Post 24: State of PC Gaming

Battlefield 3 looks like all kinds of awesome.

Here's an interesting article on where the developers of Battlefield 3 see PC gaming going in the near future, as well as their concerns surrounding Sony's recent hacking issues.  For those of you that are unaware, Sony's Playstation Network, their answer to Xbox Live, was hacked on a large scale.  In response, the company has been beefing up it's security measures.  Of course the main problem is that the event in itself has shown other hackers the vulnerability of such systems.

This is a loyal console gamer.

In the linked article, the General Manager of DICE states his opinions regarding the future of PC Gaming.  I have to disagree with him on a few points, but overall I understand and agree with what I read.  Karl indicates that he believes that consoles are being tapped out.  That nothing much can continue to happen with them and that PC gaming will rise to the top purely based on performance.  PCs do have more capabilities and are better from a hardware perspective, but as a console gamer I don't see that happening for two reasons: 1) console gamers are too loyal and too entrenched to stop the market from creating better and better consoles, and 2) what is a console at this point but a computer?  The line between PC and console has been blurred beyond recognition in many respects.  The crossovers and ports are great in number and my 360 has essentially all of the same components of a computer, it's just reduced for marketability.  If the 360 was priced as a gaming computer was, with all of the top-end hardware and software, there would be no way it could be labeled as affordable gaming. 

Overall, I dislike Apple as a company.

Karl also argues that Apple could be a force to be reckoned with in the near future.  I don't see why Apple hasn't already tossed their hat into the ring with both a console, and better game compatibility.  Microsoft did so at the end of the PS1 era and they are already the king of PC gaming.  Maybe Apple's too damn scared to get in there.  Hell, if I were going up against a giant like Microsoft in a field that my audience didn't really care about, I too would be pissing my pants.

Ick, it's indie.

The final comment that the article leaves us with is that Indie gaming is about to explode.  I hate Indie games.  I literally fucking hate them, but they are a necessary evil.  I am very comfortable with my corporate Halos, Fallouts, and Dead Risings, I don't want to see some random-ass kid make a game where you run around as a stick man and have it gain popularity.  Not because I'm a complete asshole, thought I am a bit of one, but because I don't want the games that I actually like to be replaced by pieces of shit like "Running Stick Man."  Indie gaming spawns creativity, there's no mistaking that, but when it replaces good games on PC or on a console, I foresee less development taking place on series like Call of Duty or Battlefield.  Creativity is necessary, but it can be evil when wielded by the inexperienced.

Retro Game of the Week: Action in New York

 

New York City in the future is purple.

 Alright, let's do this; play us some Action in New York, I mean.  When I first laid eyes on this game, I just didn't understand.  Action in New York?  I was thinking that it would be something along the lines of a Double Dragon clone or The Last Action Hero.  Never did I imagine a side-scrolling shooter where you're some cybernetic guy or gal flying around shooting aliens.  The name just confuses the hell out of me.  To bring even more confusion to the table, the game is also known as SCAT.  That's right, this game's name is SCAT.  Fantastic, at least they're being upfront about the shit.




I guess this is an Astrotube.

 SCAT apparently stands for Special Cybernetic Attack Team, so maybe the game isn't all about feces.  Whatever.  The plot goes a bit like this:  The year is 2029 and some aliens have planted a giant Astrotube, whatever that is, on Earth.  Apparently it connects the ruins of New York City to the alien space station.  I guess they wanted VIP access to Times Square or something so they shot it up and put in an elevator.  SCAT was assembled to fight the aliens and remove the Asstube.  Right, I meant to say Astrotube.
 There's both a one and two player mode which are fairly self-explanatory, move around and kill stuff.  The controls are basic, nothing's too stiff or too touchy, but it's not as great as it could be.  When playing the single player mode you can choose between two members of SCAT: Arnold or Sigourney.  When playing two players, player one is Arnold and two is Sigourney.  Now do these names make you picture anyone in particular?

Man, just how old is she now?

I would imagine that the creators made those US names on purpose, because they aren't the original Japanese names by any means.  I realize that both actors have some great sci-fi hits, but did Natsume really need to use these names and make kids think of their movie idols at the time?  Can't they just make a good game instead?



Just put your money right in.

 So as I mentioned, the gameplay is pretty standard.  Fly around the screen and shoot everything in sight.  Sometimes you move vertically, but most of the time it's just a horizontal flight pattern, nothing special.  You get six lives, but with unlimited continues there's no reason to not play straight through the five levels that there.  Not only is this game a confusing mesh of science-fiction and feces, but it's also really freaking short.  It's like today, if you were to buy a game and beat it in five hours it equals $50 shat right down the damn drain.  Moving on, there're some power-ups for your gun, movement speed, and life recovery.  Overall it's not a bad game, it's just blah.  I mean, how many times have you pleayed a game like this?  Granted not all of them involve Arnold Schwarzeneggar and Sigourney Weaver trying to save the world from an Asstube, but it's still too bland to be good. 

See how much harder?

The Japanese version was harder than the American and European, having supplied the players with only three lives.  Also the story at the beginning showed the destruction of a bunch of cities before the Asstube was firmly planted into New York City.  Another difference is that the JP version had two male characters instead of a male and female.  What are they, sexist?  Oh wait, they are.  The European version also had a difference with the characters.  They kept their likeness to the actors mentioned earlier, but the names were changed to Silver Man and Sparks, guess they didn't like either Alien or Predator...  In this version also, SCAT was changed to SAT.  I guess the EP market wouldn't do well with buying a game about shit.

Even though this game is really weird, and Natsume made it easy to pick on, it's not like it's a "bad" game, it's just so mediocre that it's not good.  When I beat the game I didn't feel accomplished, I felt like I wasted a few hours of my life.  Instead of playing this game I could have read a book, started a new language, or just played a better fucking game.  What a waste.

Day 23: Dead Island Scandal

This is pretty self-explanatory.

So I have approximately none time to spend on a post today so you're just going to get a bunch of garbage.  I found this article to be mildly entertaining with just a touch of enraged nerd.  Dead Island sounds and looks like an excellent game, but someone fucked up in the game's programming.  Hilarious.  Clearly someone has been burned one too many times by the opposite sex and didn't quite know how to deal with it.  Of course putting it in the game's script was clever, but completely stupid.  He probably should have just gone to counseling or tried a different type of woman before he just blew off his steam by fucking with the game.  Good show, moron, good show.

Day 22: Nextnext Gen in 18 months?

What the shit?

This is totally and completely accurate.  No lie.

I know it's been a couple of years since the 360 and PS3 came out and they've been excellent thus far, but why the fuck do we need to see the next next generation Sony console in under a year and half?  Of course this is just a rumor, and the information isn't substantiated in any way, but this is how Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo tend to work with releasing new consoles or developing something super exciting.  Soon we'll be "leaked" information about Project Moonbound and we'll see infamous pictures of things like the controller on the right that have little or no resemblance to what they'll eventually become.  Or if they do resemble in image, they'll be piles of glamorized, over-hyped shit like the Virtual Boy.

So clearly this "announcement" is linked to the development and release of the Wii U.  I'm sure that on a corporate level, Sony and Microsoft are both petrified that the Wii U is going to blow them out of the water in terms of sales when it first hits the market, but I don't think that they're seeing clearly long term.  If they are going to grunt out whatever pieces of shit they can in 18 months, or even two years for that matter, it's going to be a waste of good toilet water.  The 360 and PS3 have consistently outsold the Wii except for maybe in the early stages of Nintendo's baby when it was an extreme novelty.  After that, third party support dropped due in part to the companies love of using it's mascots as well as the newer, yet awkward technology used in the WiiMote.  My analysis brings me to one conclusion then, start development of a new console, but take the longer, more considered approach rather than shitting something out in 18 months or so.  The Wii U will outsell the next next generation consoles until it's novelty wears off and people realize that it's just a redesigned Wii with little or nothing new to offer. 

The clown child is sad for the Wii U.

To that end, Sony and Microsoft can wait a bit.  Not all three consoles need to be released at the same time.  In fact, it might just be better for all involved if each has it's own launch window.  Let's think this through, why release your console on the same day as its competitor?  Say that there are 100 people who want to buy a new console gaming system but there are two being released on the same day.  On that day potentially 50 would buy one and 50 would buy the other for a variety of reasons including game library, appearance, cost, etc.  I made those factors all even because let's face it, how different are the PS3 and 360 really?  Besides, it's not like much goes into the thought of buying a new console for most people, it's usually just personal preference or purchase history.

None of this please.  This is all bad.

The bottom line here is that Sony and Microsoft shouldn't jump the gun with their next consoles.  I think that they can take a measured approach and wait more time before releasing their next big console without pressuring their sales versus the Wii U and it's launch.  My own psyche just doesn't want to see another decent console that completely bites the dust like the Dreamcast.  I do like to think that as a community, gamers have evolved beyond the necessity of novelty, but I doubt that will ever actually be true.  The Wii U will most likely satisfy that annual need and it will suck more sales than it probably should from consoles that have a more thoughtful design, but once that time passes things will be right in my tiny little gaming mind and a new console will be all that I need to console any lingering fears about another Virtual Boy.  It literally haunts my dreams; the goggles burn red in the darkness, staring, watching, waiting.

Day 21: The Arcade

You have to love this carpeting, it adds "atmosphere."

How many of us can recall the glorious days of the arcade?  Not even I can fully remember when these impressive collections of video gaming cabinets were spread across the nation, I just didn't have the opportunity due to the fact that these types of facilities have been relegated to the Chuck E. Cheese's and State Fairs of the world.  Sure I've been able to partake of the arcades in those places, but they retain just a portion of their former glory.

The reason I bring this up is that I recently visited a state fair and had a chance to play some arcade goodness.  I couldn't find any purely retro games like Defender, Asteroids, or Joust.  Not even a 1942 or 1943 was around, but there were still some excellent games.  I want to take a minute and look at the difference between those older games and the newer ones.  Silent Scope was something that caught my eye, and I ended up spending a good while playing with one of my friends.  This is an interesting specimen, there's a screen, of course that shows what you would see from a normal perspective just looking out across the city, but there's also a screen within the scope that shows what you would see from that perspective.  Essentially you use the large screen to find your target and use the scope to take them out.  It's a great game, but it's limited by a ridiculous timer that's there to essentially make you spend as much money as possible.  The timer starts at the beginning of every level and if it runs out during that level you lose and need to insert more quarters.  Every kill gains you some time, but you're always fighting against that damn clock.  The same idea has been applied to such games as Time Crisis.  If you can't beat the clock, you better have fifty fucking dollars in quarters or tokens.  Looking at an earlier, but much better, game reveals that arcades have become much more commercial as they have aged and come to a state of degradation.

That's right, six fucking players.  Booyah.

The Xmen arcade game is arguably the best of its kind.  Where else can you find such side-scrolling, six player, boss-fighting, and super power goodness?  Well, the Xbox Live Arcade is one such spot.  You'll be hard pressed to find this game in any remnant arcade, but you can find it on the Marketplace.  As we continue to lose such gems as the above and gain some of the more commercial games such as Time Crisis and Silent Scope, we are seeing the older arcade games return in full force on various online marketplaces or websites.  Microsoft even created a virtual arcade to be used on the 360 called the Game Room where you can purchase all of the old arcade games, mascots, and memorabilia from the past and place it into your very own, customizable arcade.  If you're an older gamer, or just want to experience that retro arcade for the first time, I highly recommend something like Game Room.

I miss the older game days where you could find The Simpsons, Turtles in Time, and Xmen all in the same location.  Sure, some of these games are being ported, or have been ported, to consoles, but the only way that you can naturally experience them nowadays is if you're lucky enough to find one of those cabinets at a bowling alley or have the ability to use an emulator that you can modify into an arcade cabinet.  

Long story short, I feel like arcade gaming has gone the way of the dinosaurs.  It's a dying organism and the attempts to save it have been lackluster at best, but unfortunately no one really wants to leave their home to play video games.  I realize that this is in large part due to the rise of console and portable gaming, but it saddens me that such a great piece of gaming history is being reduced to nothing.  I propose that we should all experience the arcade, through whatever means we have available, and make a decision to support those local and dying arcades, no matter the form they come in.  Though the commercial aspects of arcades have become something of a nuisance, we should still support these entities as they are the building blocks of video gaming.  So get out there and play Silent Scope, or whatever other crappy, expensive games are out there and save the natural history of video gaming.  You can be an Indiana Jones-esque archaeologist and find old, treasured games like Asteroids, or you can be a futuristic explorer and find such creations as the below.

What the fuck is this abomination supposed to do?