My PS3 is now online and I'm connected to the Network. It's interesting having a console connected to the rest of the world. To celebrate this, I treated myself to Call of Duty IV to see what killing people from the other side of the globe was like. As I loaded the multi-player and was briefed on the main controls by a veteran 360 player ('which button was shoot again?'), I began to wonder if all my years playing against CPU controlled characters would relate into real combat experience?

Apparently not.

In my first game I was killed twenty three times and managed to rack up a glorious one kill and two assists. And how did I claim this virgin kill? By shooting through a wall to see if the bullets came out the other side, and as the unfortunately positioned marine on the other side of the wall found out they do. I'd like to take the opportunity to apologise to the first person I killed in that game because I didn't mean to do it. That's it however. I felt remorse that I made that player start from scratch and find a new sniper position. After my first game I was slightly hooked. I've racked up 21 hours on CODIV since I first got it, and shooting people gets much easier the more you do it. I just passed the 1500 mark this morning. I have found a new addiction and I love it. This is the jump in technology that has set the PS3 apart from the PS2 (Old Faithful). I have to call it a personal epiphany because people have been killing each other online for nearly a decade now, but this was a first for me. I don't think there is much of a way back from here on in. My whole reason for buying games has changed to encompass it's online potential. This is a strange development.

I don't think I'll be buying many games for a time. I'm happy to sit in fromt of a TV; playing hour upon hour of Search and Destroy to unlock the red tiger paint job for the M16A4. So if anyone out there is playing CODIV on the Network; watch out for RichMurph (that's my user ID) because crouching by a wall won't save you!

It feels good having a PS3. Despite going on about how great the PS2 still is, it was a major drag not looking forward to new games being released and simply playing catch up with my collection. It is a shame that I have been tempted by the newness and flashiness of a new console without squeezing the life out of the trusty PS2. God Hand, Viewtiful Joe, Metal Gear Solid 3, Yakuza 2 and ICO; all games I wanted to play before I went next generation. It must be said that I still feel the PS3 came out before it was truly necessary. Microsoft had already cornered the HD market and the Wii seems to have shifted its target audience away from the twenty something fanboy. I think Sony should have finished one story before starting another, by talking to loyal developers and asking what else they could do with the console.

Never the less, the market has moved on and the PS2 has no strong titles on the horizon (I can't believe a development house can create so many year on year re-hashes and sleep soundly at night, I'm looking at you EA!), so I have moved on too. I've just recently finished playing Resistance: Fall of Man which I enjoyed greatly and only this morning completed Uncharted: Drake's Fortune; and it felt gooooood! A tech friend (nerd) of mine is coming over to connect my PS3 to the internet on the weekend so I can get killed by American kids at three in the morning; and I will be setting up camp outside of GAME to reserve my copy of Grand Theft Auto IV as soon as possible! The next generation just became current and I love it!

But what about my PS2?

We got some tough times together. The summer heat of 2001; and the bitter winter cold of 2006. She was a friend and an enemy, a killer of time and a waster of hours. We laughed and we cried and we threw the controller out the window only to go hunting for it five minutes later. She now sits atop the dresser in my spare bedroom pleading for me to complete Rouge Galaxy on her. Sadly, that ship has sailed (pun intended). We'll always have our memories...

... So when does Haze come out then?

It would appear I have got myself hopelessly addicted to Puzzle Quest, which is a bit of a shame as it's affected most other aspects of my life (including updating this blog.) However those of you who live in Britain will have no doubt noticed Sony getting themselves into hot water over using Manchester Cathedral as a backdrop for 'Resistance: Fall of Man'. As a gamer who understands and loves his hobby it was my initial reaction to defend the game to the hilt and group all the detractors as mis-informed Thompson-a-likes. It was only then that the news showed the Mother of a Manchester youth who had been shot and killed in some form of gang activity. It became clear that she was hurt by the inclusion of the setting, as it was a place of remembrance and a peaceful haven where she could mourn her loss.

It became clear that most of the arguments I could conjure up would be of no solace to this grieving woman and that the desecration of this sacred spot could not be forgotten by simply turning off the console. This is the brass tax and crutch of the argument rolled into one. In the past video game detractors have been sort of middlemen in the battle of the moral welfare of the state. Because of this it was easy to put them down and counteract their arguments with valid and informed reason. In this case however, a direct link can be made between video games and the feelings of an individual. It is because of this that I will not try and counter-act her grief by pointing out flaws in her argument.

I will say, however, that I don't think the game should be modified or changed in anyway in the same way as I feel creative talent should not pander to pressure groups. I do feel violent video games should have a responsibility (as I feel all games should have) and a purpose and meaning behind their actions, and not just be pointless kill-a-thons.

Only a fool would simply dismiss the pain their creation has caused to another human being though, so it will be interesting to see how Sony handles this delicate situation. Back to Puzzle Quest.

On my last blog post I mentioned how much I liked Streets of Rage 2. I don't think I expressed myself very well; I LOVE STREETS OF RAGE 2! It's amazing how upper case lettering makes up for a stunted vocabulary. If any of you out their are yet to experience this magnificent game, please, I implore you hunt it down. It's probably languishing in a charity shop somewhere for 13p.

The reason I moan on about this game is because it's probably the only game I remember playing as a child and enjoying more when their were two people playing. This may seem odd, but I was an only child for the majority of my youth and most of my friends preferred football to video games, so I became steadily affiliated to games which focused solely on the single player campaign. These feeling have spilled over into my adult life also, as I can't abide online gaming. So what is it about Streets of Rage 2 that makes me feel all reminiscent all of a sudden? Put simply, the music! I can still recall all the level songs and most of the major sound effects from the game and quite frankly I can't say that about any other game... ever. It got so bad that after completing my new banner logo (gotta love those pixels!) I spent a good hour trying to find the music which accompanies the end credits to use as a ring tone for my phone (with no success.)

The sound in games probable sees a tiny percentage of the overall budget, and I'm assuming that up until games hit the big time, sound design mainly involved a Japanese man, a keyboard and an A level in music technology. This should not be looked negatively upon, also it should not be fawned over for it's 'quaint value'. The idea that one individual can compose and perform a whole games worth of music is frankly inspiring! Now in a world of huge Danny Elfman inspired musical scores can these small miracles be realised for their individuality and genius? This is all relative due to the scale and feel of modern games. I think most game producers would not settle for a small bloke and a Casio keyboard when the budget, despite being a small percentage, can accommodate the London Philharmonic.

Just a thought.

Today is Wednesday. In two days time it will be Friday. God of War II will be out by then as you may expect I am fairly excited about it. As it turns out I have had a day off work (a rarity due to my current position, not highly placed in the company just skint!) and so I thought I'd re-play the original God of War to put me in the mood for some mythological blood-letting. Realistically it took me a week to complete the original title (about 15 hours in total) but I fancied I could get it done in two days.

I remembered all the finer points of the original game very vividly. The Hydra battle, the Titan and the huge Cerberus fight all spring to mind instantly. However, it is now Wednesday evening and the God of War disc has not left my shelf. Realistically their was no way I could ever finish the game in the time space allotted, but frankly I didn't want to. I recalled all the times I had gone back to old games and been so disappointed with what I was presented with. Honestly this is not a graphical or game-play issue. I like the position God of War has on my memory and I don't wish to besmirch this image with a quick blast through to re-introduce myself to the game environment and control system.

As per usual my theory is as flawed as one of Baldric's cunning plans, as there are more exceptions to the rule than I had first realised. I much preferred Resident Evil 4 the second time through and Streets of Rage 2 is as good as when I first played it, many moons ago. It does however make me wonder how I would feel about some of my favourite games had I only played them once. Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy VII and Gran Turismo have all been played to within an inch of there life and, I'm sad to say, have been watered down in the process. I think I have managed to convince myself that I will leave God of War be and concentrate on completing an old game (Manhunt, review to follow). Perhaps I'll wait until I can be more subjective with my criticism until I play God of War again so's not to ruin this perfect image of an imperfect game, and only time will tell if that game stands up to the perils of age.

Whilst making dinner, my flatmate and I discussed the virtues of seeing a game through to completion. I have always took it upon myself to see the end credits and unlock all bonus features in any video game I buy. This however has not come without it's downsides. First a bit of history (please don't fall asleep). I was taught to never take anything without knowing full well I needed it. This was true with food, clothing and girls. This attitude has filtered down into my adult life, and has meant I never go to all you can eat restaurants, never buy flashy trainers and never go out with girls that have ugly mothers.

What on Earth does this have to do with video games I hear you cry! Well I used to purchase games depending on how much value for money I would be getting. A short game would have to guarantee the highest of quality (Metal Gear Solid), whilst a long game would have to last half a year to warrant a purchase. Now though I feel quantity does not justify itself as the sole reason for a purchase but I do ask of myself that I at least complete a game before getting a new one. This is why my 'I Want' section far outweighs the 'I'm Playing' section of my profile.

Perhaps it's greed but I have found myself rushing the last stages of the game I'm currently playing (Yakuza) to be prepared for the next game I want. These silly laws I have implemented upon myself are in place not only to save my bank balance but also to force me see the games I buy through to completion, thus getting value for money. Perhaps I require a game that has no end credits and is constantly re-playable. If any one knows of such a game do tell me, but please not the Wario Ware franchise. My arms get tired enough lifting tea cups to my mouth, let alone the idea of waving a Wii controller at the television. Why do I even pay for gym membership?

It's slowly becoming apparent that I'm not quite as good at video games as I thought I was. When I was a kid, playing old Mega Drive games, it was all about who could complete a game the fastest or who was the best at certain genres. Now though I play video games not to prove myself as an excellent gamer but to experience an artistic achievement. This is why I have little to no interest of online games, apart from those which revolve around co-operation as opposed to competition.

This is not to say I look down on games which breed competitiveness, it's just not how I want to play my games. As a matter of fact, I am not hugely interested in the notion of online games on the whole. Games have always been a from of escapism for me and I don't feel I need to share this experience with others. One thing I have noticed with all online games is a distinct hatred for players who have just started playing. This baffles me somewhat as we all have to start somewhere. It seems their is no room for the casual gamer in the online games world, which is a shame really. I guess sitting around moaning about it won't change the world, because sadly there will always be those who need to prove they are better than others by kicking arse on Halo 2.

As per usual with my opinions their is of course the flip side to consider. Gaming has always been coupled with competition. Some of my fondest gaming memories occurred between a Game Boy Link Cable and two copies of Dr. Mario. I do feel their is a difference between this 'healthy' competition and the down right rudeness of the majority of online gamers. It seems to me that as I get older I don't want to let go of the closeness of multi player games and embrace the cold anonymity of online gaming.

Put it this way; would you rather play four player Goldeneye with three of your best friends and a 24 case of Carling, or get massacred by spotty thirteen year olds from God knows where screaming 'DIE NOOB' over Xbox Live. I know which I prefer, hand me my N64 pad Geoffry!