I'm not sure I can follow the thesis of this article. I assume it was that video games allow for a vent for violent feelings, that could be otherwise channeled destructively, in terms of human life. I agree with this point. I also think its misguided. We shouldn't be even engaging in argument with these people who claim violent videogames are harmful to the people who play them, and our societies should make them laughing stocks for making things up on hysterical fears. That elected representatives are inventing "facts" should be scandalous. But this fabrication of a convenient truth, that matches the agenda of a powerful lobby, goes unpunished. Hell, American senators have been claiming the Canadian border was the source of the 9/11 terrorist's entry into the USA, and using this falsehood to negatively affect trade between Canada and the USA, for over a decade now.
I'm sure this isn't an American problem, nor is it a recent problem. But this political apathy of young people is hurting you. It's hurting us. Unless you're willing to write your representative and tell them that this behavior is unacceptable and take action against those who will blatantly lie to gain political power from Helen Lovejoys of the world-- unless we do that, we have the government we deserve. One that tells us what's good for us, because, until then, we won't have the guts to govern ourselves.
Why don't we get more features with Seb? I mean Danny appears a lot on random encounter. Mark and Cam were on it today... or at least they were playing Alien Triology, and we see Johnny still too seldom, but much more than we see Seb. We only now see him filling in for the ... singular episode of Feedbackula, or promos or off screen in single lines :/
We know Seb works well on camera. Bring Seb back! Lest I start a protest where I type in all caps!
Five games... Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday... Saturday? Is Saturday a recap? Will one game be featured twice? Is one game to watch, but not from the bay area? Are there six games?
Your apparent contradiction hurts my little nerd brain.
Gamers have no credibility in this debate, eh? Why? Did the US congress strip them of their citizenship while I wasn't looking? I must have missed that news brief.
Now Johnny, I know you might like Blizzard games (based on your comment that Blizzards games are not bad), but I would like to disagree. Blizzard Games are bad, and Blizzard's heavy handed DRM (like the guy who got his account banned for using a trainer in single player) is worrying and unhealthy for the industry at large as it sets a horrifying precedent: namely, that a publisher/developer has the right to say how you may play a game once you get it out of the box. And no, this example isn't anything like Punkbuster.
If we establish that there is a ideal we hold as the aspirational goal for all videogames, and this point is highly contentious but lets proceed as if there was, then we could say that games, even though they are fun, are not good videogames. I don't think games are meant to exclusively be fun. Games, as an interactive medium, have much greater potential to engage the user than simply being entertainment. Think about movies, I'm sure we can all think of a movie we like that isn't just fun. Maybe its sad, maybe its disturbing, maybe it has great ideas. Movies are powerful creations, but movies have nothing on the potential power of the videogame industry.
Now, this is just my personal take on video games, but I think the purpose of art in general should be to help push our understanding of the world. This is incredibly vague and broad, and that's how I intended it to be. Maybe they help us get a grasp on racial tensions, or the gender inequity. Maybe they teach us about history or politics. Maybe they just have ideas for other developers, where they take an old system and turn it on its head. I might be a rationalist, but the ideas, whatever those ideas are, drive the creative world. It's all about the ideas. Blizzard is particularly bankrupt when it comes to originality. WoW did revolutionise MMOs of its time, and that's a good thing, and Warcraft 3 was fairly innovative, but lately... not so much. The big draw for me, has always been to see what the community maps for Star Craft or Warcraft 3 would be.
Don't get me wrong, I bought Starcraft 2, and I enjoyed the campaign, but once I finished that and just had the same multiplayer as SC1 with some new units, I had a sour taste in my mouth. Or a stale taste, whatever-- It was a stale and sour biscuit. It did not taste good. But Diablo 2, Starcraft 2... these aren't good games. I didn't even bother with Diablo 3. They're the gaming equivalent of a holding pattern. If I were feeling particularly harsh, they have no soul. Hell, the Diablo franchaise is basically about making as much game as they can with as little substance as they can. This is Blizzard's problem, they are one step away from casual gaming with their all-fluff-no-filler approach to development.
While I enjoyed this game, comparing it to Wing Commander or X-Wing is a completely misleading comment. The game, though claiming to be on the vanguard of reclaiming the space sim genre, distinctly borrows more from eastern action games than western space sims. Each enemy jet is almost indistinct from any other, as you mow down entire wings of enemy interceptors in a few seconds. The aiming is entirely too forgiving, and the lack of a radar or comms systems really make the gameplay feel shallow. The way the game warps you from sector to sector in missions, really gives the game the feeling of a rail shooter.
This game plays like Zone of the Enders, more than it does any sort of western game. And this is too bad, because it could have really benefited from a less is more approach to game play. The game feels cluttered, as it often throws 20 fighters at you, and doesn't give you a clear way to navigate. The lack of a radar, combined with the targeting system that only targets things in front of you or nearest to you, not giving the player the option to cycle through potential targets to look for something to engage makes flying in the game disorienting. Likewise, as a space sim, it feels like a step back removing features such as lateral thrusters, or controlling of the speed outside four speeds: slow, normal, fast and afterburner.
It doesn't do justice to the genre it claims the pedigree of. It is, however a decent eastern action game... made in Guildford.
Is this a bad thing? Prehaps we could use a collapse of big budget games to build a better development scene? Maybe these "mainstreamifications" is just the final gasp of the overgrown cancer that is publishers now. Maybe we can use this as an opportunity for our own Great Diaspora, following the death of our own God Emperor Leto II. Maybe this will spark a decentralisation that sees a focus shift to indie developers, who get more control over their product. I don't think that would be a bad thing.
As a PC Elitist, I am happy that the PC version has 60 fps. However, as a PC elitist, I don't plan on picking up some over-the-top console buttonmasher. I just like keeping the console users down. Where they belong. Excuse me, I'm late for my haughty laughter class, and my 8:30 match of peasant polo.
Verenti's comments