a lot of ways is like a platformer game. It's all the same things you see in platformer games. The way you summed up how you would feel about Mario Bros. is exactly the way we look at the Kinect games. There's the core gaming depth and skills, and the casual approachability that lets you get into it and play it right away. That's what we focus on in all of the gameplay. When we say games are approachable, it doesn't mean shallow. It just means you can get in and experience the game for what it is."

...yeah, and then he finishes out with this:

"What are the standard definition of things? If you say core, it really doesn't mean it's an action game where you're shooting people. And that's what it is. If I came to you today and I was like, hey, we're going unveil this new game: it's a plumber, and you're going to be going through pipes, and you're going to be jumping on turtles, you'd be asking the exact same questions that you're asking about the Kinect experiences."

Are you fucking kidding me? Okay, first of all I'm going to assume that since you're using the word "platformer" that you're actually referring to Super Mario Bros. since the original Mario Bros. was not a platformer in any way. Being such a prominent figure at a (so-called) gaming company, I would think that you might know the difference. Putting that aside, let's assume that you mean Super Mario Bros. (the platformer one!), and put the absurdity into list form:

Ways River Rush from Kinect Adventures is like Super Mario Bros:

Your character can jump on stuff

On that note, why don't we list the ways thatRiver Rush from Kinect Adventures is like Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2:

Your character can jump on stuff

Ways River Rush from Kinect adventures is like Contra:

Your character can jump on stuff

Ways River Rush from Kinect adventures is like Fallout 3:

Your character can jump on stuff

Ways River Rush from Kinect Adventures is like Metroid Prime:

Your character can jump on stuff

Look at that! The list goes on and on! River Rush from Kinect Adventures is like a TON of games! That's fantastic, Kudo! Nevermind, of course, that in Super Mario Bros. you also attack enemies, earn power ups, collect coins, slide down flagpoles, duck down pipes, swim around under water, kick around turtle shells, play as an actual character and not a self-made avatar, SCROLL FROM LEFT TO RIGHT, and save a princess at the end. These are unimportant things that barely affect the experience at all anyways.

Let me help you make some comparisons, that you have my full permission to use in future interviews, for some other Kinect launch games:

Kinectimals is like Dragon Quest 5 because there is a tiger in it!

JoyRide is like Alan Wake because you can drive a car!

Dance Central is like Dead or Alive because you get to see jiggling tits!

MotionSports is like... (I'll let you figure this one out yourself).

You and your team of marketers at Microsoft can spin and backpedal all you want, Kudo, but all of your customers (the loyal Xbox360-playing gamers) are not as stupid as you're treating them. Everyone sees Kinect for what it is: A very shallow Wii rip-off which is your new focus. Your E3 press conference was almost all about Kinect and its shitty-looking games, and your customers know exactly why. Don't try to convince them to buy Kinect: They don't want it. Like Sony, you've spent years calling motion-controlled gaming "gimmicky" (among other insults), so the people you've preached to all this time are not particularly happy to see you change your tune all of a sudden.

Don't worry, you proved with Vista that when you make a disastrous mistake you can just market your way out of it. Good luck with that.

PlayStation 4 is a myth

2010-06-22T21:10:00.000-07:00

Saucy headline, right? Snazzy graphic to go with it, too. It's an attention-grabber, I know.

Anyway. I had mentioned in my last post Confirmed: The Bomb has been Dropped how I believe that there will be no PlayStation 4, and that Sony will very likely bow out of the video game market after the PS3 has run it's course. This statement was challenged by the commenter Eddie on that post. I made a quick comment back, but as I started thinking more and more about it, I thought that I should create a more fleshed out post with some actual facts and sources to help provide some insight into this belief for anyone out there who actually might read this blog.

Reader Eddie's reasoning doesn't seem off-base at face value. Here is the quote:

"What makes you say that? PS3 will sell around 75 -100 million easily. Gamecube sold 21 million. But Nintendo didn't exit the hardware market at all!"

Now, while I certainly don't believe that the PS3 will ever make 100 million sales "easily", I will entertain that it is possible (however remotely) that they'll make 100 million sales on the PS3. Compared to GameCube's total sales of about 22 million, that is pretty amazing. Unfortunately for Sony, "total number of consoles sold" does not even begin to tell the whole story.

The ghosts of Christmases past

The video game sector of the entertainment industry is ruthless and extremely difficult in which to sustain profit-- Especially making hardware. Don't believe me? Try asking some of your favorite console-makers of the last 30 short years: Atari, Coleco, Commodore, Amiga, Hudson, WonderSwan, NeoGeo, Hudson, Philips, Apple, Panasonic, and even Sega. You may note that I've only listed the consoles that I considered "major" here-- Many more companies have created game consoles and failed in addition to these. How many of these consoles were destroyed by Nintendo and/or Sony? Every one of them... but let's be real: Most of them were destroyed singlehandedly by Nintendo.

Money Talks

Back to the subject at hand: What did all these console companies have in common? The inability to make money in the video game market. Yes, it's really that simple: Turns out, making money is kind of important to running a successful business... and not just any wise-crackin' monkey can run a successful business of course. Companies this huge need capital, investors, shareholders, and sometimes even a board of directors. Sony is a gigantic international conglomerate which depends on the many "arms" of the corporation to create large amounts of revenue so that they can afford to expand the business into new markets, and they depend heavily on the approval of their shareholders, investors, and board of directors to do so. To put it simply, these people are the "wheels" that provide the means for the "drivers" like Howard Stringer (the Sony CEO), and the other executives to do their jobs and make Sony successful.

Sony is very much controlled by these entities and individuals. After the runaway success of the PS2 however, Sony seemed to be nearly infallible, and the executives (including the infamous Ken Kutaragi) were given a lot of freedom to develop their next console. Sony invested around 2 billion dollars into the R&D of Playstation 3. At the time, however, this was seen as the logical next step for the entertainment giant: The PS2 was a clear winner. Invest heavily in PS3, and it's sure to follow in PS2's footsteps, right?

Marty! We have to go BACK!

Let's turn back the clock again for just a moment. The Nintendo GameCube, while considered a "failure" by analysts and even Nintendo themselves still made a profit from the day it was launched. Nintendo has never follwed the "razor-and-blades" business model, (which is to sell your "razor" at a loss, and make up for that loss by selling many "blades" at a profit), and so Nintendo's 22 million units sold (along with the very successful Game Boy Advance), still provided them the cashflow they needed to invest in another console themselves. In the PS3 era, however, as Microsoft began to gain a foothold in the market, Sony believed they were forced to go the "razor-and-blades" route in order to compete with Microsoft at all. Microsoft is very much a "razor-and-blades" company, and they proved it by boasting amazing computational power and a deep and connected online platform for their upcoming console at the time. Sony's board, investors and shareholders (their "wheels") were not happy at all with the prospect of Microsoft "stealing" the video game market away from them-- It had been immensely profitable during the PS2 era, and they were not ready to let that go without a fight... But also, this was an "entertainment gateway" into the public's living rooms. A set-top box of this nature was surely the way to dominate in Sony's other entertainment divisions: Movies and music.

As Sony and Microsoft geared up to be "loss leaders" with their new consoles, many wondered what route Nintendo would go: How could "little Nintendo" compete with these international conglomerates-- powerhouses-- in the electronics and entertainment industries? Nintendo again released a console that did not fit the "razor-and-blades" model (as they never do) and came out with Wii.

Sony (and Microsoft) did not see Wii as a threat whatsoever. Even many pundits and analysts believed that the Wii was an inevitable failure, and that it would likely be Nintendo's last console (hahaha... but that's not what this article is about :P) and so they forged ahead. Laughing at, mocking, downplaying, and even insulting Nintendos "gimmicky" motion controls, Sony and their "wheels" felt very confident with the direction they were taking.

Fast-forward to a year after launch: PS3 is incurring severe losses, and Wii has skyrocketed in popularity. Still, Sony (along with many many others) believed that Wii was a fad and would soon disappear. Putting all its faith in Blu-Ray, Sony's "wheels" were concerned only with getting more "razors" (the PS3 itself) into consumers hands, so that more "blades" (software/games, Blu-ray movies, accessories, etc) could be sold. They decided to release new PS3 bundles with altered hardware configurations, and even cut the price on their original model already-- They needed to improve the "perceived value" of the PS3 (while cutting the cost to manufacture it) so that more consumers would buy it as soon as possible. Blu-ray must be successful. All the while, of course, Sony is taking heavy losses on each PS3 sold.

Fast-forward another year, and Sony has not only confusingly reconfigured hardware a few more times, but has also removed functionality in an attempt to cut costs on the console to reduce losses. Why would they intentionally remove PS2 functionality, for example, if not because they were pressured by their "wheels" to cut cut cut (and to keep people buying the still-profitable PS2)? It certainly wasn't because their customers wanted this functionality removed :) By this time, it is important to recall as well that Wii's popularity was still absolutely insane. It was flying off shelves, and was still sold out at every retailer that carried them consistently. You couldn't even find one on eBay for less than the cost of a brand new PS3.

Pressure on Howard Stringer to "fix" this situation was starting to build. Sony needed to beat the Wii at its own game, before it was too late, and get a piece of that massive pie. After years or mocking and insults toward motion controls, Sony now has just "up and decided" to present their own at next year's E3. It is also important to remember that Sony's PSP (and its other new digital movie format, UMD) at this point is getting absolutely spanked by the Nintendo DS, and was not at all the success that Sony, market analysts, and even many consumers believed it would be.

Sony looks in to the possibilities of "direct download games" (also called Downloadable Content, or DLC), and realizes that there are a lot of reasons for them to go this direction, from a business standpoint. The content is very easily controlled, retailers are no longer needed (saving on overhead costs), and the customer can never expect to re-sell their games or even get a refund! The PSP Go was born, and showed at the following E3 along with Sony's "new motion controller".

The PSP Go launched at a higher price than the original PSP, and much to Sony's chagrin, was viewed by consumers as having "less value" for a number of reasons. The PSP Go was an absolute failure in terms of ROI (Return on Investment) as well as Total Units Sold.

Here today, gone tomorrow

All of this build-up brings us back to the present. Sony is readying their motion controllers which, believe it or not, is really just a desperate attempt to recoup. They have lost more money on PS3 than they ever earned during the PS2s entire lifespan, bringing the total losses of the PS3 to about $5 billion dollars, and they had been incurring losses on every PS3 sold up until April 2010, when the PS3 finally began to sell for more money than it costs to produce.

The PS3 has been on the market for about 4 years now, and the graphics technology and processing power (two of the PS3s primary selling points throughout its young life) are already dated. Many personal computers (not just enthusiast gamers' PCs) are already capable of much more than the PS3 is in these departments, and that gap can only widen as more time goes by. This is the time in a console's life-cycle (at the absolute latest) where your "wheels" would normally green-light the beginning of R&D for your next console.

You make the call
Tell me: If you were the "wheels", and you watched your "drivers" take all the massive success of the PS2 and flush it down the toilet along with another couple billion to boot in just a short 4 year period, how enthusiastic would you be to give them the go-ahead to invest another $2+billion into R&D for their next console?

It doesn't even stop there, though, really. Sony's "wheels" watch the market very closely. There is no doubt in my mind that they were being silenced by Sony's "drivers" with promises of a "3d revolution", and that Sony's new 3d push for gaming would be the PS3's savior. The "wheels" may have even believed it to a degree: despite the ridiculous cost of entry and the fledgling and flawed technology, there is a very strong amount of consumer interest in home 3d entertainment technology. Of course, the inevitable has happened, and Nintendo is making an attempt to nip this in the bud and deliver the "death-blow" to Sony's 3d push before it is even out of the gate by producing cheaper, more accessible, and more desirable 3d effects on their next handheld, the 3DS. Sony's "wheels" just got a lot more nervous.

The skills to pay the bills

Creating a new console doesn't just take money either. It takes insight, creativity, and the ability to foresee and predict upcoming market trends. Sony has clearly demonstrated over the past 15 years that, if they ever had the ability to do these things, they absolutely do not now. The world sees Sony's motion control direction for exactly what it is: A direct result of Nintendo's success with expanded audience gamers-- and a scramble to copy their success. Sony has a long, long, history of copying Nintendo's innovations after all.

The Biggest Loser

Conglomerates and other gigantic multi-national corporations survive and stay profitable by focusing on areas where they are strong, investing in new markets, and "trimming the fat" so-to-speak when a division or branch of the company is underperforming.

Ask IBM-- In the early '00s, IBM's "wheels" were wondering what the hell they were doing in markets where they didn't belong, and put into place one of the biggest and most influential company restructuring plans of all time, and you know what? It's been pretty successful so far (but don't tell that to the thousands that lost their jobs over it).

I think that Sony's video game division can be very easily and accurately defined as an underperforming division, to put it lightly.

The 10-year plan

I believe that Sony's "wheels" have already made the decision to stop creating video game hardware, and are going to make the "drivers" do whatever they can to squeeze any positive cashflow out of the PS3, no matter how long it takes.

Myth Busted

As the company's share value continues to struggle, it is time for Sony to remove itself from markets where it is underperforming. Investing billions more into creating another video game console is just bad business.

To scratch but the surface

2010-06-21T15:31:00.001-07:00

I remember IGN when I was a kid. What it is now is some other beast. Horns, talons, and a very odd and blank stare. It hobbles about, shrouding itself in fanciful linens, and as it opens it's maw it squawks out a horrid noise.

I refer to, of course, this odd mixture of premature ejaculate:

There's so much mixed in here. Who ever wrote it can't seem to make up their mind -- Casual Gaming bad...NINTENDO ROCKS! But Microsoft and Sony are trying their hand at it. POSSIBLE NEW VIRTUAL BOY or it'll be tooootally good.

Did we mention that Nintendo sees Apple as a competitor? Yeah. iPad is 1337.

At 1:13, IGN touts that Sony is trying to prove that Motion Control isn't just random stick waggling.

I ask you, if you're not moving, is it motion control? The guy is just sitting there with what could be two dicks in his hand, deriving pleasure from GENERIC SAND SHOOTER. Just as good with a gamepad, and they most likely deserve each other.

The point of motion control is to have more creative space. I've always seen the option of motion control as an additive to game developers -- another way for their customers to interact and, shockingly, become more addicted to the game itself....perhaps even becoming, dare I say it, fans!

Like all of the blended mess that is poured into the Virtual Entertainment Industry, motion control is just another slice of the pie that helps us "resonate" with our games. One day, developers are going to get over their tendencies to half-ass the controls and we're going to see another Rare come out of the works. Do you remember Rare? You should. Circa 1997, 1998 of course. Anything before 2005. But even then their masterpieces were painted between 97 - 98.

Look upon this list:

Battletoads (& Double Dragon)

Donkey Kong Country (1,2,3)

Killer Instinct

GoldenEye 007

Diddy Kong Racing

Banjo-Kazooie ( and banjo-tooie)

Jet Force Gemini

Donkey Kong 64

Perfect Dark

Conker’s Bad Fur Day

Think about that line-up for a second. Let nostalgia roll over a bit. Ok. Now imagine someone did that again -- with Motion Control. So when they say it's not about random stick waggling -- god damnit it's ABSOLUTELY about waggling a stick. But doing it so intuitively that it's not so much waggling as it is throwing a fishing pole, or scaling a wall, or throwing a punch.

The third party that does that for us wins.

Confirmed: The Bomb has been Dropped

2010-06-20T11:44:00.000-07:00

I was shocked to figure out the truth: Nintendo is literally (and very deliberately) attempting to disrupt Sony's (and Microsoft's) HOME CONSOLES with a HANDHELD. It's unprecedented!

Ever since GDC2006 I've known that Nintendo's next move was 3d-- It just never occurred to me what they really had planned.

I read 2 interviews in the last couple days, one with Iwata and one with Reggie, where they both said quite clearly that Nintendo has been "looking at" and "planning to go" to 3d for over a decade. It's funny what, once they set their sights on destroying Sony*, they decided to do instead:

They waited, like a tiger stalking an unsuspecting bunnyrabbit, for Sony to rush into crappy and expensive 3d technology (shutter glasses. yuck.), and only then did they decide to pounce. They waited for Sony to do this with their home console, deliberately, so that they could use the 3ds to disrupt the same console a second time. Nintendo literally baited them into copying the motion controller and let them keep the illusion that 3d would be their "leg up" (and their savior hahaha), and then did this. I just cannot stop laughing about it: It's the final nail in the coffin!

I sincerely believe that Sony will exit the video game market once the PS3 has run its course. With Nintendo making them look like fools time and time again, why would Sony's board of directors and shareholders allow them to sink another few hundred million into another console?

Sony did this to themselves. Check out this post about how Sony has set themselves up for Move to fail that I wrote back in August of last year. Sony's own executives and staff members have been trolling motion controls along with viral marketers for over 3 years (while, along with Microsoft, creating and perpetuating this anti-gamer "hardcore mentality"), but has now decided to release their own (backpedaling all the way), and they're just ripe to get annihilated this Christmas. The "hardcore" aren't interested in Move, the "casuals" aren't interested in Move, and this Christmas Nintendo has set up to make Sony's 3d push irrelevant with the superior 3d technology on the 3ds.

We don't know for sure that Nintendo is going to launch 3ds at Christmastime, but I think it's a pretty safe bet, as Nintendo has historically launched nearly every console and handheld they've ever made during the Christmas shopping season. Perhaps they believe that their old DS consoles still "have another Christmas in them", though, and will wait until Q1 2011? I could see this happening potentially, but I don't see the point: DS is in decline, and 3ds is poised to become the world's next must-have gadget.

A handheld disrupting the home console market, though... it's just too funny.

Note: If you do not understand what I mean about "set their sights on destroying Sony", it might be interesting for you to look at all the parallels this generation of consoles and handhelds. Malstrom is much better at making the comparison than i, but here are a couple examples that I can think of right off of the top of my head:

Nintendo always positions new hardware launches and press conferences right where they will damage Sony the most and "steal their thunder". They refused to announce a launch date for Wii back in 2006, until Sony announced the launch date for PS3. Shortly thereafter, they announced that the Wii would launch just a few days after PS3 did. Much more recently, Nintendo scheduled their pre-e3 press conference to end right before Sony's started-- They knew Sony would be touting 3d games, so what did they do? They showed off the 3DS at the end of the conference. People were still "high" from the experience as they walked through the doors to Sony's conference and ended up being thoroughly unimpressed by Sony's 3d showing. This is just 2 examples: Nintendo has been deliberately attacking "Sony's thunder" this entire generation, and it's very clear when you look closely.

My guess as to why the 3ds didn't get a price or launch date? I am pretty certain, actually, that they're simply waiting to see if Sony will make any announcements that they can "steal thunder" from. They have "no reason" to announce a launch date or price at this time, and they probably can't anyways since the 3ds is still in development.

Not really about video games, but absolutely about video games.

2010-06-18T12:35:00.000-07:00

More than likely, you all know Matt:

Why do I bring up Matt? The video below. Please watch it.

Did you get to the very end? If not, watch all of it.

Did you watch it? Thank you.

That's called fun. The man danced around the world and, for fun, got people to DANCE WITH HIM. And here he is, giving a speech. A boring little blahblah about how he did X, Y, and Z.

And then he asked if people wanted to dance on stage.

A few people shouted yes. They stood. Some more followed suit....soon the entire stage was filled with people, all being goofy because it was fun, because they could. Because they wanted to play.

That's what fun is. And it's no different than when you play video games alone or with friends. When you play, you do so to have fun.

Do it now, if only to witness it.

2010-06-17T17:45:00.001-07:00

Interplay apparently didn't lose:

http://fallout-on-line.com/

Yeah. More on THAT later while I just sort of bask.

Yeah, I'm a fanboy :(

More info has started coming in on Sony's 3D offerings...

2010-06-16T20:04:00.000-07:00

...and it's not all good. I wasn't really thinking about the technology behind Sony's (and others) super-expensive 3D televisions yesterday. I was caught up in the hype (like most everybody else), and I had forgotten that it's not like "Captain EO" or "How to Train your Dragon". They don't use those thin grey-lensed plastic glasses-- They use electronically-controlled shutter glasses (which run about $150 a pair, btw).

This has created problems for people playing their demos at E3. If you've ever seen 3D with shutter glasses, you'll know how they work. I have tried them before, at an nVidia kiosk over at Fry's Electronics. They kinda suck.

Let's start with how they work for anyone who doesn't know, or has forgotten: Shutter glasses are "blocking" the image from either one of your eyes alternately at a very fast speed, and the TV is in sync with them, displaying images like: left-eye-image, then right-eye-image, then left-eye-image, and so on at a very fast speed.

So why do they suck in general? Well, the fact that they're shutting each of your eyes alternatively means that by nature, they're blocking out light. Your image on-screen is dark and often hazy because of how the technology is tricking your eyes. OK, so it makes it a bit dark... that's not that big of a deal, right? Right. Except that playing games presents some other issues.

Sony (and Microsoft of course) have been hyping HD this generation: True HD (1080p). They've also been touting their consoles ability to play games at 60 frames per second, so that the image is smooth and fluid. On the subject of frame-rate, lets remember that Hollywood movies usually run at 24 frames per second: This is the sweet spot that makes feature films look professional: Anything faster looks like how a soap opera does on TV-- "too real", and therefore "cheezy". When you're alternating images for the left and right eye consecutively, you effectively have to double the framerate for the video to keep the same fluidity that it has without shutter-glasses 3D technology. This works well for movies, as doubling the frame rate is only 48 frames per second-- a framerate that most devices can handle easily. For a game, however, this is a much different story.

The Playstation 3 isn't capable of displaying all of its super-polygonal amazing true HD graphics at 120 frames per second. Not even close. The fact is, most games can barely even hit 60 frames per second. Games like Killzone 2, Metal Gear Solid 4, and Uncharted look amazing in the graphics department, but usually don't run at 60 frames per second.

The thing is, even though Sony and Microsoft hyped True HD in 60fps, most gamers are at least satiated with 30fps, as a 30fps game doesn't really look bad, its just not as fluid-looking as 60fps. So, fine. However, as I stated earlier, most Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 games don't even run at 60fps with all their cutting edge graphics and technology, so you can't cut it in half to get the "acceptable" 30 fps. What do you do, as a game developer, now?

You start "saving processor power" so that the game can run at a faster framerate. How do you do this? Well, by nerfing the graphics of course. In order to get their games to run at 60fps (30fps in 3D), these games need to decrease their graphic fidelity, their number of objects/polygons on screen, along with their depth of field, and also lower the pixel resolution so that the processor can run the game fast enough.

Impressions are coming in all over the internet from game journalists playing Sony's 3D offerings on the show floor, and they're unanimously mediocre. The image is dark, the 3D depth is not that great (shutter glasses, as I said before, tend to make your vision a bit hazy), and on top of that, the graphics are dumbed down-- showing less special effects, and a whole lot more "jaggies" on screen because of a lowered resolution. No more 1080p True HD, no more top-notch graphics, and no more 60fps-- in exchange for a darkened screen and hazy depth-of-field.

It will be interesting to see how many people want to shell out $4-$5000 for a 3D TV, and $150 per person in the household to play games in this capacity. Very interesting indeed.

I still believe that 3D entertainment in the household will be the next big thing-- I'm just not convinced that shutter-glasses are the technology that will usher it in.

For now, I'll just take a 3DS, myself. I don't want to wear goofy glasses, I don't want my screen darkened, and the graphics are already not in HD, so there's no compromise between the game in 3D and the same game in 2D on the platform.

Perchance to MMO.

2010-06-16T12:01:00.000-07:00

For those of you on the MMO scene, there was some cool stuff certainly. I'd just like you all to take a look at these three movies.

Keep in mind, both show nothing worth really asking questions about...and Jesus, Bioware must pay out the ass for CG artists.

Warhammer has delivered, at least, some very interesting in game footage. While I glance upon it, it gives me a slight taste of Tabula Rasa. Call me skeptical, although I am quite excited to see it unfold.

Another attempt at what was an interesting MMO concept. Final Fantasy is a very obscure coin toss. 2009's comments by their developers were ambitious, promising that they had surveyed the MMO landscape. Some of the comments from those in the Alpha...well..They say different.

Above everything else, I see these games as rather clunky, and perhaps Star Wars taking home the "least awkward in show" cap. -- Why? Because while tip top graphics are fun, scalability is what allows a large audience to play.

And then to eventually become your core gamers. Among other things, naturally.

Something to think about.

8bitdream

Brenda Brathwaite: A salute and a question

My 3DS' identity crisis

Zelda 4: Minecraft

A Reasonable Bump

The hype around the 3DS anti-piracy system, and why it WILL be cracked

Hilarious.

The Great Content Divide

A Co-Op Gamers' Delight

A Love (?) Letter to Sony

Don't Cry For Me Yoshida

A Blunder from Downunder

Untapped Potential: Part 1

How not to screw up Dragon Quest X

Some information/speculation about how the 3DS operates *UPDATE*

Arc Rise Fantasia: Where young voice-actors go to die

Objection! Unsuccessful troll is unsuccessful

The glorious return of Dragon Warrior

The shortcomings of camera technology

Microsoft continues with Kinect damage control, more pathetic than ever

PlayStation 4 is a myth

To scratch but the surface

Confirmed: The Bomb has been Dropped

Not really about video games, but absolutely about video games.

Do it now, if only to witness it.

More info has started coming in on Sony's 3D offerings...

Perchance to MMO.

Some information/speculation about how the 3DS operates UPDATE