Monday, April 16, 2012

What will be the new Sofa!


                For my last entry (this semester flew by!) I wanted to part with an idea on the future of gaming consoles.
                As we discussed in class, virtual worlds have encroached their way into our lives and will continue until the PS9 is possible (if you don’t know what this is than google it, it was a commercial for the PS2) This made me think of our discussion on the Steam console (which would only be great because of their sales!) which may have been false at the time, but it is an interesting question to ponder. How else can games creep into our lives?
                I saw an episode of 30 Rock a couple of weeks ago and Alec Baldwin’s character Jack pondered how he could get closer to his customers. His answer, the sofa! In the show he works for Kabletown (cable company) and his bright idea was to sell expensive sofa to people, it’s his way to bring back his accomplishments from his time at GE. He figures if he already controls what they watch, on what they watch it on, and the times they watch it, what other experiences are there? Obviously it was quite a comical way in which he came to his answer, but none the less he makes a good point. For gamers, or just people really, virtual worlds are all around us in just a few decades and the expansion is not slowing down in the slightest.

                While many are speculating the companies to reflect on the current generation’s lack of new sales versus used and the rise of digital distribution there is another area that is growing.
                Media Incorporation on consoles shares Jack’s ideas on Sofas. Companies are adding new applications for the other arts like music, movies, and tv. Just recently Microsoft has released apps for cable television networks like Xfinity and Dish as well as paid orders for MLB network and HBO. For now they are simply ports, but if they follow in the path of Netflix soon these applications might be full features. As well more and more social apps are being added. This year has seen the addition of Youtube stations to Xbox and Amazon Viewer to PS3.
                Soon (well currently, if Xbox had a newer interface that is) there would be little reason to ever turn on anything else but a game console to listen to music, watch a tv show, or to do what it was meant to originally, play a game. What’s left to wonder about what the 720 or ps4? It’s clear that they will continue to broaden their horizons.  Some trails have already begun with the Playstation Vita as Sony is definitely attempting to break newer grounds (even if it takes them a while.) The console relys almost exclusively on digital downloads and has such very interesting features like NEAR (it allows Vita owners to see what other vita’s are doing within a couple miles of you) All these consoles are looking to keep players sitting (or standing depending upon the game) on their console and not the competitors, which for the first time is not just other game consoles.
                 The one thing I hope is that the motion control wars will be over. But with the “success” of the Kinect, Microsoft will most likely try to keep that incorporated. If anything I hope that games will learn from the Playstation Move. Of the 3 current gen, the Move is actually the most satisfying. Maybe if the new cycle incorporates something with the Kinect and the Move, there might be a way for other mediums to interact with the new technologies other than to turn a console on.
                While we will have to wait most likely 2 more E3’s before we hear anything of substance I can only hope that whatever the new direction is they will find their Sofa fast so they can go back to focusing on games. The one thing I do want more of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0KTUysrwgQ and less http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OnDizZ7UT0
                Does anyone else have any different suggestions for what they think the future will hold? Do you want more media’s available from one source or do you just want your console to play games?

Friday, April 6, 2012

The life of an Icon


                Everything has its icons. Movies will have their Marilyn Monroe’s and George Lucas’. Music has their Beethoven and Hendrix. Art has their Van Gogh’s and Banksy’s. What do Video Games have? Elves, plumbers, and Hedgehogs. When you preview a genre from the most popular icons, it is no wonder video games were taken as such a joke for such an extensive amount of time. It isn’t until one really pierces through the surface to truly understand what video games have to offer. One list by Empire.com lists their top 50 video games icons ever. In their list they rated Mario behind Gordon Freedmen for number 1. But what is it that makes this list matter? It’s the experiences that are attached to every one of them. Therefore people are attached to those experiences, not the icon itself. Players have taken to their controllers and symbolically forced that character through a generally harrowing adventure of a lifetime. But when it comes to game icons their road has not been without their bumps. Constantly people are raveling in their seats to the torture developers have bestowed upon their favorite icons.
                Icons for games are increasingly growing. I would even argue that the rate of expansion has been exponentially faster than any of the other arts as Video Games are relatively new and are largely at the center of pop-culture (see the WoW episode of South Park, a show that is based entirely off pop culture.) People will follow their icon more readily so than they are to pick up a new franchise. With an arena growing rapidly it makes sense that there has been nothing but sequel after sequel recently.  A franchise wants more money and will take beloved characters and place them in entirely new directions.
                Companies like Capcom have recently decided to branch out to American developers to handle reboot of their franchises. One example is the Resident Evil series in which they recently gave rights to Slant 6 to develop Resident Evil: Operation Raccoon City. To this news many players were apprehensive and gamers were ultimately underwhelmed by it after release. The real question now is why people were disappointed in it. Why would prestigious websites like Gamespot award the game with ratings of 4.5? Because it wasn’t in the tradition of Resident Evil.
                Gamers want their icon to live on so they can experience them again in new setting and such. But at what point does an icon hurt a franchise? In RE:ORC players don’t assume the roles of the traditional characters, instead they are given the chance to killer characters like Leon and Clair. While that is appeasing it isn’t the same adventure that Capcom could produce.
The same could be said about companies that go in different directions for older icons. Nintendo is extremely knowledgeable in this area.  Link, Samus, Mario, Kirby, and crew have been through so many direction changes that it’s hard to keep up with all of them. In the most recent adaptions Nintendo has been trying to make its icons friendlier to anyone of all ages. A perfect example is Kirby’s Epic yarn. A game where Kirby is transferred to a world of yarn and everything is based on that gameplay mechanic. While it was a fun game and was praised quite well, it lacked any sort of challenge. This caused a rift between gamers who are used to the old days of vacuuming up baddies and taking their abilities to those who wanted change of pace. Nintendo has been around in the industry for quite some time and it makes sense that people who grew up on their games now have children of their own and they want their children to have an experience as they did. But is this rift worth it to the companies? With companies like Nintendo increasingly hemorrhaging money it can only be hoped that these drastic changes be stopped.
While many of the above icons have been adapted either by different companies or developers, there are several cases in which just one developer will ruin an icon for many people. The most recent case is Mass Effect 3. Since 2007 players have building their own story with their won Shepard in Mass Effect 1. When the conclusion in Mass Effect 3 passed there were more than a few angry gamers. In two different cases gamers rallied together to start up a fundraiser for the organization Child’s Play to raise $80,000 dollars to change the ending of the game. Later $1,000 dollars was raised to purchase 402 red, green and blue cupcakes for the BioWare office. Finally on April 5th BioWare announced that they would release a free DLC that wouldn’t change the ending, but would give a cinematic cutscene that would explain more.
In a list by IGN.com they asked viewers of the site to poll their most disappointing gaming icons. The list included several reputable franchises like Tomb Raider and Sonic, but it was the number one spot that was surprising: Master Chief from Halo. Many people love Master Chief but IGN argued that he is “just a generic action hero riding on the coat tails of a much better game.” In that case they were referring to Gordon Freedmen, the number one listed icon on the Empire.com list. They also state Halo’s source of popularity is mostly in its online multiplayer and the theme song at the main menu.
With issues in the gaming world and just the world in general, what’s a company to do to create the best new sequel (Call of Duty 1million and 1 anyone?) And it is not only the gamers who suffer, but also the icon that have been building their legacy for years. It just goes to show that it is still a cutthroat business whether it’s from the creative or a development angle. What does anyone else think? Have any of your icons been transformed into generic identities?

Top 50 Ranked source:
Top 10 Disappointments source:
http://stars.ign.com/articles/976/976353p1.html

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

A (self?) Reflection


        When I enrolled in this class I mainly did it because I love manga and games. They constitute a great deal of who I am today. While I enjoyed the graphic portion of my class very much so (I honestly wish it made up a greater percent of the class) the gaming portion I find myself not so drawn to. I don’t mean to say I don’t enjoy it or haven’t learned anything from it, I just find it odd that learning about something so big in my life doesn’t excite me more. This got me thinking quite a bit. It has gotten to the point in which I ask abrupt questions to my friends online about certain things dealing with gaming. Their natural response was that learning about games is ruining my gaming experience, but that’s not it. I’m the guy who will take off from work during E3 just to watch as many different streams as possible. I love learning about the technical stuff (no so much the programming but more so the creative ideas, though if you’ve ever seen a Kojima interview you know that creative and technical are seldom ever disconnected from one another (i.e. the technical limitations often limit the creative ideas or explorations of the creative side push the technical side and etc…)) So I don’t believe it’s that my gaming experience is ruined from learning.
                So this leaves me with the question of why can’t I be excited about learning about video games in a class on gaming! I’ve come up with a few ideas as to why this is. The main leading answer for me is that the three authors of our class seem to be more in line of arguing that games are worth it due to the fact that people can learn from them, therefore they are worthy of examination. While I think the points made in all three books are worth examining, I wish there was a book in which focuses on games as a culmination. I want to read a book that examines games because they exist, not because there is some alternative use for them.
                To try to illustrate my point I will use the example of Gee. Gee is a nice mostly because I find him the least crazy and not up all the way up on his high horse. When I got to the part using Metal Gear Solid as an example (172-177) I was completely disheartened. If it were me writing this portion I would write about how MGS  (or MG more likely) changed the gaming world forever. Instead Gee approached it from a standpoint that MGS challenges gamers as they are not able to run and gun. Therefore they had to learn a different way of playing, stealthily. While the example is more than appropriate and flows with everything in the book to that point, I feel like his experiences are quite different than mine. Gee oversimplifies points of MGS to a fine tip that he is able to write with. But he leaves out the details that make MGS an icon. He makes it an alternative to the standard whereas I have grown up playing games a bit differently than he has. Gee views MGS as forcing players to look for alternative routes. He equivocates this to a new way of playing games. In his view gamers have to change their style of play from a standard shooter (3rd person or 1st). This is completely true. I do not argue that point. But for me growing up I played games differently. In games as basic as Super Mario World and Crash Bandicoot exploration of off route points is encouraged as it give bonuses to players who look out for secret areas. Therefore, to me, something like MGS is not so different when you are already used to the mentality of looking for out of the way areas. Where Gee should have focused on is not the stealth aspect, but how the game breaks the fourth wall on several occasions. And yes Gee does acknowledge this in a way when he references to Mei Ling’s advice about relaxing as this is a game. What annoyed me is that after that references that he completely ignores how amazing it was she just acknowledged the player directly rather than snake. Instead he focused on how he wishes children could just relax and learn. While it would be great if children could appreciate learning as they do a video game story, but his blatant disregard about such a monumental act makes me so sad.
Just the sight beings so many memories to mind...
                Missing ideas as simple as a view gone unwarranted agitates me so. This once again comes down to me “nitpicking.” But why is that my view not being represented in any of the books? Why is it that we can’t look at games and say it was great for this reasons and this is something important because it reflects such and such vales? It most likely is just me; I’ve expanded my expectations too far. Or maybe it’s the overall structure, I believe, is what irritates me .To exemplify this I will use Gee once again. Gee simply goes through and explains his experiences and forms principles on them. But at no point does he provide a counter argument. Nor does he amend a principle. He decided to just add principles later, like the three principles after the MGS example that proves to be derivates from the standard games. I understand why he would use a structure like this. It is most likely easier for those who are non-gamers to understand with his current structure in place. But what I would prefer (at least once, and there is a good chance I’ve missed it) is an in-depth look into a derivative, like MGS. For example I would love to see if a game like MGS helps people to learn better than a standard game like Game American McGee's Alice (which is an amazing game as well)? Overall I feel like maybe I’m a bit to jaded with video games to appreciate all his principles.
                Once again I want to point out I do not mean to sound like I dislike the class. I think Shannon is a wonderful professor that has given me insight I would not have found anywhere else. I already stated I especially enjoyed the graphic portion and in no other class could I play a game for homework or go to a gaming museum for credit. As my one friend pointed out I should shut up and just be happy I get credits to talk about video games. I think the main purpose of this blog entry is here to point out certain inadequacies I feel exists for either a lack of research on my part or in general. While I came into class dreading the “Are video games Art?” question I now somewhat long to discuss it in an academia setting. Anyways, if anyone has made it this far I would love to hear of anyone else’s expectations either being missed or accomplished from the class. Or any surprises (negative or positive) you have found over the course of the class.

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

“Why So Serious?” Because…..I….F**KING…..HATE...YOU!


For this entry I will compare and contrast a comic and a game. I recently finished both the comic The Dark Night Returns and the game Batman: Arkham City. I am not new to the Batman world. I’ve followed the caped crusader on his journeys during his Saturday morning cartoons and have watched, played and read several branching comics, movies, and games. I also want to state that I am sort of a minority when it comes to what is popular. For instance I do not love Nolan’s trilogy of Batman (Though that does not mean I do not like Nolan, in fact Memento is one my more favored movies). I think Jack Nicholson is the best movie adaption of the Joker. And most recently, I do not like Arkham City anywhere near as much as I cared for Arkham Asylum. In fact Arkham City, to me, is the second most overrated game of 2011 (Skyrim is number 1) And it is a game that reaches a actual level of frustration, not because of difficulty, but because of how crappy it is.
            I guess I should first explain why I feel this way before I go any further. I should also note that there are several reasons that can be described as (to many of my friends they consider all the following) nitpicking. One of the main reasons is the open world. WHY IN THE WORLD IS IT OPEN! Batman does not need to be an open world adventure. While Arkham Asylum was in a sense an open world, all the areas were well designed and everything was well contained. The main difference was that I would not have to glide, hook, dive, pull up, dive, etc… from point A to B to do the next story mission, get stuck beating up random thugs (and yes I know I have the option to just run away, but to me if the game puts it in there I feel the need to complete it. Towards the end I did just say screw it! I honestly just wanted to be done with the Game at that point,) and complete way to many Riddler trophies. The main complaint with these issues lies in the design of the city. It is frustrating to navigate. If it wasn’t for the augmented reality challenge upgrade Grapnel boost I probably wouldn’t have finished the game. The only upside to the city was the Riddler trophies. Not the physical ones, but the picture ones that reference stories to other Batman characters and events. The ones that had to be lined up as well were okay. But the actual city itself was arranged in a manner that was so ridiculous that a toddler could have done better. Seriously! Why was the city so decrepit in just a few months? Why were buildings leaning, why was the bridge so messed up, why was the seaport overflowing? And I know the criminals love explosives but if Batman AA to AC is just 18 months than what the hell happened!
            Another distress was the fact that predator mode sucked so much this time around. That was by far my favorite aspect of Arkham Asylum! I never felt closer to being the Dark Knight when I was running around corners and taking cover in the rafters. To me Batman isn’t the physical bad-ass the combat makes him to be. I always envisioned Batman as using combat as a last means necessary. Superman was always the brawler of the two. Then again they are two very different universes with two sets of villains and goals. But in Arkham City predator mode was made to feel cheap and often repetitive. I enjoyed the tactics used in Arkham Asylum. Sneaking underneath a level to come up on a partially broken wall with explosive gel to blow somebody off the level in an instant knockout was always fun. The reactions of the enemy A.I. were also better. Though they were more like set pieces versus spontaneous, the feeling obtained was gratifying. The fear in their voices and drastic movements was always well worth it as you took down their friends one by one. Arkham City completely removed the set pieces. The open world ones were the worst. The only option was to fly up to a high building than drop down behind an enemy and choke them out. If you tried any other way it usually ended up with the played being spotted and shot to death in an instant by an enemy close by. While on the subject of gameplay the new upgrades were almost completely useless. There were too many of the old mixed with the few new ones thus it cluttered the gadget equipping menu and the quick use combat equivalents. Often, both became confusing to remember which button to press for which gadget. This was especially annoying if you were trying to get high chain levels.
            One of my last complaints was the story. I mean seriously, why am I so serious, there is a giant prison in the middle of a freakin’ city! SERIOUSLY! Who thought that was a great concept for a story? Though the same writer from Arkham Asylum came back for City the lack of pervious backing from the Batman Universe seemed to strain the writers. While the incorporation of new villains (Game story that is) into the story like Hugo Strange and Ra's al Ghul seemed like a good idea they really weren’t. For the first few hours I cared about what protocol 10 was, but after the Joker became involved I started to forget about it. But Protocol 10 ended up being another one of the SERIOUSLY! WHY! moments. Let’s just kill all the inmates, it’ll be okay! If they were going to do that then why wouldn’t they have just done so in the beginning or when Batman turned down Ghul the first time? I know I’ve gone on more than a rant, but one last thing I’d like to mention was the Mr. Freeze battle. One minute they are working together, then they fight, then they help each other (Well Batman agrees to a sidequest, which were also ruined this time around as well,) Just WHY!
            Other than the DLC I have nothing more major to complain about. There were a few things I did like. They were mostly combat related and dealt with the added variation, but again there are faults here too, mostly button confusion and non responsiveness of controller. The hatter sidequest was also amusing.
            Finally getting back to the main point of this blog, I just read The Dark Knight Returns for class over the winter break. It was a Graphic Novel I always wanted to read and Frank Miller is a legend. Though it took this class to get me to read it, I can honestly say it exceeded all my predictions. I absolutely loved the realistic look into Batman in an after Cold-War setting. The cultural influences fit right at home in the Comic Universe. No more was it about putting criminals away. It had become more of an ending to Bruce, an obsession. The most common reference I can think of now is Dexter with his Dark Passenger. The urge to do what is “Right.” What is most fascinating is what the definition of “Right” is and what it has evolved into for Bruce after being Batman for 30 odd some years I believe. This brings to mind the article in the beginning of the graphic novel.
           
            “But they never talk about the mean one. The cruel one. The one who couldn’t fly or                       bend steel in his bare hands. The one who scared the crap out of everybody and laughed at all of the rest of us for being the envious cowards we were.”

            This quote really is what Batman is all about. The smart one, the one who could get away, the one with unlimited resources, the one with a tragic yet played out purpose, the one who just won’t give up. All these are what make up Returns, and in exchange make it great. While not all these values are in the Batman Arkham game series, I feel that the story of Asylum fit this mold better than City. While the only connection so far is that I have recently beaten the game and read the comic shortly ago, the death of the Joker is another incident that links the two. However the means by which each is done is quite different. In City the Joker ends up killing himself by causing Bruce to drop the Vile of antidote for the poison in his blood. After this Batman says he would have ended up saving him despite everything he has done. This is somewhat like Return as Batman wasn’t able to kill the Joker, he kills himself instead as Batman couldn’t. While Batman uses his body for an explosion, the repercussions are completely different. Returns has Bruce so close to killing the Joker that you almost believe that Batman will break his oath to get rid of the menace once and for all. It is something that Bruce has been struggling with all along. In City Bruce is much younger but still has some feelings for wanted Joker dead. Mainly that he had killed the only Woman Bruce loved and not to mention poisoned Batman and several thousands of people and other events from the previous game. But like the rest of the game, it all felt fake. Despite Joker killed himself in both versions, one on accident and one on purpose, there was little doubt that Batman would have saved the Joker. He was too static in City to be capable of any change, much less emotion or depth. This again can be taken from other quests in the game. “The most prevalent to me is the Freeze incident in which they form a love/hate relationship that Freeze breaks. Still Batman agrees to save Nora. Another is the fact he declined Ra's al Ghul’s offer. This shows Batman is still too obsessed with his mission, and himself, to compromise it in any way. It’s that cockiness that changes in City and Returns. In City Batman is at a physical peek and doesn’t need any help other than removing the Poison. In Returns the cockiness comes from his refusal to acknowledge the idea of his physical inclination from ageing. I think Bruce would have definitely considered going into the pool for more health, but in Millers universe that wasn’t an option. Instead he fought through the pain, especially in the slum yard. In a way Bruce wanted death, the honorable death, but in all actuality Bruce was just clinging on to that hope that he could change the city or the world, and through some odd series of events, he did. Gotham City Imposters too works like the vigilantes in Returns but is done so through a competitive online shooter now available to download for $15 on PSN and XBLA. I also hope to read Miller’s follow up The Dark Knight Strikes Again. It sounds like it is more of a collaboration of super heroes than a representation of cultural effects on society in the graphic novel format using a beloved icon to produce the fears/savior of a society.
            While I know most of this blog entry was a way for me to vent my frustrations with Batman: Arkham City I think the parallels and contrasts were both interesting as Millers world of Batman has become increasingly more common in the graphic novel/comic and game world. If I think of any more later I will try to update.

Monday, February 6, 2012

The first stab hurts the most!

I haven’t published a blog since I was about 17 or 18. In that time it seems I’ve forgotten what the purpose of a blog was. However I will try to pick back up the basics as I go along.
                The last time I wrote about video games was on gamespot.com (I’m not counting my Xenga, myspace, or facebook occasion comments or messages as they mostly only deal with video games during E3 or a release I’m anticipating), my favorite website and trusted source of reviews. The last entry on it was about my PS3 and how happy I was to have it and how that Christmas had lost its magic. Before that I had posted my personal reviews for games like Dead Rising 1, Final Fantasy 11, and like half-life 2. Back than my views were quite different and my ideas on how to breakdown and judge a game were a bit juvenile as mostly I reviewed games I loved and gave them all 10’s despite some major flaws, I was, and still am, a fanboy of certain series and franchises. But to give this blog a focus I’m going to concentrate on the class I am starting this blog for.
                To start I will examine Blankets and as I go on I will try to start to review games again as I enjoyed it when I used to blog and I really enjoy reviewing movies when I was on the high-school and last College’s paper. I’ll probably dedicate my next blog to a review of Bastion as I just bought it and am almost finished with it. Coming after that will be anything from Darkness 2, Reckoning, FFXIII-2, Asura’s Wrath (I want this game so damn bad!), and Syndicate. And if I’m lucky the PS Vita maybe.
Blankets:
                To me Blankets is quite an interesting choice for this class to start off with. I was suspecting that the class would start off with a more traditional comic franchise like DC or Marvel, but to my surprise we have read Mcloud and Blankets and will go on to Muse and Persepolis before we ever touch such stereotyped universes. As for my perception of the Graphic Novel in question it is quite varied depending upon the aspect in question. While I don’t care for American views on drawing in Graphic Novels I found myself keen to the changes between the kid and adult versions in the GN. It gives that sense that the worlds really are different. (I would like to see a sequel to Blankets just to see how the art style may have changed in the 10 years after release.) It is something that novelist always try for in a Bildungsroman novel and is so difficult to actually accomplish. But in Blankets Craig just differentiates them through the drawing medium and honestly it works much better than I would have expected. I was never confused unlike Craig is at several points in the GN because when he was referring to something in his past it was obvious as he was a kid again. This is nice because in a novel it can be hard to differentiate a flashback in certain novels. Thanks to the animation styles and variations on the gutter it is quite easy to interpret.
 I also liked that the size of the graphic novel as it made me feel as if the 4 hours I spent reading it actually made me feel as if I had just read Huckleberry Finn, it was such a complete coming of age story and it, at times, was heartfelt. Plus the amount of symbols found in the GN is on par to a normal novel but they are much easier to spot (Halos everywhere!) thought they are just as hard to define. In fact that is what I enjoyed most about the class last Wednesday. Sarah, Bethany, and Duncan’s (I hope they are spelled right) presentations helped to define what some of the symbols were and why they meant something.
                Unfortunately, there was also quite a bit I did not care for in Blankets.  For example, the angst between Craig and Raina felt unnatural. To me, Craig was in love with the idea of love more so than the relationship with Raina. Also the adolescence and sexual tension felt juvenile and any excuse for relief would have sounded as convincing as the religion that was imposed upon them at birth. While both first love and sexual encounter are a valuable part to a Bildungsroman story Blankets felt fake. However this to me is probably due to the religious aspects. I deal with more than enough in my own life that any more is just a nuisance unless it is a different religion of a different group of people as it is at least new to me. And as much as I hate to admit it, religion, or lack of, is a big part of any society. I think what bothers me most is how the story breaks the narrative into two categories, the religious aspect and the love aspect which wouldn’t exist without one another. But it takes so long for Craig to realize this and I found myself bored with various sections of the GN in-between. It also bothered me that Religion brought Craig and Raina together but through the interactions at Raina’s house I felt that she was never religious to start with. However if this is based on a true story I can’t really tell for sure why any of this was placed in the GN but I can say I got tired of the Religious overtones, Craig himself, and I especially hated Raina. The only moment I really felt like there was true emotion in the GN was when Raina and Craig were driving back to her house and she said she wanted destination music to play and Craig dropped the tape.  The hurt he must have felt from the fact she just wanted to be away from it all despite he was happy where he was honestly sucks. I can relate to Raina’s side but I never really stopped to think of everyone else’s feelings when I just wanted to be anywhere than where I was/am. If I took anything away from the GN it would be that.