The name of the school does not reflect my sexuality.

Yesterday it was the first day of my student life. It actually started last week, but that was more of an intro... which was an intro with uncomfortable consequences. But I'll get back to that.

It is somewhat exciting, but I can't help thinking of the fact that my next 10 months will be characterized as unsocial and stressfull. Incase you were wondering, I am studying International Marketing... which atleast seems to be an interesting study. My courses this semester are:
- Marketing Management
- The Rise of Modern Business
- Finance and Economics
- Foreign Cultures
The names of these courses are loosely based on its norwegian names, and translated by me...
I don't know what I'm having the next semester, but I guess I'll give you an update when that time comes.

It's a three year study (bachelor), so I guess I won't be playing games actively for a while. I'm also considering taking a masters degree in Boston University (yeah, in USA) when that time comes. But I'll make that decision in the future.

The teachers seem to have a lot of knowledge, and to be good at what they do. The teacher in Marketing Management was especially good though. He cracked me up, aswell as the whole auditorium all the time. I couldn't fall asleep if I wanted to. And the others - not so much. They popped a few good ones now and then, but they couldn't live up to their colleague.

Also (without knowing what it's called in english) there was a "get to know eachother" week (intro). And by "get to know eachother", I mean "drink so much alcohol, you will need the help of an exoskeleton to even stand on your feet." Some guy brought a whole bottle of absinthe to the party that he wanted to share. My common sense told me no, but since common sense go out where the booze go in, I couldn't hear its voice, screaming from toilet. Three shots later (of pan galactic gargle blasters...) I can not remember anything. At all. The next moment I find myself in my aunts car, on my way home. My two cousins were there too. Feeding me babycarrots.

This monday I stood at the buss stop, waiting for the buss to take me to the school, when I was aproached by this guy saying "Hey it's you!" - I could swear that I had never seen him ever in my life. Later he told me that I was on "the ferry" with all the other students. ("The ferry?" you ask? You tell me). During that night I was told to disembark from the boat, because I was too drunk. Then I climbed up the ropes that held the ferry to the shore (I'm lucky I didn't fall into the water and die), and I was back in the game.

I'm gonna stop there, but needless to say I was in a really bad shape the day after. Nevertheless I am looking forward to continue my life as a student. Exciting times.

So yeah, did you start school yet?

Halo ODST will be released later this year, and the recently announced that Halo Reach will stumble upon us some time in 2010. Note: ODST is not even released yet... and Reach is announced.

So maybe it was a little optimistic of me to expect something new after the release of the last part of the trilogy. When ODST was announced my first thought was "cow." I didn't really mean it, but for some reason I think that only the trilogy was the original idea. Also "Finish the fight" means, in my mind, "no more." But then I guess some guy figured out that they could make a game about the past, and expand the Halo universe. Make the story more epic. (?) But wait... every time I ask a Halo player what's so great about it, they answer the multiplayer. I concur. The single player was in my eyes way linear and repetitive, and got boring after a while. But then I decided that I won't judge just yet. Keyword: Then. Halo Reach is announced, and ODST isn't even released yet. I mean; make it more obvious so that we're sure.

I guess Bungie likes being surrounded by money.

Allright, I'm being a bit unfair. Maybe it isn't just because of the money. There are other reasons to consider, like them figuring out that they don't have any ideas for a new game/franchise. Maybe they are so afraid of not living up to their players' expectations, that they simply don't have the self-confidence to try something new. Halo was a big hit, and making something to top that would be challenging.

That's it for now, just a little something I wrote swiftly. (I realized that I hadn't updated my blog in a while.)

What do you think? Is two games released in, possibly, under a year a little impatient from Bungie (best for them that reach isn't bugged), or "HALO RULES!"?

Red Faction: Guerrilla is, as we all probably know, an upcoming third-person shooter video game in development by Volition, Inc. and published by THQ, with the PC version being developed by Reactor Zero. The game is set to be released June 2, 2009 for the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and Microsoft Windows platforms. The game is the third installment in the Red Faction series. What makes this game stand out from the rest in the shooter genre is the ability to destroy literally every construction in its open martian world.

Awesome! We all love destruction, right? Just watching the truck I stole disappear into a random building, explode my attached mines, and see the building crumble was... satisfying! But after playing the demo a couple of times, I realized that this was the only fun aspect of this game. The "shooting" part of this shooter was straight out boring. It takes almost a full magazine to kill an enemy, and you don't know if he is affected by your bullets, because he's like a steadfast tin soldier untill he drops dead. It's also like that the other way. I don't know that I'm getting hit, untill I notice that my life bar is dropping. There's also a cover system in this game, but I never really took advantage of that, since I rather wanted to DESTROY everything I can take cover behind.

What I'm thinking is that Red Faction: Guerrilla might be as disappointing as Assassins Creed. By that I mean that it's really (REALLY) fun the first couple of hours, but then you realize that it's repetitive, and suddenly you find yourself just wanting to finish the game because climbing buildings isn't as fun anymore. Check out the following trailer: http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/redfactioniii/video/6209096

Alright, so what are they promising us in that trailer?
- Guerrilla [guh ril uh] noun. So obviously this trailer is built up on the definition of a guerrilla soldier. They give us a part of the definition, and then shows us a clip about how that works in the game. But doesn't that give us the wrong impression of the game? Maybe we expect more than what's actually there, and it all ends up being another disappointment.
- Improvised warfare tactics. We can see a firefighter (atleast he looks like one) throwing proximity mines at a building, where soldiers patroles on the roof. The mines blow up, the roof crumbles and the enemies falls through, and dies. I'm not going to deny that it looks like great fun. Making people die in various ways using physics will satisfy MY dark pleasures any day.
- Harass the enemy with surprise raids. The crazed axe-wielding yellow trenchcoat-wearing firefighter (or is it a hammer?) runs towards a building, smashes the gingerbread wall, which crushes Hansel and Gretel. Sweet! So I can see through walls? I only played the demo, and there I couldn't know if the enemy was inside a building or not (Infact I can't recall seeing an enemy inside a building in the demo at all... hm.) Maybe that's an unlockable ability in the full release. Oh, and there's a funny part; THEN you see him CRUSHING an enemy with the axe/hammer. (Harass [huh ras] verb - to disturb persistently; torment, as with troubles or cares; bother continually; pester; persecute.)
- Sabotage supply lines. Niice, I can blow up a bridge, and watch them plummet to their death. But I wouldn't say that this is another feat in the game. You destroy something, and in the process kills someone.
- Utilize stealth [pause] methods. (I'm going to quote myself, I wrote this in the comments.) Stealth? I didn't get the impression that stealth was possible in the demo... maybe before you attacked the first enemy, but from then on all hell breaks loose, and sneaking around isn't an option. Someone replied me (with a very good point), but I will get back to that.
- Perform ambush attacks. Again something is destroyed, and in the process killing someone.
- Incorporate shock and awe tactics. ...destroy constructions, and see men fall into their deaths... haven't I seen this before?
- Destroy typically stronger enemies. Ok, so here's something new. Maybe there's hope.
It seems to me that the meaning of this trailer is to give us the impression that there will be alot to do, when in fact it is the same thing over and over, in terms of gameplay.

Back to my comment. Here it is again, so you don't have to look for it: "Stealth? I didn't get the impression that stealth was possible in the demo... maybe before you attacked the first enemy, but from then on all hell breaks loose, and sneaking around isn't an option." Then risbo_23 replied "Well I presume it's not really stealthy to whack someone with a 40 pound sledgehammer! :-) But one would also think that this game won't be about stealth, this was just made up to make the trailer look better hehe..." It's settled then. He wields a hammer.
Wait, where was I? Oh yeah. I was thinking the excact same thing. It was just made up to make the trailer/game look better (... and it's a part of the definition). But that doesn't only include the stealth part. After reviewing the trailer, I find my self not so much impressed. So maybe we can conclude that this game has such a lack of feats, that they have to... well, not lie, but exaggerate "feats" that is not REALLY there, on their trailers? No we can't, because the full game isn't out yet.

Ofcourse, I hope that this turns out to be a thrill all the way to the end. I'm not going to comment on the multiplayer part, because I am mostly playing singleplayer modes/games... it's what I enjoy the most. Nevertheless, it's a game that I am going to buy, and I'm still looking forward to it!

What do you think? Do you think this will turn out repetitive, or will the destruction system alone make the game varied enough?

OnLive is a seventh generation video game console and is also a on-demand video game distribution system produced by Mova (subsidiary of Rearden). The console was announced at GDC 09. A low-end computer, as long as it can play video, may be used to play any kind of game since the game is computed on the OnLive server. It was announced that Electronic Arts, Take-Two, Ubisoft, Epic Games, Atari, Codemasters, THQ, Warner Bros., 2D Boy and Eidos Interactive have signed up to have their games available on the service.

With OnLive we no longer have to spend hundreds of dollars on hardware. We pay to play games through a rather bad ass computer over the internet, which means no possibility for piracy, and more money to the game developers. But does that mean more quality games? Hang on.

Like mentioned, all you need is a computer that can play video. Which means that you won't have to use money on hardware. So what about the hardware manufacturers? With the hardware sales dropping to nothing, there will be no money to further develop the technology. Then there will be no point to make games with more advanced technology, as there is no hardware to run it. Advanced physics including ray tracing, photo-realistic graphics, and such will never see day light. Atleast for a very long time.

Also this will be a juicy addition to our financial situation, when even more workplaces go away.

Since you play through the internet, the quality of the game depends on the connection you have. It's said that only a 5mbits line is enough to run a game in high-def. I have my doubts, but we'll know this winter.

And lastly (a point I read somewhere else, but it's a good one: ), a misfortune for us hardcore gamers, we lose the ability to mod our games. Cruds.

Pros:
- No need for high-end computers.
- Less piracy.

Cons:
- Less money to the hardware developers.
- Technology freezes.
- More people will lose their jobs.
- Quality depends on you internet connnection.
- No more game modding.

There is also a console version coming, at the size of a walkman. I for one, don't think this will be a success, since consoles aren't that expensive. But if it does, then Nintendos innovative thinking was even more usefull for their future than expected.

Do you think OnLive is good news, or bad news?

______________________

Introduction is an excerpt from OnLive at wikipedia. Picture is taken from wikipedia.