First of all, let me state that I agree that Microsoft has indeed employed many questionable tactics in the past, especially in developing its Windows OS. I agree that Apple (and UNIX, for that matter) should at the very least have an equal market share with Microsoft because of its sheer product quality. Now that that's out the way, let's ask ourselves: why doesn't Apple have a larger market share? Is it really just evil Microsoft's fault for copying Mac design patterns?

The answer is no. It is not just Microsoft's fault.

While Microsoft is infamous for its faulted products, there is no denying that Microsoft knows how to please customers. Don't believe it? Take the following example: why is the Xbox 360 the "hardcore gamer" console of choice? Since it entered the market, it has been plagued with problems, the most infamous of which is the "Red Ring of Death". Note that Apple has nothing to do with the console market, and yet Micorsoft managed to pull it off again: it took a faulted product and turned it into the industry leader.

This occurred mainly because Sony overlooked an opportunity that Microsoft exploited: online console gaming. After that, even though Sony brought a far superior product to the market in the form of the PS3, consumers just didn't care enough to switch back.

Can we find an equivalent situation in the computer market? Certainly. Apple has constantly ignored the opportunity of opening up its products, while Microsoft has no problem in handing them out like hotcakes.

Typical example: Mac OS must run on an Apple system, while your microwave oven could probably run on Windows if it had a microprocessor. This behavior extends beyond the operating system market, though, and sometimes in markets where Microsoft is no clear competitor. The iPod, for example requires iTunes to manage media. And now, as I was searching for an API for development of iPhone apps, I stumbled upon an iPhone SDK.

An API (Application Programming Interface) is usually a library which contains documentation on how to program certain behavior on a particular programming language. An SDK (Software Development Kit) is usually a single program or software suite (a bundle of related programs) that aid in the rapid development of computer applications. And while I was hoping to find an iPhone API on a language such as Java or C++ or Python, I ended up with an SDK for an iPhone-specific language based on Objective-C (a minor programming language on its own).

Why? Why must Apple hold such a tight leash on its products? Apple marketing is quick to point out that if you switch from PC to Mac, you get both Mac OS and Windows, instead of just Windows. But the argument actually cuts the opposite way: if lifelong non-tech-savvy Windows users are going to end up using Windows anyway, why switch to (the much more expensive) Mac in the first place?

Why can't Apple learn from its own success? It's no exaggeration to say that Apple only came into the mainstream because of the iPod. And why did the iPod become the most successful Apple item to date? Because while it does need iTunes, iTunes can be run on Windows! Yet they expect to use this as a hook for people to switch over.

If they really want that strategy to work, why not open up Mac OS? Most of Microsoft's success lies in that it doesn't always create the hardware for its software to run on. That's why Windows-capable hardware is so cheap in the first place: economic competition forces competitive prices on hardware. If Apple doesn't compete, sure it'll always be king of its hill, but people won't really care.

I'm not one to ally myself to a specific camp. I'm not a die-hard PC fan nor am I an Apple advocate. I do however love the computer market, and within it, variety can only bring good things to the table, and that's why I want Apple to reach its potential. But until Apple gives me a good reason to switch over, I (and millions of others) will just keep happily being Windows users. Windows may be faulted, but it provides what I need at a reasonable price, and that is Microsoft's key to success.

Originally from my other blog at jcbonilla.wordpress.com.

Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong: these names have long been revered among the gaming community. They are all great, and they all share one man in common: Shigeru Miyamoto.



Donkey Kong and Mario both debuted in the arcade game Donkey Kong in 1981. Mario was then known as Jumpman, though (the popular Pac Man had started a trend of naming characters as something-man). The arcade game was a sensation and is still hailed by many as one of the best of all time, as evidenced by the 2007 movie The King of Kong: A Fistfull of Quarters. And while games are built by a team, it would be no exaggeration to say that the man responsible for such a game was Shigeru Miyamoto. He not only crafted an incredibly challenging, smart, and addictive game; but he was also the first to ever incorporate the concept of a story in a videogame (read Chris Kohler's Power-Up: How Japanese Video Games Gave the World an Extra Life). Donkey Kong captures the damsel, Jumpman must then rescue her. Simple as it was, it was a story, and the first one in videogame history.



Mario came to be better loved than his apish counterpart, though (mainly because Mario was the character controlled by the player, and Donkey Kong the bad guy), and soon got some games of his own. Most memorable among them is 1985's Super Mario Bros., which is currently still the best-selling game of all time (over 40 million copies to date). It's simple mechanics yet deep gameplay were an instant hit, and it's no exaggeration to say that it alone restored the videogame industry from its ashes after the death of Atari. Miyamoto had done it again.



Then came The Legend of Zelda. The original NES game, while popular was too difficult (at the time) to become as mainstream as other Miyamoto franchises, but it was nontheless great. But after SNES's The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, and of course, N64's The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, currently the best rated game of all time, Zelda had become a juggernaut all on its own. Through the Zelda series, Miyamoto has crafted a timeless gameplay formula with a timeless story to match.

But what of Miyamoto now? Since the inception of the Wii into the industry, Miyamoto has dedicated his time to such projects as Wii Fit and most recently Wii Music, the latter of which has sold under 81,000 copies in October (according to GameSpot). Truly he did also give us Super Mario Galaxy (curently the third best rated game of all time), but titles like the Marios and Zeldas of old are becoming few and far between. Miyamoto's (and Nintendo's) current projects are constantly leaving something to be desired.

Where do Miyamoto and Nintendo wish to head? The industry has changed drastically in the last few years, and Miyamoto seems to have changed with them. Miyamoto is acting as if though he's hit a midlife crisis. He's trying new, unwieldy videogame designs; he's leaving behind the things he's most known for; he seems out of focus; he's even dressing like a midlife crisis (a tacky combination of colorful T-shirts with a sports coat on top).



Regardless of what is driving Miyamoto (and Nintendo) right now, it is clear he must refocus. We owe most of what the videogame industry is right now to him and his franchises, and we can't afford to lose him. Sure, we'll have Calls of Duty and Gears of Wars for some time to come, but where will the Marios, Donkey Kongs, and Zeldas be?

The industry needs you, Miyamoto-sensei. Please, come back to us.

Originally from my other blog at jcbonilla.wordpress.com.

I just can't help but feel that Grand Theft Auto IV's rise to glory is overblown. How can a game whose main goal is to provide a violent and sexual power fantasy mostly geared towards adult males be considered even better than a game whose main goal is to provide a beautiful, emotional experience that everyone can enjoy? The latter description refers to The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, which was recently bested by GTAIV as the best rated game of all time after almost 10 years.

GTAIV, while providing inmersive gameplay and wonderful though-out mechanics is still a game that puts providing a power fantasy over providing a deep, emotional experience (and accomplishes it well). In other words, whatever such experience may result from GTAIV is a side-effect, not the main, intended effect. OoT, on the other hand, while providing an epic power fantasy as The Hero of Time, is still a game that puts providing a wholesome deep, emotional experience over providing said fantasy (and accomplishes it well). In other words, whatever power fantasy may rersult from OoT is a side-effect, not the main, intended effect.

By "deep, emotional experience" I mean an experience where experimenting emotions such as happiness, sadness, sorrow, sympathy, apathy, awe, etc. is the intended purpose. "Power fantasies" themselves do not provide these experiences, since they aim to make people feel the "rush" and "glory" of being the best at something, or being (by definition) powerful in some sense. The "power fantasy" appeals to feelings that are simple and physical, the "deep, emotional experience" appeals to emotions that are complex and mental (unique to human nature).

So while GTAIV can provide the emotional experience, it certainly seeks to provide the power fantasy before anything else. OoT, on the other hand, may provide the power fantasy as a side-effect, but it clearly aims to provide the emotional experience first and foremost with its storytelling and character development.

This is not to say shooters can't have different priorities: Gears of War, BioShock, and the Metal Gear, Metrod Prime and Half-Life series all have the emotional experience first, and the power fantasy second, since they all shine first and foremost for their atmospheres, stories, and cast of characters, and second (a very close second) for whatever power fantasy they may provide. The fact that all these games take place in fictional worlds may very well be an indicator of how poorly the industry has managed to project realistic shooter experiences so far.

Fictional worlds can have power fantasies as first priority as well: Halo 2 and Resistance: Fall of Man are good examples. While the Halo series as a whole is strongly story-driven, in Halo 2 the focus clearly shifted to providing the (online) power fantasy over the emotional experience.

So the question I'd like answered is this: which is more important, the power fantasy or the emotional experience? To this current age in videogame culture, which is most important? The choice is apparently the power fantasy, if GTAIV's scores are to be believed. Then, is this really the kind of videogame culture we want? Opinions are kindly welcomed.

To me, the best games provide both, but the emotional experience must come first. That's what a masterpiece is all about: providing both, with the emotional experience as first priority. Great games with power fantasy as first priority are always remembered, but quickly put away or resold. Great games with emotional experiences as first priority are also always remembered, but are also usually preserved much longer than other games, both in our shelves in our minds.

Grand Theft Auto IV, the new iteration of the wildly successful series, has hit retailers and Internet communities everywhere with 10's across the board. As it stands, in fact, GTAIV is at the time of this writing, the #1 game of all time, with a full .85% lead over The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time; and considering OoT is rated at 97.688%, and that it has retained its #1 status for over 10 years, a .85% difference is a lot. Coupling this with the absurd amount of incredible games that have been released since 2007, it's pretty obvious we're sitting in a post-modern golden age of videogames. There's definitely not a better time to be a gamer than right now.

Naturally, however, GTAIV will inevitably be accompanied with controversy. Different from the other GTA this time around, is precisely the fact that GTAIV has received such critical acclaim. Will this really make such a difference this time around?

Just imagine it: "You want proof of how appealing violent videgames are to our children? Look for no further proof than the fact the 'greatest game of all time' is neither Mario or Pokémon, but Grand Theft Auto IV, the very game that has consistently pushed the limits of what is acceptable both in violence and in sexual content; the very game that gives our children the power to behave socially and morally irresponsible with no consequences whatsoever; the very game that turns our children into gangsters and killers, and rewards them extensively for it.

"This is the game that is loved and acclaimed by the so-called 'gaming community'; this is the game that sells millions upon millions of copies, and finds its way into our children's hands as merely another plaything; this is the game that defines the gaming community.

"I ask you, who listens to me, is this not a horrible foreboding of our society's future? Is this not a reflection of the sorry state of our youth? Is this not sufficient proof of the horror that our government's inaction on the matter of violence in videogames is spreading into our society?

"It is knowing this that I propose that videogames...".

Whether a lame-brain politician will actually use GTAIV's acclaim in such a fanatical way remains to be seen, but either way we should be ready to face the cost of GTAIV's awesomeness, should it ever be billed to us.

Perhaps Grand Theft Auto IV marks the peak of the new golden age, or perhaps it is only the halfway point, and yet more awesome games will be released in the coming months, though the latter seems highly unlikely (though Metal Gear Solid 4 could prove me wrong; not that I'd mind). All rises to glory are inevitably followed by equally glorious falls; it is our world's nature. And whether it will be caused by GTAIV or not, it is obvious it is near, since it is highly unlikely GTAIV will be surpassed for the next 10 years, should it remain at #1.

I don't intend to be pessimistic, I just want to say that we should continue to enjoy this golden age of games, and even the time after it, just knowing full well that there will come a time of drought where games that achieve this level of awesomeness will only be seen after quite a few years. So, let's make it a point now, not to say things like "videogames are dead to me; ever since GTAIV, everything's been crap," come the year 2015, or something like that. After the first golden age of arcades and Atari, the "silver age" of Nintendo, the "silver age" of FFVII/Ocarina of Time, the "silver age" of PS2, and now the new golden age of... awesomeness, we should know better.

Just have fun with whatever comes our way in the coming years, whether it reaches the level of awesomeness of this golden age or not, and don't bother other gamers with the "videogames will never be the same" idea. Patience; a new age will come.

2007 was a wonderful year for videogames. It saw the release of games like Halo 3, Call of Duty 4, Mass Effect, Bioshock, Metroid Prime 3, Super Mario Galaxy, and The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass, among many other great titles. It wasn't, however, a great year for anime. In fact, it was a horrible one. Geneon USA closed up shop, The Anime Network 24/7 channel was dropped, and very few of the year's anime (both newly released in Japan, and licensed outside of Japan) were noteworthy. Anime DVD sales plummeted, and the industry is in a generally degenerate state.

How did we get here? How can something that caused such a cultural explosion be about to die?

An animnewsnetwork editor wrote that one of the greatest problems is the fact that neither Japan nor the countries that import anime have truly dedicated themselves to finding an effective way to distribute anime quickly and inexpensively outside Japan. In other words, fansubbing is one of the reasons the anime industry is collapsing, but the blame for the fansubs falls upon the anime industry itself; not on the users who download the fansubs. I agree that it is mostly the fault of the industry itself, but I'd be morally corrupt to say we users aren't to blame also.

In the end, anime lacks an effective means of distribution outside Japan.

The sad thing is that even if we had an effective means of distribution, we'd have no good anime to import. 2007 saw very few great anime releases. What's more, established favorites slipped considerably in quality (Naruto Shippuuden is a far cry from the original, pre-filler run of the series). Moe continues to infest anime releases, corrupting the industry with deranged Japanese otaku fantasies.

In the end, crappy anime is much too common.

The few titles that are actually good will usually have very small potential of generating any real money, thanks to the fansub community. Anime licenses are very expensive, and if the anime generates no profits, the licensing companies (responsible for making anime widely available to us) are the ones who suffer.

In the end, anime's target audience doesn't buy anime.

And why don't they buy it? There are many reasons (mostly because it can be found free at the risk of lower quality), but one very influential one is the perspective some people have of anime. Some of the people who don't buy anime are simply (understandably) not interested in viewing anime as an art form or anything more than "cool cartoons", and thus only want to watch anime much like we watch TV, and don't necessarily feel drawn to spending money on anime, much like we don't always buy series we watch. And those of us who do view anime as an art form and something other than just "cool cartoons" feel many times drawn to owning the anime we like, but soon find it is very expensive to have large collections. And so we are limited to only buying certain series (like I do) or not buying anime at all (like many do) and rely on fansubs to create our collection.

In the end, there are many "casual" anime watchers that won't buy anime, and anime is too expensive for dedicated fans.

Through fansubs, anime (much like the music and movie industries) has fallen prey to rampant digital piracy. But while movies can generate millions through the box office, anime (like music) must rely on the people that buy the hard-copy releases to generate money. Movies can co-exist with piracy, and since DVDs, Blu-Rays, and HD-DVDs aren't terribly expensive, it can still generate significant profits from its hard-copy releases. Music and anime don't have this advantage.

In the end, anime hasn't found an effective way to counteract the effect of piracy.

Anime will die in the coming months.

And what does this spell for videogames? The music and anime industry have both been toppled by digital piracy. Videogames are purely digital media. Game piracy has already grown significantly in the last decade, and unlike movies, videogames don't have a "box office" of sorts that will generate income regardless of whether people buy games or not. The videogame industry is on top right now, and is in the perfect spot to prepare countermeasures against piracy. Appropiate measures must be taken now. Let's at the very least learn from other fallen industries.

I hope that anime dies much like videogames did: they were great, they collapsed, and then they revived into a striving industry. I also hope that better technology is developed to prevent piracy in general, so that in 20 years from now artist is still considered a profitable profession.

I'm sure about 99% of active users of GameSpot have all noticed the frequent use of the terms "hardcore gamer" and "casual gamer". However, it seems that everywhere these terms are used they are used to refer to different concepts. Is a hardcore gamer an FPS gamer, or is it a Miyamoto gamer? Is it hardcore to play games thoroughly or is it to play certain genres of games? Is a Wii owner automatically casual and a 360 owner hardcore? And is a person that plays a game like Picross DS dedicately every single day still a casual gamer?

My personal view on the subject is as follows. A hardcore gamer is a gamer that plays games of any type, genre, age group, or target audience, on any console/PC, and does so dedicately. Be it playing Gears of War 'till 4:00am or Brain Age an hour a day, any gamer that plays a game in such a way as to get the most out of it is hardcore, or how I like to call it, "dedicated".

A casual gamer, on the other hand, is someone that picks up any game of any type, genre, age group, or target audience for any console/PC and plays it superficially, meaning that they don't care to go beneath the surface of the game. Whether it be playing Halo 3 because "it's cool" or playing Flash Focus just to kill some time, any gamer that plays a game to get what is immediately available from it, instead of going bellow the surface, is a casual gamer.

In other words, what type of gamer we are is not determined by the game we play or the console we play it in, but by the way we play. If you take games seriously, whether they be like BioShock or like Rayman Raving Rabbids, you are a hardcore gamer. If you take games as a good timekiller, whether they be The Orange Box or Big Brain Academy, then you are a casual gamer.

I believe these are the best definitions of what hardcore and casual mean. Just think about it, if you're reading this right now, it means you care enough about games to not only visit a site like GameSpot but to also read through its community's blogs. And yet, some who read this own a Wii, and others a 360, and even others a PS3 or a PC. And within those consoles, people play different games of different genres, age groups, and target audiences. Thus, we are hardcore because of the way we play and care about games. It is this principle which defines the line between casual and hardcore, nothing more, nothing less.

I don't know how many of these things have been confirmed or not, but here's a list of personal predictions/wishlist regarding Smash Bros. Brawl. It'll be really funny if some of things I predict are disproved tomorrow morning, but that's part of the fun of predicting:

1. Nintendo will never confirm Sheik as a playable character before the game's launch, and she'll be an unlockable.

2. Zelda's Final Smash will either be the Light Arrows or she will turn into Sheik, even if you haven't unlocked Sheik.

3. Ganondorf's Final Smash will be to transform into Ganon.

4. Geno and Mallow from Super Mario RPG will either be playable characters or Assist Trophies, hopefully the former.

5. If there is space for another third-party character, it will be for Knuckles.

6. There will be at least one more Pokémon Trainer character; it will be a female trainer, and will include the starting Pokémon of either Silver/Gold or Diamond/Pearl.

7. Lucario will be a playable character (this one I didn't come up with myself; a friend of mine mentioned it, and it made perfect sense to me).

8. Either Mona, 9-volt or Kat and Ana from WarioWare will be a playable character.

9. Snake's Final Smash will involve some iteration of a Metal Gear.

10. Baby Bowser will be a playable character.

11. Since Mario can now use FLUDD, Luigi will be able to use the Poltergust.

12. Paper Mario and other Paper characters will be Assist Trophies.

13. Kracko (from the Kirby series) will either be an Assist Trophy or an Adventure Mode boss.

14. Mewtwo won't make the cut.

Now for some completely wild guesses. It's very unlikely any of the following will be true, but it'll be funny if any of them actually do come true:

1. Wolf Link with Midna will be a playable character. A-button attacks will mostly be performed by Wolf Link and B-button attacks by Midna. Final Smash will be Midna's transformation through the Fused Shadows.

2. A hunter from either Metroid Prime Hunters or Prime 3 will be playable.

3. There will be more than one Final Smash per character. A second, unlockable Smash Ball will help distinguish the attacks.

4. Dixie Kong and/or King K. Rool will be playable characters.

5. Reggie Fils-Aime will be a playable character.

... ok, so maybe not that last one...

"Good evening, London. Allow me first to apologize for this interruption. I do, like many of you, appreciate the comforts of every day routine- the security of the familiar, the tranquility of repetition. I enjoy them as much as any bloke. But in the spirit of commemoration, thereby those important events of the past usually associated with someone's death or the end of some awful bloody struggle, a celebration of a nice holiday, I thought we could mark this November the 5th, a day that is sadly no longer remembered, by taking some time out of our daily lives to sit down and have a little chat.

There are of course those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now, orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on their way. Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?

Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror.

I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent. Last night I sought to end that silence. Last night I destroyed the Old Bailey, to remind this country of what it has forgotten.

More than four hundred years ago a great citizen wished to embed the fifth of November forever in our memory. His hope was to remind the world that fairness, justice, and freedom are more than words, they are perspectives. So if you've seen nothing, if the crimes of this government remain unknown to you then I would suggest you allow the fifth of November to pass unmarked. But if you see what I see, if you feel as I feel, and if you would seek as I seek, then I ask you to stand beside me one year from tonight, outside the gates of Parliament, and together we shall give them a fifth of November that shall never, ever be forgot."

~V

Well, I have completed the move to my new apartment, and I love it, so I'm doing pretty well. I finally have Internet access again, so I'm even happier. Thanks to all of you who supported me in this important moment. You're great. I wrote a comment on the past blog post, so if you posted there (or even if you didn't), go check it out. Well, that's it for now. It's great to be back! Take care!

P.S. Oh, yeah... I start classes again next Wednesday, and I'm quite happy for it. Yeah, that's it... just a side note...:lol: See you, guys!