I do love me a good flying shooter game. While not so much into the realistic sim flying titles, such as Flight Simulator, give me an arcade-style jet game like Ace Combat 6, HAWX, and the amazing Crimson Skies and I'm a happy gamer (as a side note: why is there no next-gen sequel to Skies? You mean to tell me that a new 50 Cent game can get greenlit but Crimson Skies 2 can't? Epic fail).
So I approached the Xbox 360 game Over G Fighters with high hopes, being what looked like (at least according to the back of the box) a decent flying game. Sadly, those hopes very quickly crashed into the ground once I started playing the title.
I'm going to breeze past the sub-par graphics, lame story, crappy sound, the fact that the game completely froze while I was playing, and all of the other technical fail that makes up this game, and focus instead on a couple of major issues that ground this game.
The first is a lack of identity. It can't decide if it wants to be a sim-style flight game or an arcade-style flight game, meaning that rather than going with one or the other it gets stuck in the middle with the worst features of both. A game like Ace Combat succeeds because it strips away a lot of the realism for a fast flying experience, and while you still have to deal with crashing into things and stalling out, stuff like fuel and realistically limited ammunition are gone in order to make the game more fun to play. Likewise, a simulation like Flight Simulator goes in the other direction and has the player focus on all aspects of flying a plane, eschewing the fast thrills for getting as close to the real thing as you can get without a pilots license. Both fill a particular need for the right type of gamer, both are good in their own right, but Over G Fighters tries to mash the two together and fails on all fronts. There are too many stats and not enough speed for the arcade gamers to get into, but it doesn't have enough stats and doesn't fly realistically enough for the sim players to enjoy.
The biggest problem this game has, though, is that aforementioned lack of speed. Jets are fast, and part of playing a jet game is that thrill of feeling like you're speeding through the clouds. The planes in this game, though, act more like they're moving through mud. Even at the top virtual speed, you're never given the sense of power that these machines have. The enemy planes are no faster, and in most cases you can lock on and fire from a pretty extreme distance. I destroyed quite a few enemies well before they were more than a small dot on my screen, and well before there was any tense action. There was no thrill, no sense of danger, just a button press when the little reticle turned red. When I did engage the enemy jets in a dogfight, it was more like battling with armed buses than soaring through the sky fighting for your life.
Over G Fighters tries to fill the needs of different flight game players, but ends up letting them all down. While other flight games soar, this one is better left in the hangar.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Standing Up: An Interview With Hal Halpin
Recently, on Industry Gamers, ECA president Hal Halpin posted an article in which he explained the need for gamers and the industry to step up and break the negative stereotypes that surround gaming. Entitled Perception is Everything, it does a great job of laying out the need to not just sit back and let people say what they want about us and our chosen hobby (or profession). Instead of just passively listening to people say that we're all fat and lazy and violent because we play games, the blog talks about standing up for ourselves as gamers.
Really, Mr. Halpin does such a good job in his post that I know I won't do it justice by trying to explain it. So why don't you hit that link and hop on over to the actual post and give it a read. It's OK, I'll wait. Go and enjoy, and I'll still be here when you get back.
Welcome back. Did you have fun?
I was so impressed by what Hal was saying, that I contacted him and asked him if he could expand upon some of the points he made. He graciously accepted, which brings us to a historic event here: The Grumbly Gamer's first interview!
Without further ado, I present to you Mr. Hal Halpin of the ECA.
---
First off, please briefly detail what the ECA is, and what your role within the organization entails. If you could share the goals of the ECA, and perhaps some of the ways you go about achieving those goals, it would be a great start.
The Entertainment Consumers Association (ECA) is the non-profit association that represents the interests of game consumers. Think of it like AAA or AARP, where people pay an annual membership due to join and then get access to all sorts of affinity benefits as well as representation on advocacy issues. I’m the president and founder, so my role is largely managerial. Members and the public in general, see me due to the media interviews, but the success of the ECA is directly attributable to its staff and members.
You recently wrote about the need for gamers to "step up" and break the often negative sterotypes associated with gaming. Can you elaborate not only on some of the stereotypes that you feel we can change, but how we can go about doing so?
Sure. And yes, I’ve been writing guest columns for a few years now and I can’t recall ever getting as much feedback as I have with the Perception is Everything piece. I was just chatting with IndustryGamer’s editor-in-chief, James, about that this morning, actually. It seems to have started conversations, and frankly, this is an important one for us to have. Professor Henry Jenkins has a quote in my brother’s documentary, Moral Kombat, that really resonates and goes something like: video games, as a medium, are at a cross-roads much like the comic book industry was thirty years ago, where it’ll be defined as the kind of product that you walk up the stairs to buy, or down the stairs – referring to retail. The analogy’s a good one because there are many fair parallels between the two businesses.
Absolutely! We launched a new campaign so that people can start right now, actually. Our digital advocacy tools are available on all of our social networking sites as well as on our main site. You don’t need to be a member to use them and make your voice heard… and count. And we’ve made it so easy to do that there’s really no excuse for not taking the thirty seconds it takes to get involved and speak up. The current campaign, in which people can email President Obama, squarely addresses this point. So I don’t want to see folks complaining on message boards and in comments. Here’s the megaphone, it’s free and it’s easy to use. It’s put up or shut up time.
Expanding a bit upon that new campaign, the ECA recently posted an open letter to the President in response to his comments. Can you talk a bit more about that?
We had discussed addressing the President’s “put the video games away” aspect of his speeches several times, actually. At issue is the fact that we agree fully with what he’s saying in principle. Parents need to be more involved with what their kids are doing. They need to be more engaged and focus on understanding what media their kids are ingesting. They need to use the ratings systems as a benchmark – and it’s a great first step – but they should really take the few minutes to participate in that media actively. I also agree that kids get far too much screen time, be it movies, TV, cell phones, the Internet, or computer and video games. So we hesitated a few times, hoping that some other form of screen time would be included as the example. But each time the speech was recycled, we waited with baited breath…and were disappointed that the focus remained on gaming and gamers. It began reinforcing the negative stereotype and was compounded by the media interpreting and reinterpreting his meaning. So we had to act. A campaign is precisely the way to let the White House, and by extension everyone else, understand that gamers are tired of the mislabeling of both Gaming and of Gamers. By giving folks the access to our online advocacy tools, they can take the 30 seconds and make their voices heard. It’s fast, easy and free. You don’t need to be an ECA member. Just someone who wants gaming to be treated with the respect that other forms of media enjoy. Go to: http://action.theeca.com/t/2858/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=2865
(I've already gone and done this, and I strongly urge all of my readers to follow the link and make their voices heard as well)
What can the industry itself do, or what has it been doing, to help stem the tide of negativity aimed at gaming?
Hmm, well, the industry has several very good and productive trade associations, but they primarily represent companies… business entities, rather than individuals, apart from IGDA, which does both. It would be great if they would help counter negative stereotyping by simply helping to show who we are and support the good work that we do. There are a lot of really quality gaming charities that are run by gamers, for instance. How about partnering with them, supporting them and then highlighting them, as one suggestion. Then use that success in media opportunities, shows and the like. And again, the folks who work in the business have a vested interest. They should be on our campaign before everyone else, lending their individual voices to the chorus.
There are quite a few noteworthy "enemies" of gaming, politicians and others that seem hell-bent on legislating or even censoring games. Do you have any thoughts on why there seems to be this strong dislike of the industry in certain circles? Can we do anything to change their minds, or are we stuck with them until they retire?
Both, unfortunately. There are certainly a good many people who have the wrong idea when it comes to games, and that may come as a result of honest ignorance: believing only the fleeting sensationalistic news. That would lead any rational person to conclude, cumulatively, that games are inherently bad, gamers lazy, and gaming a fruitless hobby. Those aren’t the folks that concern me, frankly. That opposition is countered by you, me and every other gamer speaking up. Doing so can be as easy as inserting gaming into conversations with friends and loved ones. At many a party, I get asked what I do for a living. The response is almost always the same. But I take that opportunity to insert some hard core facts, but in a disarming way: “Yeah, it’s a lot of fun. Did you know that the average age of gamers today is 31? Yup. Well, it makes sense when you think that we all grew up playing and then just continued. A lot like movies, probably… Etc.” The other hell-bent people, we’ll that’s a different row to hoe…
The ongoing back-and-forth between you and Jack Thompson is legendary within the industry, a source of both consternation and amusement. Care to share any thoughts on that?
I think that Jack and I would both admit that it is for us as well. Well, he amuses me anyway – at least according to his poor Joe Pesci impersonation. Before we launched the ECA, our management team formerly ran the industry’s retail trade association. The line we – all the respective trade association heads – towed was to ignore Jack, with the logic being that he’d go away. That logic line failed miserably, and I’m part to blame. Recognizing that, we said that the ECA’s take would be to not allow him to be the only one at the microphone any longer. As a result of that intentional change in tactic, and the timing of the ESA’s president resigning – the former focus of Jack’s ire – the laser got focused on me… and I’m OK with that. I wasn’t, but I’ve come to terms with it. But it wasn’t just Jack, nor just the negative ding-dongs for that matter. So along with the hate mail and death threats from one side, we get the supportive message and thoughtful notes from the other…those being the gamers. ;)
Thank you for your thoughts, and the work you do for the industry with the ECA. I wanted to give you the chance to just say what you want, and expand upon the statements you made the other day on Industry Gamers.
Thanks, Aaron. I appreciate the opportunity and the support.
Really, Mr. Halpin does such a good job in his post that I know I won't do it justice by trying to explain it. So why don't you hit that link and hop on over to the actual post and give it a read. It's OK, I'll wait. Go and enjoy, and I'll still be here when you get back.
Welcome back. Did you have fun?
I was so impressed by what Hal was saying, that I contacted him and asked him if he could expand upon some of the points he made. He graciously accepted, which brings us to a historic event here: The Grumbly Gamer's first interview!
Without further ado, I present to you Mr. Hal Halpin of the ECA.
---
First off, please briefly detail what the ECA is, and what your role within the organization entails. If you could share the goals of the ECA, and perhaps some of the ways you go about achieving those goals, it would be a great start.
The Entertainment Consumers Association (ECA) is the non-profit association that represents the interests of game consumers. Think of it like AAA or AARP, where people pay an annual membership due to join and then get access to all sorts of affinity benefits as well as representation on advocacy issues. I’m the president and founder, so my role is largely managerial. Members and the public in general, see me due to the media interviews, but the success of the ECA is directly attributable to its staff and members.
You recently wrote about the need for gamers to "step up" and break the often negative sterotypes associated with gaming. Can you elaborate not only on some of the stereotypes that you feel we can change, but how we can go about doing so?
Sure. And yes, I’ve been writing guest columns for a few years now and I can’t recall ever getting as much feedback as I have with the Perception is Everything piece. I was just chatting with IndustryGamer’s editor-in-chief, James, about that this morning, actually. It seems to have started conversations, and frankly, this is an important one for us to have. Professor Henry Jenkins has a quote in my brother’s documentary, Moral Kombat, that really resonates and goes something like: video games, as a medium, are at a cross-roads much like the comic book industry was thirty years ago, where it’ll be defined as the kind of product that you walk up the stairs to buy, or down the stairs – referring to retail. The analogy’s a good one because there are many fair parallels between the two businesses.
The Industry Gamers piece was addressed to the folks who make a living from the business. While not all of them are gamers, the vast majority are. And in either case, they have the ability to affect change – perhaps even to a greater degree than consumers. Think of advertising and marketing execs who create ads with images of gamers, as just one example. But professionals in our business are also consumers. A fair amount are members of the ECA, which is great and makes a lot of sense, but otherwise aren’t engaged. People I’ve known for a long time gripe about negative stereotyping, but do nothing to counter it. They don’t have to be members of the association to influence things. They could be doing it in their everyday work.
We often see gaming accused of, among other things, contributing to this nation's obesity, and even the President has made recent remarks about "getting off the couch" and referenced "putting down the games". How has gaming fallen into this scapegoat status, and do you think that we can change it? Do you think that someday, when this generation that has grown up with electronic entertainment comes "into power", that this will all become a thing of the past?Absolutely! We launched a new campaign so that people can start right now, actually. Our digital advocacy tools are available on all of our social networking sites as well as on our main site. You don’t need to be a member to use them and make your voice heard… and count. And we’ve made it so easy to do that there’s really no excuse for not taking the thirty seconds it takes to get involved and speak up. The current campaign, in which people can email President Obama, squarely addresses this point. So I don’t want to see folks complaining on message boards and in comments. Here’s the megaphone, it’s free and it’s easy to use. It’s put up or shut up time.
Expanding a bit upon that new campaign, the ECA recently posted an open letter to the President in response to his comments. Can you talk a bit more about that?
We had discussed addressing the President’s “put the video games away” aspect of his speeches several times, actually. At issue is the fact that we agree fully with what he’s saying in principle. Parents need to be more involved with what their kids are doing. They need to be more engaged and focus on understanding what media their kids are ingesting. They need to use the ratings systems as a benchmark – and it’s a great first step – but they should really take the few minutes to participate in that media actively. I also agree that kids get far too much screen time, be it movies, TV, cell phones, the Internet, or computer and video games. So we hesitated a few times, hoping that some other form of screen time would be included as the example. But each time the speech was recycled, we waited with baited breath…and were disappointed that the focus remained on gaming and gamers. It began reinforcing the negative stereotype and was compounded by the media interpreting and reinterpreting his meaning. So we had to act. A campaign is precisely the way to let the White House, and by extension everyone else, understand that gamers are tired of the mislabeling of both Gaming and of Gamers. By giving folks the access to our online advocacy tools, they can take the 30 seconds and make their voices heard. It’s fast, easy and free. You don’t need to be an ECA member. Just someone who wants gaming to be treated with the respect that other forms of media enjoy. Go to: http://action.theeca.com/t/
(I've already gone and done this, and I strongly urge all of my readers to follow the link and make their voices heard as well)
What can the industry itself do, or what has it been doing, to help stem the tide of negativity aimed at gaming?
Hmm, well, the industry has several very good and productive trade associations, but they primarily represent companies… business entities, rather than individuals, apart from IGDA, which does both. It would be great if they would help counter negative stereotyping by simply helping to show who we are and support the good work that we do. There are a lot of really quality gaming charities that are run by gamers, for instance. How about partnering with them, supporting them and then highlighting them, as one suggestion. Then use that success in media opportunities, shows and the like. And again, the folks who work in the business have a vested interest. They should be on our campaign before everyone else, lending their individual voices to the chorus.
There are quite a few noteworthy "enemies" of gaming, politicians and others that seem hell-bent on legislating or even censoring games. Do you have any thoughts on why there seems to be this strong dislike of the industry in certain circles? Can we do anything to change their minds, or are we stuck with them until they retire?
Both, unfortunately. There are certainly a good many people who have the wrong idea when it comes to games, and that may come as a result of honest ignorance: believing only the fleeting sensationalistic news. That would lead any rational person to conclude, cumulatively, that games are inherently bad, gamers lazy, and gaming a fruitless hobby. Those aren’t the folks that concern me, frankly. That opposition is countered by you, me and every other gamer speaking up. Doing so can be as easy as inserting gaming into conversations with friends and loved ones. At many a party, I get asked what I do for a living. The response is almost always the same. But I take that opportunity to insert some hard core facts, but in a disarming way: “Yeah, it’s a lot of fun. Did you know that the average age of gamers today is 31? Yup. Well, it makes sense when you think that we all grew up playing and then just continued. A lot like movies, probably… Etc.” The other hell-bent people, we’ll that’s a different row to hoe…
The ongoing back-and-forth between you and Jack Thompson is legendary within the industry, a source of both consternation and amusement. Care to share any thoughts on that?
I think that Jack and I would both admit that it is for us as well. Well, he amuses me anyway – at least according to his poor Joe Pesci impersonation. Before we launched the ECA, our management team formerly ran the industry’s retail trade association. The line we – all the respective trade association heads – towed was to ignore Jack, with the logic being that he’d go away. That logic line failed miserably, and I’m part to blame. Recognizing that, we said that the ECA’s take would be to not allow him to be the only one at the microphone any longer. As a result of that intentional change in tactic, and the timing of the ESA’s president resigning – the former focus of Jack’s ire – the laser got focused on me… and I’m OK with that. I wasn’t, but I’ve come to terms with it. But it wasn’t just Jack, nor just the negative ding-dongs for that matter. So along with the hate mail and death threats from one side, we get the supportive message and thoughtful notes from the other…those being the gamers. ;)
Thank you for your thoughts, and the work you do for the industry with the ECA. I wanted to give you the chance to just say what you want, and expand upon the statements you made the other day on Industry Gamers.
Thanks, Aaron. I appreciate the opportunity and the support.
Thank you for your time.
My pleasure, really.
---
So there we go, folks. Some pretty heavy stuff, some really thought-provoking ideas, and a chance to stand up and say that we don't appreciate games and gamers being lumped into some misinformed stereotype.
I really do agree with everything Mr. Halpin said. It's not hard to stand up for the industry, even in small ways. There are millions of people out there, perfectly normal folks with families and professional jobs, who come home and pop in Grand Theft Auto. This doesn't make them bad people, doesn't make them fat or violent or dumb them down in any way, but that's how too many people still see games. They see gamers as creepy man-children in dank basements, and the people that make them as super nerdy types who program these "toys" because they sucked at sports in school.
We can stand up and prove them wrong, or we can sit back and do nothing.
The change starts, and it ends, with us.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Friday Night Fail: Burning Sensation Edition
I recently went to Florida for a few days, driving down (and back home again, much to my family's chagrin) and spending most of a week in the Orlando area. The trip was, almost from the start, an amazing disaster. From the unusually long drive down, to the complete failure of the initial purpose (a friend and I had gone, as she is looking to move down and wanted to job and apartment hunt, neither of which came to fruition), to the fact that every time I wanted to go into the motel pool it was pouring, it seemed like nothing was going right. We tried our best to have as much fun as possible, going out with a friend and hitting up Gatorland Park (we couldn't afford Disney World), but in the end the entire trip just left the sour taste of epic fail in our mouths.
I bring this up as a (in my mind) clever analogy for the Xbox 360 game Kingdom Under Fire: Circle of Doom.
Just like the original plan for Florida, which was filled with strategy and good intentions, KUF has a good premise and seemingly a good plan to entertain players. It takes the franchise away from its more strategic roots, instead offering a hack-and-slash experience in line with Dynasty Warriors or Ninety Nine Nights. There are a variety of characters to choose from, each with their own abilities and stories, and it even has online co-op play. Sounds like a good game, just like Florida sounded like a good trip.
Unfortunately, just like the excursion to America's wang, KUF quickly proves itself to be much worse in reality than it was in the concept.
None of the characters are particularly noteworthy. There are the expected archetypes: dark and mysterious rogue, grizzled old warrior, heavily armored hero, scantily clad blue elven chick (really, a staple of most fantasy-based games. I think there's a law about needing them), and while there are a few differences in the way they each play nobody but the really dedicated are going to care enough to try them all out.
I chose the old warrior, with long grey hair and beard, sporting a musket. Was instantly struck by the fact that, in the cutscenes, he didn't sound like you'd expect a grizzly old fighter to sound. Instead, he talked like an effeminate court jester, which did nothing other than totally jar me out of the character and annoy me. The voice acting for every character was amazingly bad, some of the worst I've encountered in a while, but the total against-type casting in this case was a poor choice.
Still, even the worst voice acting in the world can be overlooked with solid gameplay. I mean, that's what subtitles and volume muting is for. Just like the horrific drive to Florida, with its heavy traffic and violent thunderstorm in South Carolina, if the experience is ultimately solid than the bumps along the way can be ignored.
Sadly, KUF just keeps going on and failing in every which way. The graphics are unimpressive, and while they do have a lot of enemies and effects and such happening at once with minimal slowdown, all the enemies pretty much look the same. Plus, while there are different areas to fight through (jungle, mountains, etc), the backgrounds are pretty generic and there isn't a lot of variety between the different stages in each area. The gameplay is the typical button-mashing inherent in the genre, with some combos and range attacks tossed in for good measure. It's just banging on buttons as you wade through armies of clones, a style that at its best offers some mindless enjoyment (I actually like these sort of games) but here just gets boring fast.
Each character, as I mentioned, has a different story which ultimately intertwines into the larger plot. Their tales unfold in pieces, in a dream world that you access by choosing to sleep in front of statues you'll occasionally find throughout the levels. You can ignore these, completely blowing off the story, and you'd actually miss very little outside of a chance to rest your thumb for a few minutes. The stories are bland and generic, and never really pick up enough steam to justify wading through the game. Instead of offering enough to make you want to continue to the next piece of the story so you can see how it plays out, the short scenes offer no real hooks. The stories are pretty silly across the board, pointless and/ or stereotypical, and don't really give any enticing reason to keep forcing through the mediocre gameplay.
In Florida, it became pretty clear that our reason for going there was all falling apart. Job hunting was going poorly, and no job meant no reason to look for a place to live, so it quickly became clear that we wasted time and money going down there and would gain nothing worthwhile in return.
KUF does offer a dizzying array of items to find, equipment is almost always being swapped out for bigger and better stuff. New armor and weaponry is common, and there are shop statues next to the sleeping statues so you can buy and sell. You can also craft new items by combining what you've got, but once again they injected just enough failure into this to make it not fun. The big flaw in this case is that you have no idea what you're going to make until after you make it, and then there's no way to go back. So you might combine two really powerful swords in the hopes of getting something pretty epic, and end up with something with even less strength than either of the weapons you started with. There's no advanced indication of what you're going to get, and there's no guarantee that you'll make something that's useful.
The multiplayer is solid, at least in the sense that it works as advertised. You and a few friends (up to 4 players over Live) can share in the pain together, hacking and slashing through the adventure. I had the most fun in this mode, mostly because my companions and I were endlessly complaining about the horrible game together and laughing at each other (and ourselves) for playing it. The enjoyment had nothing to do with the game, but rather joking with some friends over the headsets.
On our last full day in Florida, we went to Gatorland, which was actually pretty fun, and while it hardly made up for the failure of the previous few days it at least offered up some entertainment.
Kingdom Under Fire: Circle of Doom has really no redeeming features. While it tries, and a few times gets close to some fun, in the end it fails across the board and doesn't offer up enough to make it worth putting yourself through the pain. Just like a certain trip South, where even a bit of fun here and there couldn't cover the fact that the entire purpose had ultimately failed.
Even if you really like fighting through hundreds of enemies, play something other than this game.
And if you choose to drive to Florida in the hopes of starting a new life, line up a job and a place before you go down to avoid wasting a week of your precious time.
I bring this up as a (in my mind) clever analogy for the Xbox 360 game Kingdom Under Fire: Circle of Doom.
Just like the original plan for Florida, which was filled with strategy and good intentions, KUF has a good premise and seemingly a good plan to entertain players. It takes the franchise away from its more strategic roots, instead offering a hack-and-slash experience in line with Dynasty Warriors or Ninety Nine Nights. There are a variety of characters to choose from, each with their own abilities and stories, and it even has online co-op play. Sounds like a good game, just like Florida sounded like a good trip.
Unfortunately, just like the excursion to America's wang, KUF quickly proves itself to be much worse in reality than it was in the concept.
None of the characters are particularly noteworthy. There are the expected archetypes: dark and mysterious rogue, grizzled old warrior, heavily armored hero, scantily clad blue elven chick (really, a staple of most fantasy-based games. I think there's a law about needing them), and while there are a few differences in the way they each play nobody but the really dedicated are going to care enough to try them all out.
I chose the old warrior, with long grey hair and beard, sporting a musket. Was instantly struck by the fact that, in the cutscenes, he didn't sound like you'd expect a grizzly old fighter to sound. Instead, he talked like an effeminate court jester, which did nothing other than totally jar me out of the character and annoy me. The voice acting for every character was amazingly bad, some of the worst I've encountered in a while, but the total against-type casting in this case was a poor choice.
Still, even the worst voice acting in the world can be overlooked with solid gameplay. I mean, that's what subtitles and volume muting is for. Just like the horrific drive to Florida, with its heavy traffic and violent thunderstorm in South Carolina, if the experience is ultimately solid than the bumps along the way can be ignored.
Sadly, KUF just keeps going on and failing in every which way. The graphics are unimpressive, and while they do have a lot of enemies and effects and such happening at once with minimal slowdown, all the enemies pretty much look the same. Plus, while there are different areas to fight through (jungle, mountains, etc), the backgrounds are pretty generic and there isn't a lot of variety between the different stages in each area. The gameplay is the typical button-mashing inherent in the genre, with some combos and range attacks tossed in for good measure. It's just banging on buttons as you wade through armies of clones, a style that at its best offers some mindless enjoyment (I actually like these sort of games) but here just gets boring fast.
Each character, as I mentioned, has a different story which ultimately intertwines into the larger plot. Their tales unfold in pieces, in a dream world that you access by choosing to sleep in front of statues you'll occasionally find throughout the levels. You can ignore these, completely blowing off the story, and you'd actually miss very little outside of a chance to rest your thumb for a few minutes. The stories are bland and generic, and never really pick up enough steam to justify wading through the game. Instead of offering enough to make you want to continue to the next piece of the story so you can see how it plays out, the short scenes offer no real hooks. The stories are pretty silly across the board, pointless and/ or stereotypical, and don't really give any enticing reason to keep forcing through the mediocre gameplay.
In Florida, it became pretty clear that our reason for going there was all falling apart. Job hunting was going poorly, and no job meant no reason to look for a place to live, so it quickly became clear that we wasted time and money going down there and would gain nothing worthwhile in return.
KUF does offer a dizzying array of items to find, equipment is almost always being swapped out for bigger and better stuff. New armor and weaponry is common, and there are shop statues next to the sleeping statues so you can buy and sell. You can also craft new items by combining what you've got, but once again they injected just enough failure into this to make it not fun. The big flaw in this case is that you have no idea what you're going to make until after you make it, and then there's no way to go back. So you might combine two really powerful swords in the hopes of getting something pretty epic, and end up with something with even less strength than either of the weapons you started with. There's no advanced indication of what you're going to get, and there's no guarantee that you'll make something that's useful.
The multiplayer is solid, at least in the sense that it works as advertised. You and a few friends (up to 4 players over Live) can share in the pain together, hacking and slashing through the adventure. I had the most fun in this mode, mostly because my companions and I were endlessly complaining about the horrible game together and laughing at each other (and ourselves) for playing it. The enjoyment had nothing to do with the game, but rather joking with some friends over the headsets.
On our last full day in Florida, we went to Gatorland, which was actually pretty fun, and while it hardly made up for the failure of the previous few days it at least offered up some entertainment.
Kingdom Under Fire: Circle of Doom has really no redeeming features. While it tries, and a few times gets close to some fun, in the end it fails across the board and doesn't offer up enough to make it worth putting yourself through the pain. Just like a certain trip South, where even a bit of fun here and there couldn't cover the fact that the entire purpose had ultimately failed.
Even if you really like fighting through hundreds of enemies, play something other than this game.
And if you choose to drive to Florida in the hopes of starting a new life, line up a job and a place before you go down to avoid wasting a week of your precious time.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Whatevah, I Say What I Want!
Here's an odd one that I read over on Gamepolitics. It involves Sony, a stupid gamer, and a lawsuit, always a recipe for fun and excitement.
Basically, the gamer in question recently filed a lawsuit against Sony, claiming that the electronics giant suppressed his right to free speech and treaded upon his First Amendment rights. Seems that the guy was banned from playing Resistance: Fall of Man online, and now is crying about not only his rights but the suffering he has gone through now that he can't play the game.
Oh, in an exciting twist, the dude happens to be agoraphobic, meaning that he's afraid to go into crowds or into social situations. He is claiming that playing online is his link to the outside world and that he depends upon the Playstation 3 to socialize with people, something he is unable to do in real life.
It has been stated that the player was banned because of his behavior. Now, I've never played with this guy, but I've certainly played all sorts of online games and seen all sorts of behavior that can get people banned. From sexual remarks to racial slurs, profanity, insults, and all sorts of other shenanigans, there are definitely people out there that take the sense of online anonymity too far. When this happens, they run the risk of getting banned.
It's actually right there in the terms of service, in some fashion or another. Once you agree to those terms, you agree to not be a total prick to other people online. Based on what I've seen on Xbox Live, you can still be a pretty major ass well before you even get a warning, so to actually get banned has to take some pretty serious crap. I'm not sure what Sony's exact rules are, but I'm going to guess that they're pretty close to Microsoft's, so it's fair to say that if he was banned for behavior then he was being a tool.
So this guy is claiming that Sony is violating his rights by banning him, essentially trying to say that he can say whatever he wants to whoever he wants and is protected by free speech. Of course, he's overlooking not only the terms of service he agreed to, but basic public decency laws as well. It's what stops someone from walking into a local store and shrieking obscenities (unless you shop at this local Gamestop store. Apparently it's cool there, from what I've seen). If you do something like that, the cops may be called and you can be removed. It's called public indecency, and creating a public disturbance. What will be interesting is seeing if the online space is bound by the same rules, considered a "public" space, and the course that the frivolous lawsuit takes in that respect.
The only aspect of the suit that may hold a bit of merit is the claim that Sony has essentially stolen his money by not refunding what he has prepaid for points to use online. If a player is banned from the network, he can't access his profile at all, and therefore has no access to the purchased points. However, I seriously doubt that he has prepaid $55,000 in points, the amount he is requesting in the lawsuit.
I'm sure there is some stipulation somewhere in the small print of the terms of service and/ or the purchase agreement, something about no refunds even if you're an idiot and get yourself banned because you can't be a decent human being for five minutes when playing with others. Still, in the interest of getting the guy to shut the hell up, I could see Sony refunding the monetary amount of unused points. It's unreasonable, though, to expect them to refund everything that he's spent since the day he signed onto the network.
I've spent a small fortune on Microsoft points, and have purchased all sorts of virtual goods. Arcade games, extra game levels and stuff, and even music for my Zune. If I were to go online and start insulting people, and get banned, I'd hardly expect them to give me back the money that I've spent on all of those things. Hell, I got fired from Gamestop, and you don't see me trying to return everything I purchased over the five years I managed the store. Then again, I'm a rational human being, and the very idea of this lawsuit proves that this guy is nowhere near.
The suit also claims that Sony is "ineffective" in keeping players who are under seventeen years old off of the M rated game. This is an odd statement, though, since it actually isn't Sony's responsibility to do so. It's up to the parents of a minor to decide if he or she can buy the game and play online, and Sony's only responsibility is to insure that players don't insult one another to the point that it becomes an unpleasant or unsafe play environment.
It's amazing that this guy thinks he's even got a miniscule chance of success with this lawsuit. I'm not a lawyer, and even I can see a bunch of ways that this can fail, and I'm guessing that Sony's high priced attorneys are going to find even more.
Hell, if nothing else, maybe he won't show up for the trial, since he's agoraphobic and would be afraid to leave his house and go out into the crowded courthouse. Ooh, ouch! Is that cruel? Good thing there's that whole "freedom of the press" thing, huh?
Basically, the gamer in question recently filed a lawsuit against Sony, claiming that the electronics giant suppressed his right to free speech and treaded upon his First Amendment rights. Seems that the guy was banned from playing Resistance: Fall of Man online, and now is crying about not only his rights but the suffering he has gone through now that he can't play the game.
Oh, in an exciting twist, the dude happens to be agoraphobic, meaning that he's afraid to go into crowds or into social situations. He is claiming that playing online is his link to the outside world and that he depends upon the Playstation 3 to socialize with people, something he is unable to do in real life.
It has been stated that the player was banned because of his behavior. Now, I've never played with this guy, but I've certainly played all sorts of online games and seen all sorts of behavior that can get people banned. From sexual remarks to racial slurs, profanity, insults, and all sorts of other shenanigans, there are definitely people out there that take the sense of online anonymity too far. When this happens, they run the risk of getting banned.
It's actually right there in the terms of service, in some fashion or another. Once you agree to those terms, you agree to not be a total prick to other people online. Based on what I've seen on Xbox Live, you can still be a pretty major ass well before you even get a warning, so to actually get banned has to take some pretty serious crap. I'm not sure what Sony's exact rules are, but I'm going to guess that they're pretty close to Microsoft's, so it's fair to say that if he was banned for behavior then he was being a tool.
So this guy is claiming that Sony is violating his rights by banning him, essentially trying to say that he can say whatever he wants to whoever he wants and is protected by free speech. Of course, he's overlooking not only the terms of service he agreed to, but basic public decency laws as well. It's what stops someone from walking into a local store and shrieking obscenities (unless you shop at this local Gamestop store. Apparently it's cool there, from what I've seen). If you do something like that, the cops may be called and you can be removed. It's called public indecency, and creating a public disturbance. What will be interesting is seeing if the online space is bound by the same rules, considered a "public" space, and the course that the frivolous lawsuit takes in that respect.
The only aspect of the suit that may hold a bit of merit is the claim that Sony has essentially stolen his money by not refunding what he has prepaid for points to use online. If a player is banned from the network, he can't access his profile at all, and therefore has no access to the purchased points. However, I seriously doubt that he has prepaid $55,000 in points, the amount he is requesting in the lawsuit.
I'm sure there is some stipulation somewhere in the small print of the terms of service and/ or the purchase agreement, something about no refunds even if you're an idiot and get yourself banned because you can't be a decent human being for five minutes when playing with others. Still, in the interest of getting the guy to shut the hell up, I could see Sony refunding the monetary amount of unused points. It's unreasonable, though, to expect them to refund everything that he's spent since the day he signed onto the network.
I've spent a small fortune on Microsoft points, and have purchased all sorts of virtual goods. Arcade games, extra game levels and stuff, and even music for my Zune. If I were to go online and start insulting people, and get banned, I'd hardly expect them to give me back the money that I've spent on all of those things. Hell, I got fired from Gamestop, and you don't see me trying to return everything I purchased over the five years I managed the store. Then again, I'm a rational human being, and the very idea of this lawsuit proves that this guy is nowhere near.
The suit also claims that Sony is "ineffective" in keeping players who are under seventeen years old off of the M rated game. This is an odd statement, though, since it actually isn't Sony's responsibility to do so. It's up to the parents of a minor to decide if he or she can buy the game and play online, and Sony's only responsibility is to insure that players don't insult one another to the point that it becomes an unpleasant or unsafe play environment.
It's amazing that this guy thinks he's even got a miniscule chance of success with this lawsuit. I'm not a lawyer, and even I can see a bunch of ways that this can fail, and I'm guessing that Sony's high priced attorneys are going to find even more.
Hell, if nothing else, maybe he won't show up for the trial, since he's agoraphobic and would be afraid to leave his house and go out into the crowded courthouse. Ooh, ouch! Is that cruel? Good thing there's that whole "freedom of the press" thing, huh?
Monday, July 20, 2009
Too Many Games!
Recently, at a game conference (the Develop Conference), Denis Dyack of Silicon Knights had some things to say about the state of the industry.
Mr. Dyack's thought trains are always an interesting ride. He's one of the more outspoken people in the industry, and a lot of what he says gets a pretty strong reaction (often negative) from the people who are listening. His studio, Silicon Knights, created the exceptional Eternal Darkness for the Gamecube, then took nearly ten years to put out what was supposed to be Dyack's masterpiece, Too Human. The game was seriously hyped up by Dyack, pretty much to epic proportions, and when the game failed to meet the levels it was built up to (and in fact was a mediocre title in every way and was my first Friday Night Fail) he continued to push it and complain that people just didn't get what he was trying to create.
At the conference, Denis proclaimed the need for a single console, stating that it is "inevitable" that the industry will achieve this goal someday in the future. He feels that the industry is being slowed down by multiple consoles, and that we can't really take a step forward until gamers are given one universal system on which to play games.
This argument is nothing new, and Dyack is hardly the first person to make this claim. Actually, the point he's trying to make about the single console future isn't the direction I'm going with this post. I frankly don't think it's ever going to happen, and I think that the industry would actually suffer if it ever did. What makes it exciting is that the manufacturers are pushing to outdo each other, make better games and offer new experiences, and I think a lot of this drive would be lost if there was no competition. Sure, it'd be nice to not have to buy a bunch of machines just to play all the games out there, but ultimately the console wars are what drives the industry and the different manufacturers forward.
My focus is one particular thought that Denis started: "There were 300 or so games released last November. We're in a state of performance over supply. We're making more games than consumers can possibly consume. Marketing is having a disproportionate effect over the success of games because there's so many out there people are ignoring us. Sometimes it doesn't matter if your game's good or not; if you don't have that marketing support it won't happen."
Here is something that I definitely agree with. While managing a game store, especially around the holidays, we would see sometimes more than one hundred games released within the course of a week. Most of them were small titles, a bunch of shovelware and some low-profile releases, with a handful of big games leading the charge. So many games are released, most of them around the holiday buying season, that unless you've got thousands in disposable income there's no way to grab everything. Even if you could buy every game you wanted to, when would you find the time to play them all? Hell, I'm unemployed, so have nothing but time, and I still can't manage to play every game I own. Really, you can only play one at a time (though I have played DS while waiting for 360 games to load), and while it's nice to have choices based upon your moods ultimately something gets out away and forgotten. One friend I have claims that he very rarely beats a game, since he'll play a game when it's released up until something else is released, then put the first one down to play the next, so on and so forth, until he trades in a stack of unfinished (and often barely played) games in order to get credit and repeat the cycle.
I've got, in my collection, shelves full of games. Many of them I bought as soon as they were released, excited for the title or just swept up in the hype, and to be honest many of them have barely been played. I had to own Tomb Raider: Underworld when it came out, but just due to time contstraints I really haven't had time to play more than the first couple of stages several months later. I've got so many games to play across different platforms, and some just get lost in the shuffle. I've actually imposed a moratorium on myself, on the purchase of new console games, until I play through enough of my collection for me to feel like I'm not just wasting my money. As it is, I bought Tomb Raider at sixty bucks, and I think it's half that now. So if I had waited until I actually had the time to play, I could have saved some cash.
One console wouldn't change that. There are still a bunch of developers out there, who would be making a bunch of games, so there would still be a choice as to what to buy and someone like me would still end up with too many games and not enough time to play them.
So there are too many games coming out at once, and not enough people out there to buy them. They'll stick to the big releases, or go with names they know, but there are dozens of other games out there that will get ignored by everyone except for a few misguided grandparents looking for gifts.
Sometimes, as Dyack suggests, no matter how good a game is the marketing support just isn't there during the holiday crunch. Take something like Marvel Ultimate Alliance. It's a solid game, and one that not only got decent reviews but good fan reaction, but it got lost in the tidal wave of bigger profile titles and didn't sell nearly as well as it should have.
Is there an easy answer? No, no there is not. I mean, it'd be nice if developers concentrated their efforts more on a few strong titles, maybe cutting down on the mountain of crap that clogs store shelves, but the danger there is that they'll choose to stick with established franchises to "play it safe" and then we'll never get new and exciting game experiences.
As an industry, we need the variety and choice that tons of releases can offer. We want to cater to every taste, every gamer, and we're doing so more than ever before. It's that variety that has helped bring the industry out of dark basements and into the mainstream.
I'm being contradictory here. I'm saying that we need lots of games out there, but then complaining that too many games are coming out. I think my issue is more than a ton come out at once, and that only a select few ever rise above and sell enough to be considered a success. Store shelves get loaded with so many games it's near impossible to keep track, most of them drop their prices and net the stores and publishers no money at all, and it's a whole mess for just about everyone involved.
The problem isn't the fact that there are three consoles on the market, the problem is the flood of games that is impossible to keep up with, more than people can possibly play. Spending development dollars on fewer games, making a handful of better games than a plethora of mediocre ones, is probably the best answer. Instead of coming out with a hundred games each week in November, most of which are going to be totally ignored, cut that down to half and put a bigger push behind each one.
Even over the busy summer season, you only see a few movies released each week, and considerable time is spent balancing out schedules to big movies don't conflict too much with each other.
Anyway, I should go. Like I said, I've banned myself from buying new titles until I play what I have. There's stuff I want out there on the shelves, though: Ghostbusters, Sacred 2, Halo Wars, and a handful of others, plus a bunch coming out this Autumn that I need to grab when they come out. Star Wars: The Old Republic, Assassin's Creed 2, Mass Effect 2, Dragon Age, Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 and a whole bunch of stuff that I can't think of right now. So I need to get on that.
If you need me, I'll be playing my way out of a huge stack of games.
Mr. Dyack's thought trains are always an interesting ride. He's one of the more outspoken people in the industry, and a lot of what he says gets a pretty strong reaction (often negative) from the people who are listening. His studio, Silicon Knights, created the exceptional Eternal Darkness for the Gamecube, then took nearly ten years to put out what was supposed to be Dyack's masterpiece, Too Human. The game was seriously hyped up by Dyack, pretty much to epic proportions, and when the game failed to meet the levels it was built up to (and in fact was a mediocre title in every way and was my first Friday Night Fail) he continued to push it and complain that people just didn't get what he was trying to create.
At the conference, Denis proclaimed the need for a single console, stating that it is "inevitable" that the industry will achieve this goal someday in the future. He feels that the industry is being slowed down by multiple consoles, and that we can't really take a step forward until gamers are given one universal system on which to play games.
This argument is nothing new, and Dyack is hardly the first person to make this claim. Actually, the point he's trying to make about the single console future isn't the direction I'm going with this post. I frankly don't think it's ever going to happen, and I think that the industry would actually suffer if it ever did. What makes it exciting is that the manufacturers are pushing to outdo each other, make better games and offer new experiences, and I think a lot of this drive would be lost if there was no competition. Sure, it'd be nice to not have to buy a bunch of machines just to play all the games out there, but ultimately the console wars are what drives the industry and the different manufacturers forward.
My focus is one particular thought that Denis started: "There were 300 or so games released last November. We're in a state of performance over supply. We're making more games than consumers can possibly consume. Marketing is having a disproportionate effect over the success of games because there's so many out there people are ignoring us. Sometimes it doesn't matter if your game's good or not; if you don't have that marketing support it won't happen."
Here is something that I definitely agree with. While managing a game store, especially around the holidays, we would see sometimes more than one hundred games released within the course of a week. Most of them were small titles, a bunch of shovelware and some low-profile releases, with a handful of big games leading the charge. So many games are released, most of them around the holiday buying season, that unless you've got thousands in disposable income there's no way to grab everything. Even if you could buy every game you wanted to, when would you find the time to play them all? Hell, I'm unemployed, so have nothing but time, and I still can't manage to play every game I own. Really, you can only play one at a time (though I have played DS while waiting for 360 games to load), and while it's nice to have choices based upon your moods ultimately something gets out away and forgotten. One friend I have claims that he very rarely beats a game, since he'll play a game when it's released up until something else is released, then put the first one down to play the next, so on and so forth, until he trades in a stack of unfinished (and often barely played) games in order to get credit and repeat the cycle.
I've got, in my collection, shelves full of games. Many of them I bought as soon as they were released, excited for the title or just swept up in the hype, and to be honest many of them have barely been played. I had to own Tomb Raider: Underworld when it came out, but just due to time contstraints I really haven't had time to play more than the first couple of stages several months later. I've got so many games to play across different platforms, and some just get lost in the shuffle. I've actually imposed a moratorium on myself, on the purchase of new console games, until I play through enough of my collection for me to feel like I'm not just wasting my money. As it is, I bought Tomb Raider at sixty bucks, and I think it's half that now. So if I had waited until I actually had the time to play, I could have saved some cash.
One console wouldn't change that. There are still a bunch of developers out there, who would be making a bunch of games, so there would still be a choice as to what to buy and someone like me would still end up with too many games and not enough time to play them.
So there are too many games coming out at once, and not enough people out there to buy them. They'll stick to the big releases, or go with names they know, but there are dozens of other games out there that will get ignored by everyone except for a few misguided grandparents looking for gifts.
Sometimes, as Dyack suggests, no matter how good a game is the marketing support just isn't there during the holiday crunch. Take something like Marvel Ultimate Alliance. It's a solid game, and one that not only got decent reviews but good fan reaction, but it got lost in the tidal wave of bigger profile titles and didn't sell nearly as well as it should have.
Is there an easy answer? No, no there is not. I mean, it'd be nice if developers concentrated their efforts more on a few strong titles, maybe cutting down on the mountain of crap that clogs store shelves, but the danger there is that they'll choose to stick with established franchises to "play it safe" and then we'll never get new and exciting game experiences.
As an industry, we need the variety and choice that tons of releases can offer. We want to cater to every taste, every gamer, and we're doing so more than ever before. It's that variety that has helped bring the industry out of dark basements and into the mainstream.
I'm being contradictory here. I'm saying that we need lots of games out there, but then complaining that too many games are coming out. I think my issue is more than a ton come out at once, and that only a select few ever rise above and sell enough to be considered a success. Store shelves get loaded with so many games it's near impossible to keep track, most of them drop their prices and net the stores and publishers no money at all, and it's a whole mess for just about everyone involved.
The problem isn't the fact that there are three consoles on the market, the problem is the flood of games that is impossible to keep up with, more than people can possibly play. Spending development dollars on fewer games, making a handful of better games than a plethora of mediocre ones, is probably the best answer. Instead of coming out with a hundred games each week in November, most of which are going to be totally ignored, cut that down to half and put a bigger push behind each one.
Even over the busy summer season, you only see a few movies released each week, and considerable time is spent balancing out schedules to big movies don't conflict too much with each other.
Anyway, I should go. Like I said, I've banned myself from buying new titles until I play what I have. There's stuff I want out there on the shelves, though: Ghostbusters, Sacred 2, Halo Wars, and a handful of others, plus a bunch coming out this Autumn that I need to grab when they come out. Star Wars: The Old Republic, Assassin's Creed 2, Mass Effect 2, Dragon Age, Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 and a whole bunch of stuff that I can't think of right now. So I need to get on that.
If you need me, I'll be playing my way out of a huge stack of games.
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Friday Night Fail: Tarnished Shine Edition
It's pretty public knowledge, for those that know me and know my gaming tastes, that Sega's Shining series ranks up among my favorite interactive experiences of all time. From the original strategy-RPG Shining Force games on the Genesis, through the first-person dungeon crawlers Shining in the Darkness (Genesis) and the amazing Shining the Holy Ark for the Saturn, and even the action-RPG Shining Wisdom (Saturn), I've played them all and for the most part really enjoyed each entry of the usually unrelated franchise. While, to be fair, I have chastised Sega for the direction it's taken with the series (Saving Sega: Shining Force), the truth is if Sega puts out a game with the word "Shining" in the title, there's a really good chance I'm going to play it.
Which is why it pains me a bit to give something from the Shining series the dubious honor of being in Friday Night Fail, but when a game sucks no name printed on the cover is going to save it.
The Gameboy Advance, in addition to getting a really solid remake of the original Shining Force, got a pair of original Shining game entitled Shining Soul. I was, honestly, pretty excited when the announced the first one and started revealing information about it, as it tied pretty directly into that of the original game while still being its own story. See, in Shining Force, your band of heroes are fighting to prevent the resurrection of Dark Dragon and save the world (original concept for an old-school RPG, I know). In Shining Soul, they told the tale of Dark Dragon's first time trying to kill everything hundreds of years before he got resurrected for the first Genesis game. So, as a fan, it was a pretty cool concept.
If only cool concept could equal good game, then this (and hundreds of others) could have been saved.
Shining Soul is an action-RPG, in which you control your little spiky-haired hero and run around dungeons killing monsters and picking up treasure. There, I just described the entire game. Really, the experience is pretty much hitting the attack button a lot, running through fairly generic settings and killing fairly generic monsters. Sometimes, you fight a big generic boss monster. It still requires mashing the attack button constantly, and then you move on to a new area. Lather, rinse, repeat. You gain levels as you slaughter monsters, raise stats by changing equipment, but really nothing breaks up the monotony of playing through the game.
Let's face it: dungeon crawlers are, at their core, about running through dungeons and killing hundreds of monsters to get treasure and usually advance a story of some kind. Even something like the exceptional Baldur's Gate can get tedious when you've hacked through your seven hundredth goblin. Setting a good dungeon crawl apart from a bad one is a fine line. Sometimes it's the story that drives you, others may offer multiplayer so you can tear through monsters with a friend. Often it's as simple as the desire to collect better loot and make your character as bad-ass as humanly (and often elvenly) possible.
Unfortunately, Shining Soul doesn't really have a hook. The story isn't nearly as deep as I had hoped, and there isn't the treasure collecting vibe you get from other games in the genre. It's just a game about running around and pressing the attack button. It's not very long, either, though in the case of a bad game I don't know if that qualifies as a negative. I beat the entire game over the course of a weekend, without really putting too much effort into it.
Like ripping off a band-aid, it really hurts but the pain goes away pretty quickly.
It is entirely possible that I am harder on this game than I should be simply because it is a Shining game and I expect better. I don't want to be disappointed, to tear through a boring adventure in two days and feel like I didn't do anything other than wear out one of my GBA's buttons. I want a story and a game that's going to live up to the venerable name, and that's definitely not what I got with Shining Soul.
Which is why it pains me a bit to give something from the Shining series the dubious honor of being in Friday Night Fail, but when a game sucks no name printed on the cover is going to save it.
The Gameboy Advance, in addition to getting a really solid remake of the original Shining Force, got a pair of original Shining game entitled Shining Soul. I was, honestly, pretty excited when the announced the first one and started revealing information about it, as it tied pretty directly into that of the original game while still being its own story. See, in Shining Force, your band of heroes are fighting to prevent the resurrection of Dark Dragon and save the world (original concept for an old-school RPG, I know). In Shining Soul, they told the tale of Dark Dragon's first time trying to kill everything hundreds of years before he got resurrected for the first Genesis game. So, as a fan, it was a pretty cool concept.
If only cool concept could equal good game, then this (and hundreds of others) could have been saved.
Shining Soul is an action-RPG, in which you control your little spiky-haired hero and run around dungeons killing monsters and picking up treasure. There, I just described the entire game. Really, the experience is pretty much hitting the attack button a lot, running through fairly generic settings and killing fairly generic monsters. Sometimes, you fight a big generic boss monster. It still requires mashing the attack button constantly, and then you move on to a new area. Lather, rinse, repeat. You gain levels as you slaughter monsters, raise stats by changing equipment, but really nothing breaks up the monotony of playing through the game.
Let's face it: dungeon crawlers are, at their core, about running through dungeons and killing hundreds of monsters to get treasure and usually advance a story of some kind. Even something like the exceptional Baldur's Gate can get tedious when you've hacked through your seven hundredth goblin. Setting a good dungeon crawl apart from a bad one is a fine line. Sometimes it's the story that drives you, others may offer multiplayer so you can tear through monsters with a friend. Often it's as simple as the desire to collect better loot and make your character as bad-ass as humanly (and often elvenly) possible.
Unfortunately, Shining Soul doesn't really have a hook. The story isn't nearly as deep as I had hoped, and there isn't the treasure collecting vibe you get from other games in the genre. It's just a game about running around and pressing the attack button. It's not very long, either, though in the case of a bad game I don't know if that qualifies as a negative. I beat the entire game over the course of a weekend, without really putting too much effort into it.
Like ripping off a band-aid, it really hurts but the pain goes away pretty quickly.
It is entirely possible that I am harder on this game than I should be simply because it is a Shining game and I expect better. I don't want to be disappointed, to tear through a boring adventure in two days and feel like I didn't do anything other than wear out one of my GBA's buttons. I want a story and a game that's going to live up to the venerable name, and that's definitely not what I got with Shining Soul.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Way to Fail, Kid
I tend to believe that I've seen quite a bit of stupidity in my thirty-four years on this planet. I've worked in retail, after all, so I generally believe that nothing surprises me when it comes to the sheer amount of dumb that can come pouring out of people on a daily basis.
Tonight's example of fail was reported by Indystar.com (the direct link has been removed, and to access the article means signing up and signing in). It seems that a teenage boy playing World of Warcraft threatened to hijack an airplane while playing the game. Meaning that he made the threats while playing, not that he was going to do the actual hijacking while playing the game. Though I've known people that were so addicted to that game that if they could keep playing while unleashing terror upon innocent people, I'm sure they would.
"Everybody freeze! I'm taking this plane down!"
Shrieks of fear, people panicking and crying.
"Wait, hold that thought. I'm about to gain a level!"
Right. Anyway... He was apparently pretty specific as to his plan, stating that he was going to board a 7:30 plane out of Chicago and that he planned to "kill as many Americans as possible". He went ahead and stated his intentions multiple times, prompting someone to report the dumbass to the authorities. At first the kid claimed that someone hacked his account and therefore it wasn't actually him making the serious threats. He may have mentioned something about a one-armed man. He then switched gears, saying that he was just kidding around about the whole thing. My guess is that he various federal agents that kicked down his door with guns in their hands didn't find it very funny.
Yeah. Word of advice, you drooling moron. Even if you were kidding, making such claims in a public forum, especially given the current state of the world, is probably one of the dumbest moves you could have made out of what I'm sure is a long career of dumb moves.
Blizzard has examined the chat logs, and they've claimed that what the teen said certainly looks pretty serious and didn't seem to be joking around. Currently the FBI has seized the kid's computers and is investigating the case.
This kid has quite possibly ruined his life,which is all the more entertaining to us smart people if it turns out that he was just trying to make a funny. He could very well spend time behind bars or at the very least be grounded for a bit, but I have to wonder if his biggest problem with it all is that he was undoubtedly banned from World of Warcraft. Not that he'll have much time to play in whatever federal prison he gets tossed into. There may be a few big orcish dudes doing a bit of mining with him, or more to the point to him, but I'd bet that's the closest he'll get for a while.
I can't wait to see how the anti-gaming press spins this and somehow manages to connect the dots, blaming World of Warcraft for the kid's issues and his plans to destroy airplanes. I mean, every time some dumb kid opens fire and shoots people they make a connection to Halo, and whenever someone walks into a stranger's home and start rooting through their treasure chests then you see Zelda get blamed. So it's only a matter of time before someone decides that killing wild boars as a Night Elf somehow led the kid to want to hijack aircraft. It will be amazing logic, I'm sure, and may even out-stupid the stupid kid who started the stupid in the first place.
As insipid as this all sounds, I'm sure next week we'll be dealing with something of equal or greater lameness.
Tonight's example of fail was reported by Indystar.com (the direct link has been removed, and to access the article means signing up and signing in). It seems that a teenage boy playing World of Warcraft threatened to hijack an airplane while playing the game. Meaning that he made the threats while playing, not that he was going to do the actual hijacking while playing the game. Though I've known people that were so addicted to that game that if they could keep playing while unleashing terror upon innocent people, I'm sure they would.
"Everybody freeze! I'm taking this plane down!"
Shrieks of fear, people panicking and crying.
"Wait, hold that thought. I'm about to gain a level!"
Right. Anyway... He was apparently pretty specific as to his plan, stating that he was going to board a 7:30 plane out of Chicago and that he planned to "kill as many Americans as possible". He went ahead and stated his intentions multiple times, prompting someone to report the dumbass to the authorities. At first the kid claimed that someone hacked his account and therefore it wasn't actually him making the serious threats. He may have mentioned something about a one-armed man. He then switched gears, saying that he was just kidding around about the whole thing. My guess is that he various federal agents that kicked down his door with guns in their hands didn't find it very funny.
Yeah. Word of advice, you drooling moron. Even if you were kidding, making such claims in a public forum, especially given the current state of the world, is probably one of the dumbest moves you could have made out of what I'm sure is a long career of dumb moves.
Blizzard has examined the chat logs, and they've claimed that what the teen said certainly looks pretty serious and didn't seem to be joking around. Currently the FBI has seized the kid's computers and is investigating the case.
This kid has quite possibly ruined his life,which is all the more entertaining to us smart people if it turns out that he was just trying to make a funny. He could very well spend time behind bars or at the very least be grounded for a bit, but I have to wonder if his biggest problem with it all is that he was undoubtedly banned from World of Warcraft. Not that he'll have much time to play in whatever federal prison he gets tossed into. There may be a few big orcish dudes doing a bit of mining with him, or more to the point to him, but I'd bet that's the closest he'll get for a while.
I can't wait to see how the anti-gaming press spins this and somehow manages to connect the dots, blaming World of Warcraft for the kid's issues and his plans to destroy airplanes. I mean, every time some dumb kid opens fire and shoots people they make a connection to Halo, and whenever someone walks into a stranger's home and start rooting through their treasure chests then you see Zelda get blamed. So it's only a matter of time before someone decides that killing wild boars as a Night Elf somehow led the kid to want to hijack aircraft. It will be amazing logic, I'm sure, and may even out-stupid the stupid kid who started the stupid in the first place.
As insipid as this all sounds, I'm sure next week we'll be dealing with something of equal or greater lameness.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
I Laughed, I Cried...
I've been playing Lost Odyssey lately, a practice that I highly recommend to any RPG fan who happens to own an Xbox 360. Not only does it go in a different direction than many Japanese role-playing games, tossing out the spiky haired protagonist from a tiny village who somehow ends up on a quest to save the world for a mature immortal who is tired of traveling and watching his loved ones die, but it's gorgeous to look at and a lot of fun to play.
Just last night I came to a rather pivotal moment, in terms of both character development and storyline. There was a cinematic, which I won't spoil if you haven't had the chance to play the game yet, but one that I will say was very moving and very powerful. Seriously, I had a lump in my throat watching the scene, and it really does twist the story in a new and unexpected direction.
Emotion is something that game developers have been trying to inject into their works for quite a while now, and as technology advances the creative minds behind our electronic worlds are trying to harness the new power to enhance the experiences they bring to players.
Of course, some emotions are pretty easy to convey. Excitement, for example, is something that most gamers have felt at one point or another. Play one of the Phoenix Wright games for the DS. When you're on the right track, the music starts pumping and Phoenix starts making those dramatic poses as his case comes together, tell me that your pulse doesn't quicken a bit as you get swept up in the moment. Text adventures don't do it for you? How about the rush of leaping from a cathedral spire in Assassin's Creed, or the frantic excitement of taking down Scarab in Halo?
What about conveying fear? Take something like Bioshock as an example. Tiptoeing through a hallway, water leaking from above. You've just taken out two splicers, and you think you're in the clear and can catch your breath, when suddenly you hear the unmistakeable sound of a Big Daddy in the area. Your blood will run cold when you hear that groan echoing through the hallways of Rapture (not to mention the guilt you may feel when destroying your first Little Sister for the precious ADAM she carries). Not scary enough? Try Fatal Frame. You can hear a sound, but what's making it? Bringing your camera to your eye, suddenly you see the twisted spectre lunging straight at you. Serious goosebumb territory.
So there are some emotional responses that games are known for, that certain genres (like survival horror) are pretty much based upon. What creators are looking to do next, though, is tug at your heartstrings and even make you cry.
The concept is nothing new. Fans of Final Fantasy VII will tell you how sad they were when Aerith died. Most RPG's shoot for an epic level of emotional attachment to the characters, though honestly there are only a select few that ever succeed.
Peter Molyneaux of Lionhead Studios has spoken quite a bit about emotion in games, and stated that one of the main tenants in Fable 2 was actually love. He spoke of getting married in the game, the unwavering devotion your children will show you, and of the loyal dog that stands by your side throughout the adventure. David Jaffe (God of War) has stated that he wants to make gamers cry (hey, start making games for Microsoft or Nintendo, then watch all the Sony fanboys scream and freak out. Or maybe that's not the same thing...), and there have been others who have claimed that their goal is to develop a true emotional connection between the game and the player.
Of course, this is easier said than done, as in the end it's just a game, and here where the real problem comes.
In a movie, it's easy to express emotion. The characters onscreen laugh and cry and love and hate, and if the writing is sound and the acting is good than a viewer can feel those emotions as well. It's a passive experience designed to take the audience on a journey through a story and whatever feelings that tale should convey.
In a game, at least in part, it is easy to do the same. The emotional investment in the characters is still there, perhaps even moreso since the player is actively controlling them instead of just watching. The stories are as deep if not deeper, and as graphics and sound improve the sense of "just watching a game" blurs.
Like in that cutscene in Lost Odyssey, it's not hard to use the same techniques that movies and books use to draw upon the same emotions. Surprise, sadness, both were conveyed in the cinematic.
So then what's holding back emotion in games? Why is it still something that game makers feel they need to achieve, not something they've already managed to pull off?
Like I said before, in a game you've got a lot of opportunities that you don't have in other media. Instead of simply reading about a character, or watching him act out a scripted scene, you are the character. You've got a lot more time than you would in a two hour movie to build the character and the story, and with a decent calibre of writing you can easily draw upon the same emotions that other media does.
The problem is, though, in the end it is still a game. For example, in Lost Odyssey: After watching this heartwrenching scene, after genuinely caring for the characters and having a profound emotional response to what was happening, the scene ended and we were left with a pretty lame fetch quest. The game went from the deep video right into characters standing around talking in text boxes, and I was sent to find flowers and branches.
Ultimately, it is a game, and as such it is meant to be played and not just watched. However, the choice that was made, to have me run around and pick up objects from around the environment, served to suck the emotion right out of me and put me back into "OK, I'm playing a game now" mode.
Next, in what could have been an amazingly emotional scene had it been a cinematic, I was stuck with playing through it with a simplistic button pressing mini-game.
Would it have been possible, had Mistwalker gone with a different follow-up style to the cinematic, to keep the level of emotion that they had built up? Probably not. Once we go from watching to playing, it gets a lot harder to keep that lump in a player's throat, since now they're concentrating on the gameplay and not the scene at hand. Does it minimize the emotions that I had felt while watching the scene? Absolutely not, and it's one that will probably stick with me for a while, but I will also remember being jarred from the emotion and being told to go find ten white flowers. In a movie, you can bring down the viewers in whatever way you choose, carrying the emotion for a while longer or shifting the scene accordingly, but in a game you ultimately need to go back to having the players play, and that's when keeping the emotional level gets a lot more complex.
In something like Fable 2, it's equally complex. I loved the game, but at any point did I really feel an emotional attachment to my wives or children in the game? Once you got past the "heehee, I'm having sex in the game" (and don't try to lie to me, you all did it), they really just served as a distraction. Hell, in my evil playthrough I killed wives and slept with prostitutes and ignored my kids, so I really hope I wasn't emotionally attached to any of them. Even in my good character's world, I really didn't develop any special bond with my family. I gave my kids gifts and upgraded my house to make my wife happy, but mostly did it because it was part of the game. Even my loyal hound, whom I fed treats and such, was a tool to find treasure and help me battle monsters.
Then again, maybe that's the point? Maybe Molyneaux got it right? Instead of going for the tearjerker moments, the powerful cinematics designed to make you cry, he integrated the family so seamlessly into the experience that you cared for them without even realizing it. I could have blown off my family, but I took the time to return home now and again and give presents to my kids. I stopped at random times to play fetch with my dog, give him treats, and made sure that if he was hurt I healed him as soon as possible. Without even realizing it, I did have some sort of bond with these characters.
Either way, the quest to emotionally involve players in these games is an ongoing one. Whether you choose heartwrenching cinematic scenes or try to integrate the emotion right into the gameplay, trying to get players to feel instead of just play is the goal of many developers out there. Some have come close, but has anybody really managed to pull it off just right? Whether it's Fable 2's subtle approach or Lost Odyssey's direct one, has anybody really managed to really immerse the hearts of the players as they have the minds?
I will say this, though: Whether you get emotionally attached to characters in games, or just play them without feeling, if you tossed the Companion Cube into the incinerator without so much as a pause (Portal), you are one heartless bastard.
Just last night I came to a rather pivotal moment, in terms of both character development and storyline. There was a cinematic, which I won't spoil if you haven't had the chance to play the game yet, but one that I will say was very moving and very powerful. Seriously, I had a lump in my throat watching the scene, and it really does twist the story in a new and unexpected direction.
Emotion is something that game developers have been trying to inject into their works for quite a while now, and as technology advances the creative minds behind our electronic worlds are trying to harness the new power to enhance the experiences they bring to players.
Of course, some emotions are pretty easy to convey. Excitement, for example, is something that most gamers have felt at one point or another. Play one of the Phoenix Wright games for the DS. When you're on the right track, the music starts pumping and Phoenix starts making those dramatic poses as his case comes together, tell me that your pulse doesn't quicken a bit as you get swept up in the moment. Text adventures don't do it for you? How about the rush of leaping from a cathedral spire in Assassin's Creed, or the frantic excitement of taking down Scarab in Halo?
What about conveying fear? Take something like Bioshock as an example. Tiptoeing through a hallway, water leaking from above. You've just taken out two splicers, and you think you're in the clear and can catch your breath, when suddenly you hear the unmistakeable sound of a Big Daddy in the area. Your blood will run cold when you hear that groan echoing through the hallways of Rapture (not to mention the guilt you may feel when destroying your first Little Sister for the precious ADAM she carries). Not scary enough? Try Fatal Frame. You can hear a sound, but what's making it? Bringing your camera to your eye, suddenly you see the twisted spectre lunging straight at you. Serious goosebumb territory.
So there are some emotional responses that games are known for, that certain genres (like survival horror) are pretty much based upon. What creators are looking to do next, though, is tug at your heartstrings and even make you cry.
The concept is nothing new. Fans of Final Fantasy VII will tell you how sad they were when Aerith died. Most RPG's shoot for an epic level of emotional attachment to the characters, though honestly there are only a select few that ever succeed.
Peter Molyneaux of Lionhead Studios has spoken quite a bit about emotion in games, and stated that one of the main tenants in Fable 2 was actually love. He spoke of getting married in the game, the unwavering devotion your children will show you, and of the loyal dog that stands by your side throughout the adventure. David Jaffe (God of War) has stated that he wants to make gamers cry (hey, start making games for Microsoft or Nintendo, then watch all the Sony fanboys scream and freak out. Or maybe that's not the same thing...), and there have been others who have claimed that their goal is to develop a true emotional connection between the game and the player.
Of course, this is easier said than done, as in the end it's just a game, and here where the real problem comes.
In a movie, it's easy to express emotion. The characters onscreen laugh and cry and love and hate, and if the writing is sound and the acting is good than a viewer can feel those emotions as well. It's a passive experience designed to take the audience on a journey through a story and whatever feelings that tale should convey.
In a game, at least in part, it is easy to do the same. The emotional investment in the characters is still there, perhaps even moreso since the player is actively controlling them instead of just watching. The stories are as deep if not deeper, and as graphics and sound improve the sense of "just watching a game" blurs.
Like in that cutscene in Lost Odyssey, it's not hard to use the same techniques that movies and books use to draw upon the same emotions. Surprise, sadness, both were conveyed in the cinematic.
So then what's holding back emotion in games? Why is it still something that game makers feel they need to achieve, not something they've already managed to pull off?
Like I said before, in a game you've got a lot of opportunities that you don't have in other media. Instead of simply reading about a character, or watching him act out a scripted scene, you are the character. You've got a lot more time than you would in a two hour movie to build the character and the story, and with a decent calibre of writing you can easily draw upon the same emotions that other media does.
The problem is, though, in the end it is still a game. For example, in Lost Odyssey: After watching this heartwrenching scene, after genuinely caring for the characters and having a profound emotional response to what was happening, the scene ended and we were left with a pretty lame fetch quest. The game went from the deep video right into characters standing around talking in text boxes, and I was sent to find flowers and branches.
Ultimately, it is a game, and as such it is meant to be played and not just watched. However, the choice that was made, to have me run around and pick up objects from around the environment, served to suck the emotion right out of me and put me back into "OK, I'm playing a game now" mode.
Next, in what could have been an amazingly emotional scene had it been a cinematic, I was stuck with playing through it with a simplistic button pressing mini-game.
Would it have been possible, had Mistwalker gone with a different follow-up style to the cinematic, to keep the level of emotion that they had built up? Probably not. Once we go from watching to playing, it gets a lot harder to keep that lump in a player's throat, since now they're concentrating on the gameplay and not the scene at hand. Does it minimize the emotions that I had felt while watching the scene? Absolutely not, and it's one that will probably stick with me for a while, but I will also remember being jarred from the emotion and being told to go find ten white flowers. In a movie, you can bring down the viewers in whatever way you choose, carrying the emotion for a while longer or shifting the scene accordingly, but in a game you ultimately need to go back to having the players play, and that's when keeping the emotional level gets a lot more complex.
In something like Fable 2, it's equally complex. I loved the game, but at any point did I really feel an emotional attachment to my wives or children in the game? Once you got past the "heehee, I'm having sex in the game" (and don't try to lie to me, you all did it), they really just served as a distraction. Hell, in my evil playthrough I killed wives and slept with prostitutes and ignored my kids, so I really hope I wasn't emotionally attached to any of them. Even in my good character's world, I really didn't develop any special bond with my family. I gave my kids gifts and upgraded my house to make my wife happy, but mostly did it because it was part of the game. Even my loyal hound, whom I fed treats and such, was a tool to find treasure and help me battle monsters.
Then again, maybe that's the point? Maybe Molyneaux got it right? Instead of going for the tearjerker moments, the powerful cinematics designed to make you cry, he integrated the family so seamlessly into the experience that you cared for them without even realizing it. I could have blown off my family, but I took the time to return home now and again and give presents to my kids. I stopped at random times to play fetch with my dog, give him treats, and made sure that if he was hurt I healed him as soon as possible. Without even realizing it, I did have some sort of bond with these characters.
Either way, the quest to emotionally involve players in these games is an ongoing one. Whether you choose heartwrenching cinematic scenes or try to integrate the emotion right into the gameplay, trying to get players to feel instead of just play is the goal of many developers out there. Some have come close, but has anybody really managed to pull it off just right? Whether it's Fable 2's subtle approach or Lost Odyssey's direct one, has anybody really managed to really immerse the hearts of the players as they have the minds?
I will say this, though: Whether you get emotionally attached to characters in games, or just play them without feeling, if you tossed the Companion Cube into the incinerator without so much as a pause (Portal), you are one heartless bastard.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Cost Wars
The latest battle being fought within the industry isn't really a part of the over-arching "console wars", which is generally always going on anyway, but is focused on one particular machine and the price tag attached to it.
It's no big secret that the Playstation 3 is an expensive machine. From the day it was announced, gamers and developers alike were stunned by the substantial investment involved in purchasing the console. Substantially more than any other system on the market, the price is one of the major reasons that Sony's baby now lags third out of the three current generation machines.
The company's attitude about the hefty price hasn't helped. I remember some executive, probably Kaz "Foot in Mouth" Hirai, stating that the price was fine and that people will want the system badly enough to work longer hours to make more money to afford the system. Not only is this an amazingly arrogant statement to make, but it only served as one of the earliest examples of Sony trying to dodge the price issue with posturing and hiding behind their past success. They've come out more than once and stated that people will buy the system simply because it says "Playstation" on it, and that the machine is so amazing and is well worth the cost and that people need to buy it and basically wait for the games and such to catch up.
Meanwhile, while they're avoiding the problem, people are buying other consoles. Game developers are pouring more time and dollars into the other machines, which are getting more exclusives and just more attention across the board, and despite frequent price drop rumors Sony keeps sticking to their guns and defending the high cost.
The battle took an unexpected turn recently, when Activison's CEO Bobby Kotick threatened to pull support from Sony and their machines (the PS3 as well as the PSP) unless the price of the Playstation 3 is dropped. He states that Activision support could dry up as early as next year if something isn't done, saying that the return on their investment isn't as good on the PS3 as it is on competing consoles.
From Kotick's statement: "I'm getting concerned about Sony. The Playstation 3 is losing a bit of momentum and they don't make it easy for me to support the platform. It's expensive to develop for the console, and the Wii and Xbox are simply selling better. Games generate a better return on invested capital on the Xbox than on the Playstation."
To be fair, Kotick has been a critic of console prices for a while now, stating more than once that all of them need to hit the sub-$200 price point. Still, having a big company like Activision making a statement like this should rattle some feathers, right? Aside from owning almost every licensed property out there, Activision publishes some little series called Call of Duty as well as those Guitar Hero games, so there's no question that their support is very important to the success of any console.
Not long after Activision's statement, Tecmo came forward and also begged Sony for a price cut. They weren't nearly as bold about it, not threatening to pull support but offering more of a "you should do it but if you don't that's cool too" type of statement. So we won't talk any more of that, but I figured I'd toss it out there.
So what was Sony's response? A polite statement explaining why they have no plans to drop the price, or maybe an announcement of a drop? Nope, of course not. They decided to draw a line in the sand, blowing off Kotick's statement in their typically arrogant style.
Sony CEO Sir Howard Stringer responded by saying "He likes to make a lot of noise. He's putting pressure on me, and I'm putting pressure on him. That's the nature of business. I lose money on every Playstation I make, how's that for logic?"
Jack Tretton continued the statement, pointing out that people "have short-term thinking" and that the console isn't even three years old yet. He tries to paint the machine as having long-term value, tossing a backhanded statement to the other consoles when he asks "how many people are still playing them?" and taking the stance they've taken all along: that the system is well worth the exorbitant price tag.
Really, Stringer probably shouldn't be tossing little insults into his statements. He could have dropped that first part about Kotick "making noise" and still had a solid statement, but he had to go that extra mile. The fact is, Activision could stop all Sony production tomorrow and still be just fine in the money department. Hell, they make more on their crappy licensed DS games than they probably make in PS3 sales. Activision can survive without Sony, but can Sony survive without Activision? With a library not as strong as those on the other consoles, can they really afford to have it cut even more?
Tretton took the stance that Sony has had from the start, that the machine offers so much and is a real value when you consider all that it can do. They often point out Blu-Ray, internet, and other bells and whistles as reasons for the price, and generally take a "look at the long term" stance. Of course, consumers don't look at the long term, and it's silly to expect them to. If someone walks into a game store with a couple hundred dollars looking for a new machine, what are they going to go for? The really expensive machine that will take all their cash, not leaving enough left over to grab games with, that promises to be great in a few years, or the one that they can grab and buy some cool titles right away, that already has a great online network or tons of hot games? It's shortsighted of Sony to expect people to buy it because of the name and then wait it out, and someone is finally calling them about it.
It's interesting to see this particular skirmish coming to a head, and time will tell how it plays out. Will Sony drop the price of the machine, as everybody wants them to do, or will they stick to their guns and hold out? With the company losing money for the first time in a long time, can they even afford to drop the price and lose even more with each console sold? Then again, if the consoles aren't selling at all, and therefore leaving games and accessories on store shelves, can they afford not to drop the cost?
If Sony doesn't drop the price, will Activision follow through on their threat? It would certainly be historic, one of the major publishers pulling their support from a manufacturer. Would other houses follow suit, bolstered by the move, leaving Sony in even more of a difficult position?
It will be interesting to see if Bobby Kotick responds to Stringer's response, adding fuel to the fire. It may end up being a lot of posturing on both sides, or it may lead to some big decisions from some of the biggest players in the industry.
Hell, the price is one of the major reasons I haven't bought one yet. Well, that, and there are maybe four games I even want to play on it (not a one of them Activision titles, incidentally).
It's no big secret that the Playstation 3 is an expensive machine. From the day it was announced, gamers and developers alike were stunned by the substantial investment involved in purchasing the console. Substantially more than any other system on the market, the price is one of the major reasons that Sony's baby now lags third out of the three current generation machines.
The company's attitude about the hefty price hasn't helped. I remember some executive, probably Kaz "Foot in Mouth" Hirai, stating that the price was fine and that people will want the system badly enough to work longer hours to make more money to afford the system. Not only is this an amazingly arrogant statement to make, but it only served as one of the earliest examples of Sony trying to dodge the price issue with posturing and hiding behind their past success. They've come out more than once and stated that people will buy the system simply because it says "Playstation" on it, and that the machine is so amazing and is well worth the cost and that people need to buy it and basically wait for the games and such to catch up.
Meanwhile, while they're avoiding the problem, people are buying other consoles. Game developers are pouring more time and dollars into the other machines, which are getting more exclusives and just more attention across the board, and despite frequent price drop rumors Sony keeps sticking to their guns and defending the high cost.
The battle took an unexpected turn recently, when Activison's CEO Bobby Kotick threatened to pull support from Sony and their machines (the PS3 as well as the PSP) unless the price of the Playstation 3 is dropped. He states that Activision support could dry up as early as next year if something isn't done, saying that the return on their investment isn't as good on the PS3 as it is on competing consoles.
From Kotick's statement: "I'm getting concerned about Sony. The Playstation 3 is losing a bit of momentum and they don't make it easy for me to support the platform. It's expensive to develop for the console, and the Wii and Xbox are simply selling better. Games generate a better return on invested capital on the Xbox than on the Playstation."
To be fair, Kotick has been a critic of console prices for a while now, stating more than once that all of them need to hit the sub-$200 price point. Still, having a big company like Activision making a statement like this should rattle some feathers, right? Aside from owning almost every licensed property out there, Activision publishes some little series called Call of Duty as well as those Guitar Hero games, so there's no question that their support is very important to the success of any console.
Not long after Activision's statement, Tecmo came forward and also begged Sony for a price cut. They weren't nearly as bold about it, not threatening to pull support but offering more of a "you should do it but if you don't that's cool too" type of statement. So we won't talk any more of that, but I figured I'd toss it out there.
So what was Sony's response? A polite statement explaining why they have no plans to drop the price, or maybe an announcement of a drop? Nope, of course not. They decided to draw a line in the sand, blowing off Kotick's statement in their typically arrogant style.
Sony CEO Sir Howard Stringer responded by saying "He likes to make a lot of noise. He's putting pressure on me, and I'm putting pressure on him. That's the nature of business. I lose money on every Playstation I make, how's that for logic?"
Jack Tretton continued the statement, pointing out that people "have short-term thinking" and that the console isn't even three years old yet. He tries to paint the machine as having long-term value, tossing a backhanded statement to the other consoles when he asks "how many people are still playing them?" and taking the stance they've taken all along: that the system is well worth the exorbitant price tag.
Really, Stringer probably shouldn't be tossing little insults into his statements. He could have dropped that first part about Kotick "making noise" and still had a solid statement, but he had to go that extra mile. The fact is, Activision could stop all Sony production tomorrow and still be just fine in the money department. Hell, they make more on their crappy licensed DS games than they probably make in PS3 sales. Activision can survive without Sony, but can Sony survive without Activision? With a library not as strong as those on the other consoles, can they really afford to have it cut even more?
Tretton took the stance that Sony has had from the start, that the machine offers so much and is a real value when you consider all that it can do. They often point out Blu-Ray, internet, and other bells and whistles as reasons for the price, and generally take a "look at the long term" stance. Of course, consumers don't look at the long term, and it's silly to expect them to. If someone walks into a game store with a couple hundred dollars looking for a new machine, what are they going to go for? The really expensive machine that will take all their cash, not leaving enough left over to grab games with, that promises to be great in a few years, or the one that they can grab and buy some cool titles right away, that already has a great online network or tons of hot games? It's shortsighted of Sony to expect people to buy it because of the name and then wait it out, and someone is finally calling them about it.
It's interesting to see this particular skirmish coming to a head, and time will tell how it plays out. Will Sony drop the price of the machine, as everybody wants them to do, or will they stick to their guns and hold out? With the company losing money for the first time in a long time, can they even afford to drop the price and lose even more with each console sold? Then again, if the consoles aren't selling at all, and therefore leaving games and accessories on store shelves, can they afford not to drop the cost?
If Sony doesn't drop the price, will Activision follow through on their threat? It would certainly be historic, one of the major publishers pulling their support from a manufacturer. Would other houses follow suit, bolstered by the move, leaving Sony in even more of a difficult position?
It will be interesting to see if Bobby Kotick responds to Stringer's response, adding fuel to the fire. It may end up being a lot of posturing on both sides, or it may lead to some big decisions from some of the biggest players in the industry.
Hell, the price is one of the major reasons I haven't bought one yet. Well, that, and there are maybe four games I even want to play on it (not a one of them Activision titles, incidentally).
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Warning: Reading This Blog May Make You Awesome
It's no secret that many people in America are overweight. Obesity is a big problem, and all you have to do is take a look at people out on the street to see that there are a lot of really fat folks out there (or you can go to a club, where there are a lot of really fat folks wearing next to nothing. I don't recommend that).
Lots of time is put in, lots of money is spent, and there are a lot of people working on the problem, trying to make the country svelte and sexy. Big portions, junk food, lack of exercise, all are cited as causes to this big (hah! pun!) issue.
Of course, video games are often targeted as well, due to the fact that they can apparently hypnotize people and make them spend all of their time on the couch instead of outside running marathons. Unless you're talented enough to run while playing DS, of course.
A recent post at blog Winston Salem Fitness calls out Wii Fit, and also suggests that labels need to be put onto games to warn people about their fat-inducing powers.
Now, the author states pretty much up front that he has never played Wii Fit. However, that didn't stop him from making judgements on the game based on what he's heard. Because there's nothing more scientific than basing your entire opinion on hearsay. He proceeds to state that the entire premise of the game, to help people lose weight and get fit, is shaky at best and will most likely not "make a dent in America's growing obesity problem".
He then calls out each aspect of the game, proceeding to question the focus on balance and the use of Body Mass Index (BMI) for tracking progress. After that, he actually breaks down individual exercises and activities and explains why they are not helpful and pretty much offers up a passive-aggressive assault on the game itself. Again, he has not played the game at all, according to the beginning of the post, but he is apparently more than qualified to pass judgement.
To be fair (for a change), he does call out specific exercises and explains from a physical standpoint as to why they're not helpful for losing weight or strength training, and he may very well be right. I'm not a personal trainer, nor do I know a lot about muscles or physical conditioning, so my opinion probably doesn't count for very much here. Then again, that's not stopping this guy...
He sums up his post with this:
"Overall, I give Nintendo credit for trying to make a game that tries to get people to be more active, which is more than can be said for other video game manufacturers. However, this will not do anything in terms of chipping away at the American obesity problem. In fact, I’ll go out on a limb and say that the video game industry needs to follow the route of the tobacco and alcohol manufacturers, and state that excessive use of their product could lead to inactivity and obesity, rather than try to make a half-hearted effort at increasing American activity levels."
Here we have my (roundabout) point to today's Grumbly Gamer post: he thinks that the video game industry needs to put a warning label on games. He wants a statement about excessive use leading to inactivity and obesity.
That's amazingly narrow-minded. Should we be putting warning labels on bags of Oreo cookies next? Something like "Warning: Eating this entire bag of cookies can make you fat and probably make you throw the hell up"? What about putting a warning on your TV, warning people that if they sit down and watch for too long they could balloon up to the size of Jabba the Hutt.
While sitting in front of a TV, watching or playing games, for too long without any activity is certainly one factor in the issue, it's hardly the only one, and the idea of warning people about it is just dumb. How stupid does this guy really think the American public is?
Seriously, trying to blame the problem on games is not only a serious over-simplification of the much larger (!) issue, but really can't be done without then pointing an accusing finger at every other possible cause. I've been fat, not morbidly obese or anything but overweight, and I can point to a bunch of different factors that led me there. It was my own fault, my own lifestyle and eating habits, and I'm certainly not crying over the fact that I played a lot of games and they made me fat. I made a conscious decision to eat like crap and not exercise, and I paid the price. In the last year I have spent time exercising, modified my diet to eat healthier and lower fat/ calories/ carbs, and even playing Wii Fit to help supplement the workouts, and I have lost over thirty pounds. I still game a lot, and I certainly didn't need a lame-ass misdirected warning label on the packaging telling me that the games may have caused me to be fat in the first place.
Do people need to get off the couch and move around? Yes, absolutely. Is putting a label on games going to make that happen? Not a chance in hell.
Plus, if a game like Wii Fit or EA Sports Active, or even next year's Pokemon Soul Silver/ Heart Gold games with the nifty little pedometer get gamers to move and maybe get more active, then more power to them. Despite what this guy has to say (with his deeply scientific "never played them" methods), games like this can only help in the long run.
Hey, if people are sitting on their computer reading blogs instead of out exercising, can they be blamed for the country's obesity? Then, shouldn't that guy's blog have a warning label at the top of it telling people that sitting around reading it can make them fat (and kill their brain cells)?
Mine has a warning. Right up there in the title. Because I care.
Lots of time is put in, lots of money is spent, and there are a lot of people working on the problem, trying to make the country svelte and sexy. Big portions, junk food, lack of exercise, all are cited as causes to this big (hah! pun!) issue.
Of course, video games are often targeted as well, due to the fact that they can apparently hypnotize people and make them spend all of their time on the couch instead of outside running marathons. Unless you're talented enough to run while playing DS, of course.
A recent post at blog Winston Salem Fitness calls out Wii Fit, and also suggests that labels need to be put onto games to warn people about their fat-inducing powers.
Now, the author states pretty much up front that he has never played Wii Fit. However, that didn't stop him from making judgements on the game based on what he's heard. Because there's nothing more scientific than basing your entire opinion on hearsay. He proceeds to state that the entire premise of the game, to help people lose weight and get fit, is shaky at best and will most likely not "make a dent in America's growing obesity problem".
He then calls out each aspect of the game, proceeding to question the focus on balance and the use of Body Mass Index (BMI) for tracking progress. After that, he actually breaks down individual exercises and activities and explains why they are not helpful and pretty much offers up a passive-aggressive assault on the game itself. Again, he has not played the game at all, according to the beginning of the post, but he is apparently more than qualified to pass judgement.
To be fair (for a change), he does call out specific exercises and explains from a physical standpoint as to why they're not helpful for losing weight or strength training, and he may very well be right. I'm not a personal trainer, nor do I know a lot about muscles or physical conditioning, so my opinion probably doesn't count for very much here. Then again, that's not stopping this guy...
He sums up his post with this:
"Overall, I give Nintendo credit for trying to make a game that tries to get people to be more active, which is more than can be said for other video game manufacturers. However, this will not do anything in terms of chipping away at the American obesity problem. In fact, I’ll go out on a limb and say that the video game industry needs to follow the route of the tobacco and alcohol manufacturers, and state that excessive use of their product could lead to inactivity and obesity, rather than try to make a half-hearted effort at increasing American activity levels."
Here we have my (roundabout) point to today's Grumbly Gamer post: he thinks that the video game industry needs to put a warning label on games. He wants a statement about excessive use leading to inactivity and obesity.
That's amazingly narrow-minded. Should we be putting warning labels on bags of Oreo cookies next? Something like "Warning: Eating this entire bag of cookies can make you fat and probably make you throw the hell up"? What about putting a warning on your TV, warning people that if they sit down and watch for too long they could balloon up to the size of Jabba the Hutt.
While sitting in front of a TV, watching or playing games, for too long without any activity is certainly one factor in the issue, it's hardly the only one, and the idea of warning people about it is just dumb. How stupid does this guy really think the American public is?
Seriously, trying to blame the problem on games is not only a serious over-simplification of the much larger (!) issue, but really can't be done without then pointing an accusing finger at every other possible cause. I've been fat, not morbidly obese or anything but overweight, and I can point to a bunch of different factors that led me there. It was my own fault, my own lifestyle and eating habits, and I'm certainly not crying over the fact that I played a lot of games and they made me fat. I made a conscious decision to eat like crap and not exercise, and I paid the price. In the last year I have spent time exercising, modified my diet to eat healthier and lower fat/ calories/ carbs, and even playing Wii Fit to help supplement the workouts, and I have lost over thirty pounds. I still game a lot, and I certainly didn't need a lame-ass misdirected warning label on the packaging telling me that the games may have caused me to be fat in the first place.
Do people need to get off the couch and move around? Yes, absolutely. Is putting a label on games going to make that happen? Not a chance in hell.
Plus, if a game like Wii Fit or EA Sports Active, or even next year's Pokemon Soul Silver/ Heart Gold games with the nifty little pedometer get gamers to move and maybe get more active, then more power to them. Despite what this guy has to say (with his deeply scientific "never played them" methods), games like this can only help in the long run.
Hey, if people are sitting on their computer reading blogs instead of out exercising, can they be blamed for the country's obesity? Then, shouldn't that guy's blog have a warning label at the top of it telling people that sitting around reading it can make them fat (and kill their brain cells)?
Mine has a warning. Right up there in the title. Because I care.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Friday Night Fail: Bastard Child Edition
Way back in the olden days, when people used to gather in saloons to play games while listening to festive piano music (and I'm pretty sure spitoons were somehow involved), there came a game called Secret of Mana. Created by a company known then just as Square (before the addition of Enix), Secret of Mana was a SNES action-RPG that complemented their flagship (if innapropriately named) series Final Fantasy.
The series saw another entry on the Gameboy, Sword of Mana, though when it reached US shores it was renamed Final Fantasy Adventure. The game was later remade, with its original name, for the Gameboy Advance, though this remake was a little heavy-handed and overdone, actually a bit of a let down for fans of the original like myself. I played through Final Fantasy Adventure more than once, but couldn't get through one playthrough of Sword of Mana.
So I was pretty excited when a new DS entry into the series, Children of Mana, was announced.
Upon first putting the game into my trusty DS, I assumed that I was in for an exciting action-RPG. The graphics were fun and colorful, the opening animated intro was impressive, there was some basic character customization in the sense that you could choose one of four characters and then choose which color clothing they wore, and the game utilized the dual-screen device well with action on the top and menus on the touch screen.
Unfortunately, it didn't take long for the cracks in the facade to show through.
First of all, there's the story they set up. Now, I really don't generally expect much from Square when it comes to narrative. They've got more spiky-haired young heroes with amnesia who must set out from their small village and save the world from a terrible evil than any one company should be allowed, but the tale weaved in Children of Mana can be told in one sentence: The stone in front of the Mana Tree cracked and you have to go figure out why. There's no real twists or turns, no big reveals or deep layers, just that set-up to explain why you're running through a dizzying amount of dungeons killing monsters.
However, a weak story can be forgiven if the game is fun to play.
Children of Mana is, like its predecessors, an action-RPG. This means running through dungeons, killing monsters in real time, and usually solving some puzzles to continue. Unfortunately, this is pretty much the entire game. You've got a town which acts as a main mission hub, and while you'll travel to different areas throughout the game there is generally one settlement in each area that serves this same function. Here is where you'll buy and sell items, rest up at the inn, and get new missions. There are the main story missions, as well as special extra missions you can undertake to grind levels and get more loot. They're all the same in the end, though. In each area you'll be in the same dungeon for story missions or bonus missions, killing the same monsters, picking up the same treasure, and solving the same rudimentary puzzles to continue.
The game's biggest disappointment is that it's just boring.
The combat it tied to one button, so you'll just run through the generic dungeons mashing that same button over and over again. You do have ranged weapons and some magic, but most of the time you'll be hitting the attack button. The puzzles are generally "kill all the monsters in a room" or "find the pot with the key and put it onto the panel" sort of things, nothing that requires any deep thought. The bonus missions involve going back into the dungeon and killing a certain amount of slimes or getting to level ten or something generic like that, and since there's only really one dungeon per area you'll soon get bored with seeing the same scenery over and over again.
The game does have flashes of originality. Your character has a "gem frame", basically a 2x2 holder, and as you progress through the dungeons you'll find plenty of different gems. Each gem has a different ability, such as adding to defense or increasing money drops, and it's up to the player to put the gems they want into the gem frame. This allows for some customization, as well as a bit of strategy: different gems have different shapes, so a powerful attack enhancer may take up two slots, so you'll have to weigh the benefits against the fact that you're losing some space.
There is multiplayer, where players can run through a dungeon together. This can be entertaining for a while, as any multiplayer game is, and it is cool that you're using your own character so any experience or loot you earn in multiplayer carries over back into single.
The biggest issue I have with Children of Mana is the feeling of wasted potential. The graphics are fun and colorful, there's some neat ideas at work, but ultimately it's all squandered by generic gameplay.
In the end it's a straightforward dungeon crawler, which I do enjoy for the most part, but in this case I was just hoping for a little bit more.
The series saw another entry on the Gameboy, Sword of Mana, though when it reached US shores it was renamed Final Fantasy Adventure. The game was later remade, with its original name, for the Gameboy Advance, though this remake was a little heavy-handed and overdone, actually a bit of a let down for fans of the original like myself. I played through Final Fantasy Adventure more than once, but couldn't get through one playthrough of Sword of Mana.
So I was pretty excited when a new DS entry into the series, Children of Mana, was announced.
Upon first putting the game into my trusty DS, I assumed that I was in for an exciting action-RPG. The graphics were fun and colorful, the opening animated intro was impressive, there was some basic character customization in the sense that you could choose one of four characters and then choose which color clothing they wore, and the game utilized the dual-screen device well with action on the top and menus on the touch screen.
Unfortunately, it didn't take long for the cracks in the facade to show through.
First of all, there's the story they set up. Now, I really don't generally expect much from Square when it comes to narrative. They've got more spiky-haired young heroes with amnesia who must set out from their small village and save the world from a terrible evil than any one company should be allowed, but the tale weaved in Children of Mana can be told in one sentence: The stone in front of the Mana Tree cracked and you have to go figure out why. There's no real twists or turns, no big reveals or deep layers, just that set-up to explain why you're running through a dizzying amount of dungeons killing monsters.
However, a weak story can be forgiven if the game is fun to play.
Children of Mana is, like its predecessors, an action-RPG. This means running through dungeons, killing monsters in real time, and usually solving some puzzles to continue. Unfortunately, this is pretty much the entire game. You've got a town which acts as a main mission hub, and while you'll travel to different areas throughout the game there is generally one settlement in each area that serves this same function. Here is where you'll buy and sell items, rest up at the inn, and get new missions. There are the main story missions, as well as special extra missions you can undertake to grind levels and get more loot. They're all the same in the end, though. In each area you'll be in the same dungeon for story missions or bonus missions, killing the same monsters, picking up the same treasure, and solving the same rudimentary puzzles to continue.
The game's biggest disappointment is that it's just boring.
The combat it tied to one button, so you'll just run through the generic dungeons mashing that same button over and over again. You do have ranged weapons and some magic, but most of the time you'll be hitting the attack button. The puzzles are generally "kill all the monsters in a room" or "find the pot with the key and put it onto the panel" sort of things, nothing that requires any deep thought. The bonus missions involve going back into the dungeon and killing a certain amount of slimes or getting to level ten or something generic like that, and since there's only really one dungeon per area you'll soon get bored with seeing the same scenery over and over again.
The game does have flashes of originality. Your character has a "gem frame", basically a 2x2 holder, and as you progress through the dungeons you'll find plenty of different gems. Each gem has a different ability, such as adding to defense or increasing money drops, and it's up to the player to put the gems they want into the gem frame. This allows for some customization, as well as a bit of strategy: different gems have different shapes, so a powerful attack enhancer may take up two slots, so you'll have to weigh the benefits against the fact that you're losing some space.
There is multiplayer, where players can run through a dungeon together. This can be entertaining for a while, as any multiplayer game is, and it is cool that you're using your own character so any experience or loot you earn in multiplayer carries over back into single.
The biggest issue I have with Children of Mana is the feeling of wasted potential. The graphics are fun and colorful, there's some neat ideas at work, but ultimately it's all squandered by generic gameplay.
In the end it's a straightforward dungeon crawler, which I do enjoy for the most part, but in this case I was just hoping for a little bit more.
Friday, July 3, 2009
Can I Buy My Tickets NOW?
Sometimes, I scour the interweb, reading all sorts of game news and trying to find some nugget that is worthy of my scathing abuse. I absorb articles, reviews, and rumors in the hopes of finding something that I want to write about. Once I choose the news that I want to sarcastically report on, I read and re-read the article and develop my plan of attack, often hit other sites to get different details on the news, and then I sit down and write.
Every now and again, a story comes along that not only screams MAKE FUN OF ME, but really doesn't need much help to sound completely ridiculous. Tonight I offer you one of those stories:
According to The Hollywood Reporter, Universal Pictures will be making a movie based upon the classic video game Asteroids.
Really, I could end the post right there. That's amusing enough. However, for those who may not be catching the humor, I'll elaborate.
Asteroids, for the six people who may not know, is an old arcade game (1979) that was later released for consoles such as the Atari 2600 (arguably the best wood-paneled system in gaming history). It consisted of the player controlling a small, triangle-shaped ship and shooting large asteroids. When one is shot, it breaks up into smaller rocks, and then when those are shot they break down once more. The background is black, the ship and asteroids are white lines, and there is no story or characters to speak of. When you destroy all of the asteroids on a level, you go to the next level where there are more to shoot at. They get faster and more plentiful until you blow up and run out of little triangle ships.
Not exactly War and Peace. Hell, I think the barcode for the book has a deeper narrative.
Amazing fact #1) Universal now has the rights to make a move based upon this game, but there was actually a bidding war between them and three other studios. So four studios were fighting over a game that had more text on the arcade cabinet that housed it than in the game itself.
Amazing fact #2) They acknowledge the lack of story or "world-building mythology", and that they will have to create a story from scratch. It is pointed out that they are also doing so for two other properties they recently obtained for movie-making purposes: Battleship and Candyland. So not only has the studio chosen to make a film based upon a thirty year old arcade game, but have also acquired the rights to "several" Hasbro board games.
Amazing fact #3) While the country suffers through perhaps the worst economic crisis in its history, and people are starving and our children are under-educated, people are going to put millions of dollars into making a movie based upon fucking Asteroids.
What's next? Pong, the tragic story of two lines and the little square that keeps coming between them? Defender, an action adventure about a ship that flies over an endless mountain range (or city, in the Atari 2600 version) and rescues people from alien ships? How about a comedy based upon Breakout, with wisecracking colored blocks that keep taunting the ball determined to hit and destroy them.
Ummm.... if any decision-making types in any movie studios happen across this post, those are ALL VERY BAD IDEAS. Unless you decide to make one, in which case it's a bad idea that you need to pay me a million dollars for coming up with.
Really, is this how desperate people are getting for ideas? It's bad enough that Hollywood regularly rapes video games, taking rich interactive experiences and turning them into poorly written tripe, but up until this point they've at least gone for games with a narrative and color graphics.
You know what? I don't need to come up with anything clever or sarcastic (some would argue that I never do anyway) in this case. All I need to say is this:
Universal Studios is making a movie based upon the game Asteroids.
Every now and again, a story comes along that not only screams MAKE FUN OF ME, but really doesn't need much help to sound completely ridiculous. Tonight I offer you one of those stories:
According to The Hollywood Reporter, Universal Pictures will be making a movie based upon the classic video game Asteroids.
Really, I could end the post right there. That's amusing enough. However, for those who may not be catching the humor, I'll elaborate.
Asteroids, for the six people who may not know, is an old arcade game (1979) that was later released for consoles such as the Atari 2600 (arguably the best wood-paneled system in gaming history). It consisted of the player controlling a small, triangle-shaped ship and shooting large asteroids. When one is shot, it breaks up into smaller rocks, and then when those are shot they break down once more. The background is black, the ship and asteroids are white lines, and there is no story or characters to speak of. When you destroy all of the asteroids on a level, you go to the next level where there are more to shoot at. They get faster and more plentiful until you blow up and run out of little triangle ships.
Not exactly War and Peace. Hell, I think the barcode for the book has a deeper narrative.
Amazing fact #1) Universal now has the rights to make a move based upon this game, but there was actually a bidding war between them and three other studios. So four studios were fighting over a game that had more text on the arcade cabinet that housed it than in the game itself.
Amazing fact #2) They acknowledge the lack of story or "world-building mythology", and that they will have to create a story from scratch. It is pointed out that they are also doing so for two other properties they recently obtained for movie-making purposes: Battleship and Candyland. So not only has the studio chosen to make a film based upon a thirty year old arcade game, but have also acquired the rights to "several" Hasbro board games.
Amazing fact #3) While the country suffers through perhaps the worst economic crisis in its history, and people are starving and our children are under-educated, people are going to put millions of dollars into making a movie based upon fucking Asteroids.
What's next? Pong, the tragic story of two lines and the little square that keeps coming between them? Defender, an action adventure about a ship that flies over an endless mountain range (or city, in the Atari 2600 version) and rescues people from alien ships? How about a comedy based upon Breakout, with wisecracking colored blocks that keep taunting the ball determined to hit and destroy them.
Ummm.... if any decision-making types in any movie studios happen across this post, those are ALL VERY BAD IDEAS. Unless you decide to make one, in which case it's a bad idea that you need to pay me a million dollars for coming up with.
Really, is this how desperate people are getting for ideas? It's bad enough that Hollywood regularly rapes video games, taking rich interactive experiences and turning them into poorly written tripe, but up until this point they've at least gone for games with a narrative and color graphics.
You know what? I don't need to come up with anything clever or sarcastic (some would argue that I never do anyway) in this case. All I need to say is this:
Universal Studios is making a movie based upon the game Asteroids.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
And Now For Something Completely Different...
I've spent the evening skimming game news, hoping that something would jump out and yell "make fun of me", but apparently it's just not to be, which leaves me with the need to put something in this space and nothing quite fitting. I considered some sort of list, but that seems like a cop-out (not like I haven't done that in the past, and probably will in the future), so what's a hapless blogger to do?
So, I applied for a job today, as a writer for a reasonably large game studio. It was a straightforward online application process, a space for the resume and then the basic contact info. Of course, my resume has a link to this here corner of the interweb, but this is (sort of) game journalism and I want to prove that I'm also capable of the creative writing that would be more appropriate for the career path I applied for. I had spent the last day or so working on a short "audition" piece, and then when I applied I found that there was no place to attach it and send it along.
If we go on the assumption that someone from said studio might take a moment to point their browser this way (at least, that's the assumption I'm going to go with in order to not depress myself), then I'd like to get the chance to show this creative side. Then I realized that this is my damn blog, and I could write about the differences between cheddar cheese and a cat if I so chose (one of them is a tasty addition to a burger. I'm not saying which one), so I think I'll just go ahead and post this short creative writing piece in the hopes that someone will see it and say "Ods Bodkins! We must hire this person and give them lots of moneys!"
Or, if nothing else, it'll effectively make it look like I posted something today, so here goes:
*****
War Hero
When I joined up, I had visions of being a hero. The posters, the advertisements, everything about the military made it seem like a glamorous and exciting adventure. Even after I enlisted, on the rare times I talked to family and friends back home, the went on about how proud they were of me and what great work I was doing. I guess I envisioned myself striding across the front lines, blasting away at enemies and saving the day, getting showered with medals and getting the girl, just like I was led to believe.
I don't know if I'm a hero. I don't feel like one. In all of my grand fantasies, all I felt was confidence and strength and bravado. Now, though, huddled in foxholes and trenches in the pouring rain, all I can feel is fear. I'm afraid to die, I'm afraid that my fellows are going to die, and I'm afraid that I will never again see my home. I'm not even sure what we're fighting for anymore, can't be sure why we're shooting at them or they're shooting at us. I'm just doing what I'm ordered to do, hoping to survive another day and get one day closer to getting out of this madness.
I wonder if, somewhere on the other side of the battlefield, my enemies are huddled in a trench thinking the same thing.
The brass is planning something, some big assault I'd reckon. I can't say for sure, but there have been a lot of hushed conversations, private meetings, and weird scouting missions. We lost four guys the other day, four comrades that never returned, because they were sent out on some top-secret task. Four good men, gone, and most of the world may never even know why.
---
I wake up to a private gently shaking my shoulder, saying my name. I must have dozed off, sitting up with my back against the muddy trench wall. My rifle is across my lap, my hand on it even in sleep, and when my eyes snap open my fingers reflexively grip tighter before I realize where I am and see the dirty face of the kid who was sent to wake me.
He says something to me, but the roar of a jet flying low overhead steals the words and I just stare at him, still trying to shake the grogginess from my mind. He speaks again, telling me that the brass want to see me in the command bunker. I nod, he leaves to deliver his next message, and I sit for several moments while my stomach rolls with ice-cold dread. All I can think about are those four souls that were lost, four scared soldiers who were asked to go to the command bunker and who will never be going home again.
Steeling myself, I stand on shaky legs and walk towards the structure. Two others are also heading that way, both are trying to hide the worry just like I am, and are having no better luck. Martin and I share a glance, my fear reflected back in his eyes, and I nod to him in the hopes of looking more confident than I feel. I don't think I succeed.
---
The command bunker is nothing more than a rickety structure of wood and metal, hastily assembled in the middle of the camp. The only real difference between it and most of the other cobbled-together buildings is that it has a door rather than just a blanket hung over the entrance. As I walk to the building, it starts to rain, and I absently realize that I hadn't noticed that it stopped in the first place. The sky is grey, it has been for over a week, and the weather is just one of those little details that seems to fade away into the background when faced with the near constant threat of death. Some have told me that they actually notice it more, that they see things they always took for granted, like they're trying to absorb as much of the world as they can before they go. Me, I guess I just tune everything else out, the world just blurring around me as I twirl around the concept of dying in my head over and over.
Inside the bunker, General Brady and a couple of his officers are around a small table, looking over what looks like a scrawled map. They barely acknowledge us as we enter, and the three of us stand in silence and wait as the other men talk over the map in hushed tones. I don't know how long we wait, but it's probably not nearly as long as it feels. After what seems like an hour, they finally turn to us and the general speaks.
He cuts right to the chase, telling us about the mission we were chosen for. It's top secret, very dangerous, and he tells us that we'll be heroes. There's that word again, and for a split-second I see those posters of the dashing soldiers standing tall that made me join up in the first place. He beckons us over to the map, a roughly drawn blueprint of what looks like a massive tank. One of the officers, a skinny man whose name I don't think I ever knew, starts describing it as a super-weapon that the enemies are constructing, one that if completed could very easily turn the tide in their favor.
"We've sent out several scouting missions to the construction site, and they've transmitted back as much information as they could before..." He trails off, aware that my companions and I are staring at him.
"They gave their lives to save countless others," the general states, as if that somehow makes their deaths acceptable, "And now you're going to be given the chance to do the same."
I glance at Martin and Jason on either side of me. Both are staring straight at the general, but I do see a single tear run down Jason's mud-stained cheek.
The skinny officer continues, "I believe that we have all of the information we need to execute the next phase of the plan, the complete destruction of this weapon."
That gets my attention. I had already thought ahead, assumed that this was another suicidal recon mission, and this was therefore completely unexpected.
The officer continues, with additions by the general and his other aide, and the plan is laid out. Most of the force is going to attack from the flank, a distraction intended to draw the enemy's attention away from the construction site. It will no doubt still be guarded, but they feel that a small team can infiltrate the site and place charges at key points in the massive tank, destroying it and preventing it from ever being used.
We are given the rest of the day to prepare, the night to rest, and we are told that our mission begins at dawn. As we leave the command bunker and walk away, very little is said. At some point as I walk through the camp I realize that Martin and Jason are no longer beside me, no doubt off to get ready in their own ways for what could be our greatest moment, our last, or both.
---
I wonder the next morning if I spent the night before appropriately, given the fact that this mission is by far the most dangerous I have ever undertaken. What do people do when they believe that they may never see another sunset?
I write a letter to my parents, sit and watched the sun go down, and spend a lot of time in my bunk staring in silence at the ceiling. I don't think about anything in particular, nothing deep or meaningful, but just let my mind wander. I think about my past, about silly high school moments and the first girl I kissed, and at some point I drift off into fitful sleep.
Very little is said as we prepare for the mission, packing our gear and the explosive charges we'd be using to destroy the weapon. The whole experience is like a surreal dream, the general wishing us well and saluting us as we walk from the camp amid the silent stares of the other men, and it isn't long before the camp was gone from view and we are well on our way. We know that the rest of the battalion would be heading in another direction, acting as the distraction so we could complete our mission, but that seems like some distant battle as we trudge across the muddy ground.
We walk for almost a full day, stopping only briefly to eat our rations and rest for a moment before moving on, and as the sun starts to go down we see our target coming over the horizon. We unsling our rifles, crouching down as we walk, keeping our eyes peeled for guards as we slowly move forward, but it soon becomes clear just how huge this tank really is. For quite a while it looks like it isn't getting any closer at all, and as we come over a ridge we realize that we were only seeing the very top of what is a simply gigantic machine. It stands stories tall, wider than a house: it looks like it could roll right over our entire camp, and it's simply bristling with weaponry. Cannons, missile launchers, and what looks to be flame throwers are positioned all over the monstrous tank. Even incomplete, the sight of the super-weapon sends ice through my veins, just imagining what it could do if they got it operational.
---
We wait until nightfall, watching the guard patrols through binoculars, trying to determine their patterns and how they were armed. We only talk to each other when necessary, and mostly we just wait.
The rain starts again just before we hear the sounds of battle from nearby. Gunfire erupts, flashes can be seen through the darkness, and soldiers from the enemy camp scramble to retaliate against our men. Only a few guards stay behind to watch over the tank, and now it is time for our mission to really begin.
As we start down the hill towards our target, the image of that poster flashes back into my mind. The square-jawed soldiers standing up on a ridge, oozing strength and confidence, smiling and looking like a movie action hero. Nothing like the ragtag and muddy trio of Martin, Jason, and myself, trying to keep our footing in the rain and praying that we'd live to see the morning.
We choose to come in from the South side, where the defense seemed lightest. I sneak up behind a guard, drawing my knife and slitting his throat as I had been trained to do, but feel an unexpected moment of remorse. Was he an evil enemy monster, like we had been led to believe, or just a soldier like me? Was he just following orders, hoping to get home to his family when all of this was over, fearing death and thinking that this war was nothing like the pictures in the recruiting office. Had he been told by his own superiors that I was the evil one?
I do what I was taught, lowering the body slowly to minimize the noise to avoid alerting other guards. I watch for patrols as Martin and Jason slip into the perimeter, found the opening that we had seen on the roughly drawn map, and quietly sneak into the tank. I follow, rifle raised and ready, knowing that as soon as another guard find the body all hell would break loose.
---
We meet little resistance, but the inside of the tank is far more complex than the transmitted scout reports had indicated. It's far from complete, walls are half built and there are open spots where electronic panels will eventually be put in, but there is still a lot more inside than we had ever considered. It takes longer than we want to find places to set the charges, and as we work our way towards the exit we hear footsteps and shouting, the sounds of the dead guard being discovered and his own fellow soldiers looking to kill the intruders. I motion to Martin and Jason, silently instructing them to take up positions and prepare for a fight, and as I find a hiding place of my own I turn the detonator over and over in my hand.
The guards come through the door, and we pull our triggers. The first couple of guards fall in the doorway, but within moments more are coming through and returning fire, the sound of our weapons deafening in the enclosed metal hall. The muzzle flashes are blinding, and as the guards press in I scan my memory of the map, hoping to remember another way out.
Martin moves, catching my attention. He's been hit, tumbling backwards in slow motion and jerking as more bullets rip through him. He's dead before he hits the floor, his eyes staring straight up as darkness pools around his body.
Someone throws a grenade. The sudden bright burst of fire blinds me, the explosion deafening. Jason is caught by the blast, ripped apart before he can even try to protect himself.
My eyes full of spots, my ears ringing, I retreat further into the tank's bowels, hoping to find an open panel or hatch that I can use to escape. Clutching the detonator like a talisman, I realize that my companions are dead, that their own visions of wartime glory have been cut short by bullets and fire. I want to get out, escape, and as fear takes hold in my mind the ultimate goal of the mission fades away into the background. I can hear shouting, more gunfire, bullets hitting nearby on the wall, and suddenly all of my training is gone as I scramble through the dark. I think of my family, my parents and sister, crying as they hear that I've been killed, I feel overwhelming grief when I realize that I'm never going to see them again.
My thoughts splinter as pain rips through my arm, a bullet tears through my bicep and knocks me against the wall. I blindly fire down the hall, warmth running down my arm, and I struggle to control emotions that are chaotic with panic. All of my training, all the simulations and grueling tests, melt away in the face of death, and I don't feel like a soldier but more like a scared child who is somewhere he doesn't want to be.
---
I've been hiding in an alcove for several minutes, trying to control my ragged breathing and listening to the shouts of the guards as they search for me. I'm holding the detonator, my thumb playing over the button, but every time I steel myself to press it something stops the motion. I haven't found any sort of exit, and am sure that there are soldiers between myself and the way I came in. I know that there is no way out, nothing to do but complete the mission, but I can't bring myself to press the button that will end my life.
They find me, firing and forcing me from my hiding place. Another bullet hits, searing my side and knocking me against a wall. I drop my rifle, but keep running, trying to draw my pursuers farther into the maze. A cold fire has burned away my fear, replaced my panic with a strange detached focus. All that matters is the mission, destroying this massive weapon, and now my only goal is taking out as many as these evil monsters as I can in the process.
I come to a dead end, turning to face the enemy soldiers closing in on me. I see them for what they truly are, villains who must be stopped at any cost, and I grit my teeth into a grin as a bullet tears through the muscle of my thigh. Fighting past the pain, I stand tall, thrusting out my chin. For just a moment, I see what those posters promised, for just a second I am the hero that I had hoped to be when I enlisted a lifetime ago.
I raise the hand that holds the detonator, staring the lead guard right in the eyes. He raises his weapon, pulls the trigger, and pain explodes in my chest. His fellow soldiers fire, but I no longer feel any pain. The world starts to blur, darkness flows into my mind and sight. I think I'm falling, but my gaze never leaves my enemy's.
With the last of my strength, my thumb presses the red button on the detonator. The ground bucks, and I think I smile as the guards realize what is happening.
There's a flash of blinding light, then nothing, and the last thing I think of is a military recruitment poster, a proud soldier standing on a ridge heroically.
That soldier has my face...
*****
Thank you, and good night. Remember: Ods Bodkins, and lots of moneys.
So, I applied for a job today, as a writer for a reasonably large game studio. It was a straightforward online application process, a space for the resume and then the basic contact info. Of course, my resume has a link to this here corner of the interweb, but this is (sort of) game journalism and I want to prove that I'm also capable of the creative writing that would be more appropriate for the career path I applied for. I had spent the last day or so working on a short "audition" piece, and then when I applied I found that there was no place to attach it and send it along.
If we go on the assumption that someone from said studio might take a moment to point their browser this way (at least, that's the assumption I'm going to go with in order to not depress myself), then I'd like to get the chance to show this creative side. Then I realized that this is my damn blog, and I could write about the differences between cheddar cheese and a cat if I so chose (one of them is a tasty addition to a burger. I'm not saying which one), so I think I'll just go ahead and post this short creative writing piece in the hopes that someone will see it and say "Ods Bodkins! We must hire this person and give them lots of moneys!"
Or, if nothing else, it'll effectively make it look like I posted something today, so here goes:
*****
War Hero
When I joined up, I had visions of being a hero. The posters, the advertisements, everything about the military made it seem like a glamorous and exciting adventure. Even after I enlisted, on the rare times I talked to family and friends back home, the went on about how proud they were of me and what great work I was doing. I guess I envisioned myself striding across the front lines, blasting away at enemies and saving the day, getting showered with medals and getting the girl, just like I was led to believe.
I don't know if I'm a hero. I don't feel like one. In all of my grand fantasies, all I felt was confidence and strength and bravado. Now, though, huddled in foxholes and trenches in the pouring rain, all I can feel is fear. I'm afraid to die, I'm afraid that my fellows are going to die, and I'm afraid that I will never again see my home. I'm not even sure what we're fighting for anymore, can't be sure why we're shooting at them or they're shooting at us. I'm just doing what I'm ordered to do, hoping to survive another day and get one day closer to getting out of this madness.
I wonder if, somewhere on the other side of the battlefield, my enemies are huddled in a trench thinking the same thing.
The brass is planning something, some big assault I'd reckon. I can't say for sure, but there have been a lot of hushed conversations, private meetings, and weird scouting missions. We lost four guys the other day, four comrades that never returned, because they were sent out on some top-secret task. Four good men, gone, and most of the world may never even know why.
---
I wake up to a private gently shaking my shoulder, saying my name. I must have dozed off, sitting up with my back against the muddy trench wall. My rifle is across my lap, my hand on it even in sleep, and when my eyes snap open my fingers reflexively grip tighter before I realize where I am and see the dirty face of the kid who was sent to wake me.
He says something to me, but the roar of a jet flying low overhead steals the words and I just stare at him, still trying to shake the grogginess from my mind. He speaks again, telling me that the brass want to see me in the command bunker. I nod, he leaves to deliver his next message, and I sit for several moments while my stomach rolls with ice-cold dread. All I can think about are those four souls that were lost, four scared soldiers who were asked to go to the command bunker and who will never be going home again.
Steeling myself, I stand on shaky legs and walk towards the structure. Two others are also heading that way, both are trying to hide the worry just like I am, and are having no better luck. Martin and I share a glance, my fear reflected back in his eyes, and I nod to him in the hopes of looking more confident than I feel. I don't think I succeed.
---
The command bunker is nothing more than a rickety structure of wood and metal, hastily assembled in the middle of the camp. The only real difference between it and most of the other cobbled-together buildings is that it has a door rather than just a blanket hung over the entrance. As I walk to the building, it starts to rain, and I absently realize that I hadn't noticed that it stopped in the first place. The sky is grey, it has been for over a week, and the weather is just one of those little details that seems to fade away into the background when faced with the near constant threat of death. Some have told me that they actually notice it more, that they see things they always took for granted, like they're trying to absorb as much of the world as they can before they go. Me, I guess I just tune everything else out, the world just blurring around me as I twirl around the concept of dying in my head over and over.
Inside the bunker, General Brady and a couple of his officers are around a small table, looking over what looks like a scrawled map. They barely acknowledge us as we enter, and the three of us stand in silence and wait as the other men talk over the map in hushed tones. I don't know how long we wait, but it's probably not nearly as long as it feels. After what seems like an hour, they finally turn to us and the general speaks.
He cuts right to the chase, telling us about the mission we were chosen for. It's top secret, very dangerous, and he tells us that we'll be heroes. There's that word again, and for a split-second I see those posters of the dashing soldiers standing tall that made me join up in the first place. He beckons us over to the map, a roughly drawn blueprint of what looks like a massive tank. One of the officers, a skinny man whose name I don't think I ever knew, starts describing it as a super-weapon that the enemies are constructing, one that if completed could very easily turn the tide in their favor.
"We've sent out several scouting missions to the construction site, and they've transmitted back as much information as they could before..." He trails off, aware that my companions and I are staring at him.
"They gave their lives to save countless others," the general states, as if that somehow makes their deaths acceptable, "And now you're going to be given the chance to do the same."
I glance at Martin and Jason on either side of me. Both are staring straight at the general, but I do see a single tear run down Jason's mud-stained cheek.
The skinny officer continues, "I believe that we have all of the information we need to execute the next phase of the plan, the complete destruction of this weapon."
That gets my attention. I had already thought ahead, assumed that this was another suicidal recon mission, and this was therefore completely unexpected.
The officer continues, with additions by the general and his other aide, and the plan is laid out. Most of the force is going to attack from the flank, a distraction intended to draw the enemy's attention away from the construction site. It will no doubt still be guarded, but they feel that a small team can infiltrate the site and place charges at key points in the massive tank, destroying it and preventing it from ever being used.
We are given the rest of the day to prepare, the night to rest, and we are told that our mission begins at dawn. As we leave the command bunker and walk away, very little is said. At some point as I walk through the camp I realize that Martin and Jason are no longer beside me, no doubt off to get ready in their own ways for what could be our greatest moment, our last, or both.
---
I wonder the next morning if I spent the night before appropriately, given the fact that this mission is by far the most dangerous I have ever undertaken. What do people do when they believe that they may never see another sunset?
I write a letter to my parents, sit and watched the sun go down, and spend a lot of time in my bunk staring in silence at the ceiling. I don't think about anything in particular, nothing deep or meaningful, but just let my mind wander. I think about my past, about silly high school moments and the first girl I kissed, and at some point I drift off into fitful sleep.
Very little is said as we prepare for the mission, packing our gear and the explosive charges we'd be using to destroy the weapon. The whole experience is like a surreal dream, the general wishing us well and saluting us as we walk from the camp amid the silent stares of the other men, and it isn't long before the camp was gone from view and we are well on our way. We know that the rest of the battalion would be heading in another direction, acting as the distraction so we could complete our mission, but that seems like some distant battle as we trudge across the muddy ground.
We walk for almost a full day, stopping only briefly to eat our rations and rest for a moment before moving on, and as the sun starts to go down we see our target coming over the horizon. We unsling our rifles, crouching down as we walk, keeping our eyes peeled for guards as we slowly move forward, but it soon becomes clear just how huge this tank really is. For quite a while it looks like it isn't getting any closer at all, and as we come over a ridge we realize that we were only seeing the very top of what is a simply gigantic machine. It stands stories tall, wider than a house: it looks like it could roll right over our entire camp, and it's simply bristling with weaponry. Cannons, missile launchers, and what looks to be flame throwers are positioned all over the monstrous tank. Even incomplete, the sight of the super-weapon sends ice through my veins, just imagining what it could do if they got it operational.
---
We wait until nightfall, watching the guard patrols through binoculars, trying to determine their patterns and how they were armed. We only talk to each other when necessary, and mostly we just wait.
The rain starts again just before we hear the sounds of battle from nearby. Gunfire erupts, flashes can be seen through the darkness, and soldiers from the enemy camp scramble to retaliate against our men. Only a few guards stay behind to watch over the tank, and now it is time for our mission to really begin.
As we start down the hill towards our target, the image of that poster flashes back into my mind. The square-jawed soldiers standing up on a ridge, oozing strength and confidence, smiling and looking like a movie action hero. Nothing like the ragtag and muddy trio of Martin, Jason, and myself, trying to keep our footing in the rain and praying that we'd live to see the morning.
We choose to come in from the South side, where the defense seemed lightest. I sneak up behind a guard, drawing my knife and slitting his throat as I had been trained to do, but feel an unexpected moment of remorse. Was he an evil enemy monster, like we had been led to believe, or just a soldier like me? Was he just following orders, hoping to get home to his family when all of this was over, fearing death and thinking that this war was nothing like the pictures in the recruiting office. Had he been told by his own superiors that I was the evil one?
I do what I was taught, lowering the body slowly to minimize the noise to avoid alerting other guards. I watch for patrols as Martin and Jason slip into the perimeter, found the opening that we had seen on the roughly drawn map, and quietly sneak into the tank. I follow, rifle raised and ready, knowing that as soon as another guard find the body all hell would break loose.
---
We meet little resistance, but the inside of the tank is far more complex than the transmitted scout reports had indicated. It's far from complete, walls are half built and there are open spots where electronic panels will eventually be put in, but there is still a lot more inside than we had ever considered. It takes longer than we want to find places to set the charges, and as we work our way towards the exit we hear footsteps and shouting, the sounds of the dead guard being discovered and his own fellow soldiers looking to kill the intruders. I motion to Martin and Jason, silently instructing them to take up positions and prepare for a fight, and as I find a hiding place of my own I turn the detonator over and over in my hand.
The guards come through the door, and we pull our triggers. The first couple of guards fall in the doorway, but within moments more are coming through and returning fire, the sound of our weapons deafening in the enclosed metal hall. The muzzle flashes are blinding, and as the guards press in I scan my memory of the map, hoping to remember another way out.
Martin moves, catching my attention. He's been hit, tumbling backwards in slow motion and jerking as more bullets rip through him. He's dead before he hits the floor, his eyes staring straight up as darkness pools around his body.
Someone throws a grenade. The sudden bright burst of fire blinds me, the explosion deafening. Jason is caught by the blast, ripped apart before he can even try to protect himself.
My eyes full of spots, my ears ringing, I retreat further into the tank's bowels, hoping to find an open panel or hatch that I can use to escape. Clutching the detonator like a talisman, I realize that my companions are dead, that their own visions of wartime glory have been cut short by bullets and fire. I want to get out, escape, and as fear takes hold in my mind the ultimate goal of the mission fades away into the background. I can hear shouting, more gunfire, bullets hitting nearby on the wall, and suddenly all of my training is gone as I scramble through the dark. I think of my family, my parents and sister, crying as they hear that I've been killed, I feel overwhelming grief when I realize that I'm never going to see them again.
My thoughts splinter as pain rips through my arm, a bullet tears through my bicep and knocks me against the wall. I blindly fire down the hall, warmth running down my arm, and I struggle to control emotions that are chaotic with panic. All of my training, all the simulations and grueling tests, melt away in the face of death, and I don't feel like a soldier but more like a scared child who is somewhere he doesn't want to be.
---
I've been hiding in an alcove for several minutes, trying to control my ragged breathing and listening to the shouts of the guards as they search for me. I'm holding the detonator, my thumb playing over the button, but every time I steel myself to press it something stops the motion. I haven't found any sort of exit, and am sure that there are soldiers between myself and the way I came in. I know that there is no way out, nothing to do but complete the mission, but I can't bring myself to press the button that will end my life.
They find me, firing and forcing me from my hiding place. Another bullet hits, searing my side and knocking me against a wall. I drop my rifle, but keep running, trying to draw my pursuers farther into the maze. A cold fire has burned away my fear, replaced my panic with a strange detached focus. All that matters is the mission, destroying this massive weapon, and now my only goal is taking out as many as these evil monsters as I can in the process.
I come to a dead end, turning to face the enemy soldiers closing in on me. I see them for what they truly are, villains who must be stopped at any cost, and I grit my teeth into a grin as a bullet tears through the muscle of my thigh. Fighting past the pain, I stand tall, thrusting out my chin. For just a moment, I see what those posters promised, for just a second I am the hero that I had hoped to be when I enlisted a lifetime ago.
I raise the hand that holds the detonator, staring the lead guard right in the eyes. He raises his weapon, pulls the trigger, and pain explodes in my chest. His fellow soldiers fire, but I no longer feel any pain. The world starts to blur, darkness flows into my mind and sight. I think I'm falling, but my gaze never leaves my enemy's.
With the last of my strength, my thumb presses the red button on the detonator. The ground bucks, and I think I smile as the guards realize what is happening.
There's a flash of blinding light, then nothing, and the last thing I think of is a military recruitment poster, a proud soldier standing on a ridge heroically.
That soldier has my face...
*****
Thank you, and good night. Remember: Ods Bodkins, and lots of moneys.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
