Deja Vu

I think it's official now.  MMOs are dead, long live MMOs!

 

For a good number of years now developers everywhere has been trying to top World of Warcraft as the holy grail of subscription based massively multiplayer online game.  All have failed.  The latest being Star Wars: The Old Republic, now in life support as a free to play game funded by micro transactions.  The dream wasn't supposed be like this.  It was supposed to be funded via subscriptions.  Lots of subscriptions.  It is Star Wars afterall, with Bioware pedigree.  It was not to be.  The Old Republic is not the only victim.  Not by far.  The list reads like a who's who of sci-fi fantasy: Lord of the Rings, Star Trek Online, Final Fantasy 14, Conan, Warhammer and not even Star Wars can stem the tide.

 

Those are just the more well known names.  Recently, developer Trion (maker of the MMO Rift) got hit by layoffs.  At about the same time, another MMO called The Secret World just dropped its subscription model, presumably to move onto free-to-play.  I think it's safe to say that MMOs are pretty much dead and that noone can ever topple WoW from its throne.

 

Unless they can.

 

Anyone figure out what all the 'failed' games have in common?  Yes, they are all pretty much the same, aren't they?  I'm not too sure about Secret World, but I can say that I've read up on all the others from Conan to Rift and the one thing they all have in common is fantasy.  They are all, in some way, shape, or form, the same old melee and magic based RPGs that we've been playing in the past.  What if you can change up the formula?  Create something different.  Something that doesn't depend on swords and socery (or lightsabers and lightning in the case of Star Wars).  What would you get?

 

Well you might get something like EVE Online, which is one of the few surviving subscription based game.  The focus here is starship to starship combat rather than person to person.  This might sound like Star Wars but it isn't, because the game is designed to be extremly brutal.  You can be stolen from by other players for instance.  You can't do that in Warcraft.  Last I read, most players join a corporation (an EVE term for guild or clan) just to be able to survive.

 

Or, you can get a game that's completely different.  Like Second Life.  This doesn't come up much in gaming media because it's not a game but rather… well, it's a second life.  A digital life, versus your real life.  It's a place where you can design your own avatar if you have the inclination, or pay for 'parts' from other users to design your avatar with.  After that, I think, you just try to live a life.  Meet other digital people.  Maybe buy some virtual property and design a virtual house.  It's really rather flexible, and I believe people pay for the privilage. 

 

Personally, I don't think making the next breakout MMO is impossible.  But I do think making the next third person, quest-based, might and magic, raiding and leveling fest is.  In other words, there will be no World of Warcraft except World of Warcraft.  The next successful subscription based MMO MUST be totally different from anything that's came before.  I think the recent declining trend supports my theory.

 

If a gamer wants to play in a fantasy, the option is there.  If another gamer wants to be a spaceship, there's that too.  And if another gamer wants to live another life, that's possible online.  But there's got to be more people than that.  I don't know what it is though, because the next big massively multiplayer game has yet to be invented.  What I do know is that there will be two breakout MMOs coming in the future.  One is World of Warcraft 2, and the other will be someone noone has ever seen before.

 

P.S.  Why do I get the feeling I wrote this exact same blog before?  On 1up maybe?  Or an earlier one in Blogger?  I don't know.  But it's not stopping me from writing about it again!

Wii U Impressions Over Four Days

On day 1, the new system was down right disappointing.  I understand that the new touch pad is the gimmick of the hour but must everything go through that tiny screen?  On this day I find that far too much action happens on the small screen.  Even if the TV and the touchpad is showing the exact same image, the actual input comes from the pad.  You can't even use the directional buttons to make selections.  Nope.  You have to touch the screen.  Which means eyes must be taken off the TV.  You might as well forget about the beautiful 60 inch set you have and just stare at the pad!  I was so mad.  Not that I have a beautiful 60 inch set.  Just an example, the Nintendo eStore can be viewed from your TV just fine, but if you want to go into an item, say, to browse the description, you have to use the touch pad.  Drove me nuts.  What happened to old fashioned d-pad and the A button?   Bah.

 

On day 2, I was determined to do something different.  Today, the goal is to ignore the touch pad until absolutely necessary and focus almost strictly on the TV screen.  The difference it made to the Wii U experience was like night and day.  I was using the new Wiiverse app (more on that in a minute) and you can scroll through the app with the analogue sticks and some features have button short cuts (you can go back a menu for example, by using the good old B button).  This means that I was using the TV screen most of the time to read posts.  Unfortunately, to use any of the more 'advanced' features like 'reply' or even to make a 'new' post, you have to tap and tap and tap.  Grrr.  But I'm getting used to the dual screen setup and there's less anger towards the machine.

 

Day 3 was the day I popped in a real game to try.  Nintendoland it is.  Didn't spend too much time with it, but there was some nice things to do with the touch pad so it didn't seem so stupid anymore.  Played the Legend of Zelda 'attraction' as they call it (more like mini game) and you use the pad as a 'viewfinder' of sorts where you can tilt it around to aim and shoot arrows at enemies.  It was suprisingly fun.  I also tried Octopus Dance.  It's a rhythmn action game whereby you follow the instructions of an AI NPC and try to copy it's dance moves.  Harder than it sounds!  You also have to switch from looking at the TV to the pad screen and vice versa whenever the game randomly 'flips' the perspective of the dance.  Very nice!  I'm coming around to the Wii U.  Actually liking it now.

 

Day 4.  Mario time!  Popped in New Super Mario Bro. U and played it.  It was…. blah.  It's Mario.  You jump, you eat mushrooms, you jump some more.  *snore*  Wooops!  Sorry about that.  To be honest, I was excited about starting Mario.  After I did, however, it grew old and fast.  Sorry, Mario lovers, I grew past this guy around the time when games went 3D.  BUT, the Wii U grew on me nonetheless.  That's because I found the joys of Wiiverse!  What is it?  It's basically Nintendo Twitter.  You can't carry an app around your phone like real Twitter, but on the Wii U, it's the primary method of communicating.  Your Friends can be access from here but you can also access a great many other things.  The app works almost exactly like Twitter, right down to the 120 charaters or so space limit.  You can broadcast your posts or you can view other posts, give them 'thumbs up's and follow other users.  Because of the nature of the touch pad, you can even use the stylus to draw your post rather than type them!  There are some talented artists in the community.  Each game has it's own 'community', or forum, and you can post into any one of them regardless if you've ever played the game.  But what sold me was the integration of the app into actual gaming.  You can take screen shots and post them to the game's forum.  You can post from within the game and the post will even include which level of the game you're currently in at the moment.  I still haven't figure out everything yet, but already the excitement is difficult to contain.

 

It's Nintendo, so I don't think they'll ever grow out of their old habitats, but if Wiiverse can be integrated into Facebook or the real Twitter where if you post there you post everywhere, then I think it'll be the best thing since 3D polygons.  Even as it is, I can't wait to be able to use it for other games besides Mario.  Right now, I'm playing Farcry 3 on the 360.  It's a very beautiful game, and sometimes, I'd be high up on a cliff somewhere and there would be a breathtaking view for miles around.  Those are the times when I wish I could take a picture and post it for all to see.  Alas, there is no Miiverse on the 360!  But give it time, maybe, and I can do that, some day, on the Wii U, with another beautiful game.

My Wii U Story

I didn't know it, but deep inside, I really wanted a Wii U.

Last Friday, I went grocery shopping with my mom.  We parted ways when it was done and I found myself at a local game retailer.  There were five or six people already lined up in front of the counter.  I got a hunch, and asked what it is they were waiting for.

The store clerk said to me: 'Don't go telling everyone, but we just got a new shipment of Wii Us in today.'

'The deluxe version?' I asked.

'Yes.'

'Enough for all these people here?' I said, gesturing to the waiting line.

'Yes,' she replied, 'and if you get in line now, there's enough for you, too.'

What can I do?  I got in line.  Then a voice spoke up in my mind.  It's like from the back of my head.  My inner voice said: 'shouldn't you be at work now?  You should be working now, and if you line up here you'd be late.'

I really didn't care.  'This is the Wii U chance I've been waiting for.  So I'll get to work late, I'll make up the time later.  No big deal.'

Then I woke up.  And not only was I NOT lined up for a Wii U, I STILL had to go to work.  *sigh*  The signs are all there, right?  A line up?  For the Wii U?  Two weeks after launch?  Yeah right!  What is this?  A PS3?  Just joking, Nintendo fans, don't kill me.

My girlfriend has slowly been conditioning my beliefs to the idea of using dreams as a kind of premonition.  So I was curious to see if it meant something.  Maybe if I did go to a Gamestop today, there would be a Wii U deluxe bundle there.  Unfortunately, during my lunch break, I totally forgot about the dream.  It wasn't until late Friday night while I was over to a friend's house that I remembered again.

My friend worked for an independent game retailer, so I told him about the dream.  He then tells me that the place he worked for has the deluxe set, but the store owner was reluctant to sell them for just anything.  My friend tells me that maybe the owner would part with one if I promised to also buy a couple of games from the retailer.  This sounded fair to me.  Unlike some folks, I buy systems to play them, so adding in a couple of games was what I planned on anyway. 

My friend promised to talk to his boss the next day and see what kind of deal we can strike up.  The next morning, a Saturday, I woke up and anxiously waited for some news.  It was 1:30 when I finally decided to follow up on the deal.  Turns out he forgot to ask his boss about the Wii U!  When he did, however, his boss wasn't keen on the idea.  His boss said something like 'the Wii U is everywhere.  Just tell him to buy the system from some where else and buy the games from us.'

It's a little unreasonable but well within his rights.  But if he says that the new Wiis are everywhere, then maybe that's true?  So I hit a nearby Gamestop.  And here is the unbelievable part...  The clerk at this Gamestop told me they sold out of the deluxe versions...  THAT VERY MORNING!  Which means two things.  1)  The Wii Us ARE everwhere and 2) if I had bugged my friend earlier I might have decided to come to Gamestop earlier and might have gotten the machine!  Never mind earlier.  If I had followed up on my dreams Friday I might have gotten one then!

But in another way, the premonition was true.  The Wii U was just a dream afterall.

But giving up this easily just doesn't make sense.  The Gamestop clerk was nice enough to take down my number and promised to give me a call when they get the next shipment in.  He says that one was planned for the following Monday.  The waiting list was abolished, so he couldn't reserve me the next machine, but a phone call was possible.

So Monday it is.  And hope was alive.

Monday rolled around and I've waited all morning but still no phone call.  During lunch, I visited yet another Gamestop to ask if they had any Wii Us instead.  The clerk there pretty much confirmed what the other had told me: that they had expected a shipment earlier on Monday.  However, that shipment had yet to arrive.  Now I understand why there was no phone call.

But it was so close, right?  Just one more day, maybe?

And so we come to Tuesday.  Today.  I waited all morning and early afternoon and there was still no call from the first store.  So on lunch, I went back to the second Gamestop, the one who told me about the late shipment and tried my luck.

And they had them!

I think the story can safely end here.  There's no punchline or anything other than a happy ending.  I'm fairly certain you, the reader, can figure out what happened here, at the end. ;)

Should There Be New Versions?

So I was thinking about the Wii U launch and how retailers and gamers alike are hoping that new hardware blood will reinvigorate the dying retail gaming industry.  Then I thought to myself:  why not have console iterations the same way we have new versions of iPhones or Samsung Galaxies every year?

Just as quickly I dismissed that as a stupid idea.

The best part about the current console generation is how static it is.  No more having to worry about getting the latest versions of the Xbox or the Playstation.  Personally, I'm as happy as a clam not to have to shell out close to a thousand bucks every five years (for two systems).

But there's more than that.  Who would care about buying new versions of home consoles every year or so?  It's not like a mobile phone.  One can say that part of the appeal of a new phone is showing it off everywhere you go.  But unless you lug your PS4 on the bus most people won't be able to see how awsome you are.  Is it any wonder that the only handheld consoles have a million versions?  DS Lite, XL, PSP, Go, whatever.  Yet, for consoles, there's pretty much the launch boxes and... slims.  That's it.

So no, I don't think it's going to work.  Will probably piss people off if anyone tries.  Personally, I don't know how people put up with new versions of the same tablets and phones year after year.  Maybe I'm wrong, and these same people don't mind buying virtually identical consoles year after year.  There are probably people who own slim versions of the Xbox or PS3 even if their older models still work.

Personally, I hope not.  But... I can see Microsoft trying to do something like this though.

The Wii U and I

No no, I don't have a Wii U.  But, that in itself is strange.  Going all the way back to the PS2, I've bought each new console as it first came out, either on launch day or a month or so after.  The Wii U is breaking this trend.

I think there's three things about the Wii U launch that's rubbing wrong.  The first is that there isn't single game I want to play on it.  The second is that my older model TV only has one HDMI port (proudly hooked to my PS3) and lastly, even if I wanted a Wii U, there's no place that have any for sale.  Still, these were factors I've encountered before, and never have they stopped me.  I waited 8 hours in front of a Walmart in freezing October weather to get a PS2 and what did I play on it?  Summoner. So much for launch games I want to play.  And additional cable investments haven't stopped me before either.  Remember when the Xbox and PS2 both came packed in with AV cables?? Of all things.  Yet I shelled out a small fortune for the then rare PS3, and more money for an additional HDMI cable.  And availability?  In truth, there are plenty of Wii Us out there, if you don't mind the white regular edition.  Personally, I'm not desperate enough to go that far.

For the first time in a long time, there's a console launch that is just so ho-hum and unexciting.  It's happened before, but for handhelds.  The 3DS and the Vita didn't have the biggest hype and I didn't want either at launch day.  But lo and behold I bought them anyway.

My point is that if I desperately wanted a Wii U, even if it's the special edition black version, I would probably have one by now.  I just never made too much effort.  That said, if some Gamestop employee tells me they have black Wii Us in stock, I'd probably flash the credit card.  But I'm also not making it happen.  For instance, I was in an EB today for lunch and didn't even bother asking the clerk if they have any Wii Us.  They most likely don't, but it never hurts right?

I guess it's just being burned by Nintendo all these years.  The Wii wasn't a very good machine.  And if it wasn't for stuff like the two Zeldas, Last Story and Xenoblade that thing is a total right off.  Actually, if I can only name four good games for it, it still is!

*sigh*  I dunno.  This is a meandering blog, but I'm still just trying to decide. Maybe writing about it helps.  Do I want one?  Do I not want one?  Right now I just don't know.  The only thing I know for sure is this.  There is absolutely nothing I want to play on it right now, so if I get it, it would only be for the one factor of actually having it.  And is that worth it?

I just can't decide....

Music: What it Used to Be

Most people would never consider myself to be a music fan.  There's no background music when I write this blog, for instance, nor am I one of those people who constantly have headphones on.  Ask me what the top 30 is today and all you would get is a blank stare back.  In fact, I remember having to do an assignment back in high school for media studies.  It was embarrassing because it totally baffled me what the top 30 songs were back then!  I mean, who are these Slackstreet Boys?  And who is this Lavish Garden couple?

But the one thing I'm always vulnerable to are gaming tunes.  While I was able to tune out Ace of Lace and  Poutcast, there was no escaping from Terra's Theme, or Man with the Machine Gun.  Not to mention the Zelda main theme, or anything from Panzer Dragoon and Panzer Dragoon Zwei (and Saga!).  Back in the day, those are pretty much the only music in my head (along with some great Andrew Lloyd Webber show tunes). 

I really miss the days when a game would be playing something in the background for every thing.  Running the plains in Final Fantasy 7?  A soothing melody.  Shooting up baddies in Contra?  A popping, but catchy beat keeps you moving.  Busting zombies and skeletons?  You can't do without that Castlevania organ piano.  Even when you're in the main menu, pursuing your inventory, the music stays with you.  Now a days, there's just nothing but background noise.  Sure, when you're fighting the Covenant or a Titan you get some rocking tracks but who's noticing?  You're busy dodging sticky grenades and giant fists.  Plus it's not all that great.  Most people can remember the slow Halo choir leading to a thumping finish and maybe you can remember a few bars of the Kratos theme but really... that's ONE song out of... two?  Whatever happened to real gaming soundtracks?  Where, like a good show tune album, features more than just one hit?  Like Final Fantasy's!

It's difficult to pinpoint just when gaming tracks vanished like the dinosaurs, but my bet is that it coincided with the demand for realism.  In Grand Theft Auto 3, would it be realistic if background music played when you're robbing a bank?  Not really.  In Fallout 3, would it make sense to hear a stirring melody while being pounded by supermutants?  No, I guess not...  The ironic thing is, music plays a big role in both games.  In GTA 3's case, it was famous for using real world licensed soundtrack, and for Fallout, the 40's music is just as iconic to the franchise as the supermutant mauling your face.  And I think that's the thing... all of a sudden, if you had to have music in your game, it had to be met with realism.  You don't actually hear any tunes unless you're in a car with the radio up, or you turned on your portable radio while exploring the wasteland.  Even the sounds you hear in other games really only stand out when the gamer enters combat.  Usually meaning generic guitar riffs or drum pounds.  Honestly, if there's no licensed music, there's usually no variety, and nothing is catchy anymore.

And that brings me to the reason I'm writing this.  It is because of a game called Nier.  Nier, brought me back to the days when music made the game every bit as graphics did.  Nier features a suite of stirring and surprisingly vocal tunes that fit every occasion in the game.  And, it plays in the background all....  the...  time!  How awesome is that!  After hearing just a couple of songs, I couldn't take it anymore.  I had to get the soundtrack.  Luckily, it was all there on iTunes, under the Square Enix Music label.  It was one of the best 15 dollars ever spent.  This game threatens singled handedly to turn me into one of those dudes you see with headphones on the commute, oblivious to that pole he's about to walk into.  Okay, so that's never happened to me but you get the idea.

One of my favorite things about soundtracks from the old days (NES to PSOne) is that you can usually find arranged versions of your favorite tunes.  Since the sound quality didn't really come into it's own until the DVD generations of consoles, a lot of the older tracks would get the orchestra treatment.  The best example would the anything from Final Fantasy 10 and previous.  Generally, the arranged version sounds much better quality wise, if not better in general.  It is a real treat to hear favorite turns pumped up from 8bit or synthesized to full orchestra.

So imagine my surprise when I found that Nier also had an arranged album.  Naturally, I snagged it shortly after getting the original but there's one thing I forgot.  While 'arranged' for the older songs mean 'orchestra', the quality for Nier was already so high that 'arranged' apparently meant 'techno'. :/  Luckily, there are some other treats in the arrangement including a medley featuring 8 bit renditions of all the best tracks.  LOL!  Talk about role reversal.

The 8 bit rendition is very, very good, by the way.

And you know... so is the techno.

A Show of Appreciation

My girlfriend and I have this favorite Japanese restaurant called Asahi Sushi. We love going there mostly because the food is just awsome and we go quite often. Because of this, every time we enter Asahi, we are greeted with warm smiles by the proprietors of the place - a middle aged Korean couple - and sometimes, they would treat us to some free food. We don't always have to order specifics to get some extra edamame, or a free salad bowl or two. By now you might be thinking that this is a restaurant review, but no, it's not! It's about gaming! What else?

The thing is, if you're a regular at a restaurant owned by independents, you might get a bit of preferential treatment. Free food, warm smiles, that kinda thing. Small stuff mostly. But what about games? Do we get anything for being fans? Sometimes, I'm not sure if the answer is yes. Club Nintendo is one big loyalty program, yes, and preorder bonuses are a dime a dozen. No, I'm talking about something a bit more intimate. Something from the developers straight to you and me.... You might think that noone really does this but lately, I found one example to beat the odds and I wish that more developers and publishers would go this extra mile. The publisher who does things right is Aksys, and the game is Record of Agarest Wars 2. You will be forgiven for never having heard of this niche JRPG but I guarantee you that what they are doing on the appreciation front is absolutely new.

When you buy Record of Agarest Wars 2, you're buying a special edition only (for now anyway) box set with an art book, a mylar balloon and a hand towel but that's not it. You pay for these on the price of the special edition package. If you check the PSN Store, however, this PS3 exclusive offers a tonne of free stuff just for the taking. A great many of these free items have descriptions that begin with 'in appreciation of your continued patronage, we offer....' Something like that. The gist is there. Point is, they make clear that the free stuff offered on PSN are there as appreciation for buying the game.

The goods they give away are small. A few extra experience points, some crafting materials and maybe an armor set or two. The armor set is nothing to sneeze at. According to a friend of mine who downloaded the item, the gear is head and shoulders above what he can currently obtain at his point in the game. But we don't have to go that far. In the end, the armor is just a handful of stats. The beauty is that such appreciation packages don't have to cost developers much. Any game featuring a points system or some kind of in game currency can benefit simply by offering a few points in appreciation here and there. What makes Agarest and Aksys friendly is that they continue to offer free stuff even a couple of weeks after releasing the game, which, I think, enhances gamer gratitude. We're not talking about a free DLC with new missions, costumes and story, or whatever. Just a few extra points thrown the player's way that won't break the game but show the players that the publishers care.

Now, if a small outfit like Aksys can do this, how come EA and Activision and all the big players don't? UBI Soft kinda does. They offer free in game upgrades to your characters for the last couple of Assassins' Creed games but there's a catch. You have to open a Uplay account and give out some personal information to get the freebies.  This stuff in exchange for your personal info doesn't really count.  Nor am I referring to those pack-in codes available on the first new release runs.  Those are incentives to buy the game on or very close to street date.  I'm taking about free gifts that show appreciation to gamers with no strings attached whether you buy the game now or ten months later.

With the gaming industry sales sliding into free fall, maybe it will be gestures like this that make the difference. The casual players are gone but we can at least keep the core gamers happy by dropping a few goodies our way. It's a nice, inexpensive way to say 'thanks' for buying a game at up to $60 retail at launch. I don't see how that could hurt. Again, this isn't the same as a preorder bonus. This is stuff that everyone gets just for buying the game. No strings attached.

There's one caveat here, folks. Agarest Wars 2 is the third in a series and the only PS3 exclusive. The other two games, Agarest and Agarest Zero were also for the 360. According to the same friend who tipped me off the these freebies, the other two games aren't as generous on Microsoft's platform. Apparently, the same free stuff on PSN costs points on Live. I hear from a long time ago that developers who want to offer free goods on the 360 couldn't because MS won't allow it and this is a perfect example.  I guess when it comes to MS or Sony, we know who appreciates gamers more.

A couple of days ago, an article was posted on gaming site Gamasutra regarding the state of the retail videogame industry. The analyst writing the feature didn't have much good news. Retail gaming sales is still taking a nose dive and, in the worse case scenerio, we can expect revenues in 2012 to come down to the same levels we saw while in 2005. The writer indicates that this was the time of the DS launch, but before the 360 launch and my memory confirms this.

In a way, this isn't very surprising. Right now, we are missing the number one factor/driver that lead to the heady days of 2008 when games were flying off shelves. The time when even music retailer HMV was diversifying into selling games (but they no longer do, thanks to the downturn). Three factors after 2005 contributed to the claim that gaming was surpassing the movie industry:

1) The launch of the Nintendo Wii
2) Guitar Hero/Rock Band
3) Modern Warfare (the game, not real life)

All three items contributed to the growth of the gaming industry from 2006 to 2008 and that main factor is... the casual gamer! The Wii was the most influential driver of this with it's family friendly collection and motion controls (now grandma can play!). This was closely followed by the music gaming phenomenon (now anyone can be a rockstar!), which brought in all kinds of interest from non gamers to the point where Activision was forced to milk and eventually destroy the genre. And finally, we have the start of the Modern Warfare franchise in 2007. Though MW isn't exactly a 'casual' game, it did bring in a lot of people who normally don't play to buy a 360. A lot of people I know own a 360 just for that one series (and maybe a Gears of War or a Forza). Now everyone can be a bad@ss killer, yay! That's sarcasm, by the way.

So the video game down turn we're seeing now, I believe, is simply these casual gamers leaving the industry as we know it. Wii sales are on the decline, the music genre is on life support and even Modern Warfare's numbers have peaked. Basically, sales are down because there are simply less grandmas, rockstar hopefuls and wannabe soldiers of fortunes around to float the boat. Where did they all go? That's easy. Mobile and social games, of course! Pretty much all of the casual stuff from Nintendo down to a few matches of Call of Duty just comes down to a little bit of entertainment here and there, when you're bored, or when there are people over that need to be entertained for just a few minutes. And most of these needs can be satisfied by apps and Facebook games. The idea is that if you're bored, just fire up the phone for a bit, and if your house guests are bored, they can fire up their phones. Yes, sarcasm, but the gist is real.

So we are now heading back down to 2005 levels, when games on the shelves were snapped up by gamers looking to play - not just for a few minutes, but for a few hours. It's not so bad. Maybe this will get Nintendo to go back to making some 'real' games for a change. Actually... no... the future is pretty bleak even from here.

What's the difference? Well, back in 2005 and prior, if you want to make games, the consoles (and PC) is the only game in town. If you want to play any decent games, there are only a few places you can go. This isn't true anymore. Now you can get different types of games just about anywhere. A dedicated machine (or a gaming PC) is entirely optional. It seems that every time I visit Gamasutra, this or that talented game maker left this or that publisher/studio to form his or her own company making.... mobile and social apps! Top tier talent everywhere are leaving the traditional landscape for a place where the hours are less, the pressure to please the publisher non existent, and where one can control one's destiny. This is some attractive proposition, not to be underestimated.

What's going to happen in the future? Unless the mobile and social grasses turn out not to be so green, there will simply be fewer and fewer people making console games. More specifically, BIG, console games, games like Uncharted, or Infamous, which require teams of hundreds. And to be honest, what is a console without your big console games?

I really hate to say this, but I predict that this is the beginning of the end of the gaming world as we know it. The writing is on the wall. Console games will never go away entirely. But we might get to a point where a decent console title will be hard to find. Not just because it's expensive to make, but there will be noone making them.

Why Buy 360?

A couple of days ago, a friend of mine asked me how I decide what to buy for which system: the PS3 or Xbox 360.  As an owner of both consoles, this is the most vexing decision.  With most games these days appearing on multiple platforms, the question of which version to get is never easy.  A confession to make before moving on:  I am hugely biased in favor of the PS3.  Being an older gamer, the Sony brand simply means so much more, from the best JRPGs to the best action games like God of War.  Sony is where my favorite memories stem from over the years (after having been given the shaft by Nintendo, but that is a story for another blog).  With my Sony-heavy bias, my answer to my friend's question was....  well... I buy games for the 360 mostly out of pity.

Yes, that's right.  If I could, I would buy every single game ever released on a Sony platform.  With that bias in place, the only time I would ever buy a multi-platform 360 game would be when I feel sorry for the machine and decide to give it some love.  However, after mulling the question over in my head for a day or so, the whole story begins to emerge, and it's not always about feeling sorry for one system over another.

Remember how I said that the Sony machines gave me the best gaming memories?  Well, there were some painful ones.  Two of which involved having to replaced both my PS1 and PS2 simply due to wear and tear.  Having already gone through two PS3s due to technical break downs,  the last thing I need is to get a third PS3 console.  (Why I still have Sony in such high regard after this fiasco I will never know.  For the record, however, I am on my second 360).  So sometimes, getting a game on the 360 is a good idea, even if I prefer the PS3.  If I'm not running the Sony machine, it can't wear out, right?  And if the 360 happens to red ring on me again, hey, I can say my bias is justified.  Yes, that's a joke.  Ironically enough, this sometimes mean that I buy lengthy RPGs like Fallout and The Elder Scrolls on the 360.  Because the hundred hour or so playing these games will not wear out my PS3.

There are other practical reasons for getting games for the 360, one of which is the system's stability.  As a Sony fan I shouldn't be saying this but psychologically, I think the 360 is the more stable system.  Just recently, I had the PS3 crash on me while playing splitscreen co op in Lego Batman 2.  The 360 also crashes, like when I play intensive games such as Skyrim.  This actually puts the 360 in favor for the more technically intensive games.  The simpler chip architecture of Microsoft's machine translates to a more stable game experience in my mind.  It also didn't help that my first PS3 died on me while playing Fallout 3.  Anytime Bethesda comes out with an epic, it's an automatic 360 buy.  Like I said before, I'd rather sacrifice the Xbox.  For games which are PC ports, this is a no brainer.  Is it any coincidence that both the Witcher 2 and Divinity Ego Draconis are both 360 exclusives?  PC ports to the 360 is much easier than to the PS3, which is why for games like Alice Madness Returns, I once again choose Microsoft.

Then there are the free stuff, and this is mostly in Sony's favor.  Just off the top of my head, Arkham Asylum, Dante's Inferno, Assassin's Creed Revelations and Dead Space 2 both had extra free content for Sony's platform.  I always make it a policy to buy the version which gives me more, and so far, Sony's side is winning over stingy Microsoft.

Then who can forget about the multiplayer?  A good friend of mine who plays games have the opposite bias as I do and it gets in the way whenever a good fighting game shows up.  He will always buy the 360 version while I spring for the PS3 but we both want to go head to head together!  Thing is, he has friends on both sides of the fence so he actually gets both version, but he gets the 360 first, waits for a price drop or a used copy, and then buy Sony's.  In this case it works out.  Also, the games that I want to play multiplayer co op on, like Halo and Gears of War, are Xbox exclusives.  That decision is easy.  But one day, there will be a game that the two of us would like to play, and I would rather not subscribe to Xbox Live.  So far, that day hasn't come, but who knows?  Persona Arena will be yet another test of loyalty...

I wish I had a witty end to this blog but I don't.  I do have one more reason to choose one over the other though.  It sometimes just comes down to momentum.  Some games like Mass Effect requires that you stick with one console if you want to carry over saves.  In this case, why switch?  I just wish that it came out on Sony's platform first. :)

Apps VS Rhythm Heaven - A Rant on the Mobile Platform

Having been a user of the Apple platform of devices for going on two years now, the amount of games I've played on the things can be counted on one hand.  All this time, the only games you'll find on my iPhone or iPad are Angry Birds, Chaos Rings, Superbrothers, Zenonia and Mega Mall Story.  There was also a demo of Cut the Rope but that was my girlfriend's pick and I barely touched it but I guess it counts. So there's six games in total.

This isn't a rant on how good/bad mobile games are compared with console/handheld games.  Angry Birds is a good as everyone says.  Cut the Rope is great, too.  Chaos Rings is a pretty little JRPG and a good game.  Superbrothers is a fantastic adventure game and Mega Mall Story was addictive while it lasted.  The only true disappointment was Zenonia, which featured a translation so childish that I was actually offended.

This rant is about depth.  Because as great as some of these app games are, most of them aren't too deep.  Angry Birds is just chucking fowls over and over, and Mega Mall Story got thin after you realize that there isn't that much freedom in the game.  Not the kind of freedom of a Sim City or Civilization.  So Chaos Rings had a lot of depth, but in the end, it's something that console games have been doing since the SNES days.  Does it really count as an 'app' game just because it is featured in the App Store?

Superbrothers is the only game that truly offers depth while pushing the creative envelope.  But so does Rhythm Heaven.  And that got me thinking.  Why isn't there a game like Rhythm Heaven (and it's Wii sibling Rhythm Heaven Fever) on the app side?  The game has enough depth, what with dozens of mini games and variations on each one.  There are even bonus unlockable games too, not to mention a ranking system for competing with yourself for the best performance.  For the sake of disclosure, I never beat Rhythm Heaven on DS, BUT, I did get gold on every mini event I played and that counts for me as depth - that I'm actually able to do this without getting bored.  Thing is, Rhythm Heaven is perfect as an app.  It's got a simple premise mixed in with some zany mini games all the to beat of some of the most catchy tunes you'll ever hear.  Isn't that what the mobile platform is all about?  Simple games bursting with creativity and music?  So why isn't there a Rhythm Heaven clone app?

Someone out there can set me straight, I'm sure.  There's got to be one out there that I just don't know about.  But that's the thing.  Why don't I know about it?  I mean, I know about Rhythm Heaven.  Played it too, and loved it.  When I first got my iPhone and iPad, I was checking the game releases week after week, seeking to see for myself what all this mobile hype was all about, and all I got was a disappointing mix of puzzle games, hidden picture games, word games and ports of popular console fare like Need for Speed.  Honestly, this wasn't what I signed up for.  Where's the simple, zany games with great music?  Couldn't find any.  Why is that?  Why are some potentially great games so hard to find?  And why are all the featured games so.... shallow.  I mean, I've seen Temple Run in action.  Not interested.

So my search goes on.  And while the apps have yet to offer more games for a grizzled game vet like myself, I can always rely on the good old consoles to deliver to me my entertainment.  For me, mobile games have a long way to go before catching up to the best that consoles have to offer.  It's just that, if consoles and handhelds can offer stuff like Rhythm Heaven, then why do I ever need to turn to apps?

Oh, and I lied.  I also bought Street Fighter IV for a buck on the App Store.  But that doesn't count.  Afterall, wasn't it done on consoles first?  And better besides?

The Console War: Now Just Giving them Away!

It's been six long years, but the inevitable has finally happened.  People are starting to give away consoles!  In just the past few months alone, I have seen three deals in stores where if you buy whatever, you get a free 4 gig Xbox 360.  For late adopters and recent red ring sufferers, this is like a godsend.  But for guys like me who had to buy TWO 360s, it's kind of scathing.

Just recently, I saw two such deals happening pretty much simultaneously.  In Canada, both Staples and Futureshop are both offering a free Xbox if you buy a select brand of laptops.  Buy a small computer for $800, get a $200 console for free.  Not a bad deal, and it's no a surprise that the Staples site has already sold out of their Toshiba machines.  I'm not sure about Futurshop though, who is offering the deal for Samsung buyers.  A few months before, Rogers was offering a free Xbox if you do one of their bundles (with Kinect, even, if I remember correctly).

Now I'm not privy to the deals, but I doubt it's truly for free in the sense that Microsoft is just giving them away.  I don't know if reimbursements are coming from Rogers, or Toshiba, or Staples or whoever but I doubt Microsoft is just letting retailers or manufacturers use their console without any kind of catch.  And even though gamers are getting a very good deal, it's still more of a bait than a windfall.  Any core gamer can say that a 4gig 360 isn't at it's full potential without a hardrive (another $100) and a Live subscription ($60/year).  An exciting deal overall?  Yeah, but just know what you're getting into.

But I seriously doubt late adopters care.  All they want to see is probably what the console hype is all about and don't have to pay a penny for it.  Microsoft is probably loving the installed base.  Sure, they might have 30+ millions of Xbox consoles out in the world, but a million of those didn't have to pay a penny for it, and the machine might not even be out of the box.  But if Microsoft just wants the numbers, there are worse ways to go about getting them.

I don't have some super sharp insight into all of this, just a cynical observation that the company who can afford to give away so many consoles also happens to be one with the deepest pockets.  Not sure if that's fair.  But, before anyone starts feeling sorry for Sony, it's best to keep in mind that they started it.

Remember that Rogers deal?  Well, before they gave away 360s, they did it first with the PS3.  If the timeline is any indication, it looks like Sony gave their rivals one excellent idea.

But the true winner in all of this?  The folks who got a PS3 from Rogers.  With no hard drive to upgrade and no subscriptions to maintain, it truly is for free.

Cloud Gaming: There Has Got to be a Better Way

So the big hoopla about On-Live launching and taking the world by storm has come and gone.  The gaming industry is still pretty much the same now as it was back then. Personally, I can't help but heave a sigh of relief.  Still, one is never far off from talk about how cloud gaming will rock the industry as we know it.  It can still come true, but personally, I don't want to be around when that happens.

Most gamers by now have lived through the anticipated launch of Diablo 3, but how many had had a good experience on day 1?  The day the game went live, I played for about 10 minutes before the server kicked me out for a last minute update...  and this is why I'm dreading a future of the cloud.  What's that?  Diablo 3 isn't a game in the cloud?  No, but it's close, since you simply cannot play it when not hooked up to the internet.

Right now, I'm not going to go into how cloud gaming is a bad idea because of the usual stuff like spotty connections, lag, being a hostage to your service provider or the fact that you don't have a physical copy of the game (even though I just did).  Rather, I'm arguing on the sake of just being able to play the darn thing.  Taking the Diablo 3 analogy a step further, can you imagine loading up a cloud version of Red Dead 2, or Resident Evil 7 on launch day, only to find that you can't play it due to high server volumns?  I'm picking on these games, and not games like World of Warcraft or even Modern Warfare because my concern is about single player.

One of the unavoidable ironies of the Diablo 3 launch is that the game can be played alone, single player, but you can't do that if the servers aren't up.  And all the while you're thinking to yourself how it just doesn't make any sense!  I'm trying to play single player for goodness' sake!  It's like at the zoo, where a tiger is on the other side of the glass, and it wants nothing more than to maul me but it can't because I'm not on the same side.  Even though the tiger can see me right there, not two feet away, but oh so frustratingly far because of the glass! 

When I'm hungry for a great game, cloud gaming is that glass.  I am the tiger, and the game is just on the other side, so close but so far away.

Anyway, this posting is more a rant than anything serious, but if given the chance, I'd go for a sunny forecast any day of the week.

Superman: My New Favorite Hero

My favorite superhero of all time used to be Spiderman.  But I'm not sure if that's so true anymore.

Recently, I had a chance to read through all 12 issues of All-Star Superman by Grant Morrison, Frank Quietly and Jamie Grant.  At first I wasn't all that impressed (Watchmen is still my favorite graphic novel of all time), but the more I think about what I've read the more it grows on me.

It's no secret that, on the DC side, it's all about Batman.  One needn't look past the two stellar films to see that it kicked Superman's last Hollywood outing in the butt.  But I think it's more the sign of the times rather than one being a better character than the other.  It wasn't THAT long ago (maybe fifty years or so) when Superman was top dog.

Thing is, if you look at the world around you, and then you look at what films make it these days and which don't, you can kinda see why Supes is playing second to Bats.  Nowadays, with the less than rosy forecast (both economic and climate), people are more... negative... than ever.  And that's pretty much Batman.  These days, when you hear on the news of so many struggling (to make ends meed, for instance), you also think of... Batman!  And it's kinda easy to see why.

Batman, despite his wealth, struggles every time he gets into his Bat suit.  Just to get where he is he has to train for years with Tibetan ninjas and whereas Superman can leap a building in a single bound, Batman has to work out everyday just to stay in shape.  In today's popular perception, Batman just fits more.  Here we have a rich kid with a huge inheritance feeling 'just not good enough' so he has to don his bat costume each day and slave like a dog just to catch criminals who ultimate will always escape jail just so they can be caught again.  It's rough being Batman, just like how it's rough to be human, sometimes.

Superman, however, is the total opposite.  Here you have a being who's basically just... being himself.  The movie Kill Bill told it best when the titular Bill said that Clark Kent is the disguise, while Superman is the real identity.  Superman doesn't have to work out.  He doesn't have to do anything to be super. He's super just cause of what he is and this is the important lesson.  As much as we may value struggle, as much as we may value making it on our own through the sweat off our backs, Superman reminds us that it's enough just to be who you are.  You don't have to DO anything to be super.  You just have to BE super.

A lot of people, I think, have forgotten that message lately.  Sure, we can't fly, or lift cars, or run faster than a speeding bullet but we don't have to.  We just have to be ourselves.  Personally, I'm a little tired of having to constantly struggle and to prove myself (especially at work).  Now, I just want to sit back, relax, be myself, and STILL BE SUPER!  And I think that is why I'm more inclined to Superman now than ever before.

Because sometimes, it's enough just to be who we are.  Even if it means wearing our underwear on the outside.