Gaming for Glory

New Study: Enjoyment Over Violence

2009-01-16T13:04:00.000-08:00

A new study by the University of Rochester found that "violent content was largely unrelated to need satisfactions," the Wired blog reported. In other surprising news, the sun came up this morning and pie tastes good. (Ba-dumpSH!)

But seriously, folks. The study, abstract available here, found that gamers value "enjoyment, value, and desirefor future play," more than violence, even, significantly, those gamers who self-identified as liking violence in their virtual worlds.

While I think the study just confirmed what many gamers know already, that gameplay, play control, and world immersion are all more important than violence, I'm not sure I think it was done well. It was based mostly on surveys, after all, although some experiments were done. And while I don't think violence is terribly important, it can be effective if done correctly.

At the same time, I don't think I'll ever tire of using VATS in Fallout 3 to blow off a super mutant's head with a shotgun.

Composer, Musician, Game Developer?

2009-01-15T16:23:00.000-08:00

It was reported several days ago that Andrew Lloyd Webber is in talks with some game publishers to develop a singing game based on music from some of his plays. At first I was unsure of how someone so associated with making middle-aged women weep tears of joy would do in the testosterone-driven world of video games, but the more I think about it, the more the idea's growing on me.

I've actually enjoyed much of Webber's work, especially Phantom of the Opera. That one, in particular, has a hard-rocky late-80s feel to it that plain out rocks. The title song was even covered once by prog metallers Nightwish. That version, especially, wouldn't be out of place on something like Rock Band.

Ugly tactics by Mirosoft

2009-01-15T09:44:00.000-08:00

Destructoid's Conrad Zimmerman on a major problem he has with Xbox Live.

He describes a situation where he hadn't logged into a Gamertag for some time before trying to upgrade the account to Gold. He wasn't able to, and was informed by Microsoft that if you don't log into Xbox Live for three months, you aren't able to add MS points or upgrade to Gold, ever again, with that Gamertag. The only solution is to make a new profile, essentially losing any and all DLC purchases you've made up to that point.

I essentially agree with him that this is terrible business practice. I love my 360 and I've rarely had problems with it or the Xbox Live service, but I had not heard about this until now, and it sucks. You can understand MS's wanting to clear inactive accounts off the servers, but that should only be after, like, a year of inactivity, and with plenty of warning. To do it after only three months, and with no warning, is awful.

I think this is one reason disc-based games will only die after much kicking, screaming, biting, crying, and weeping. Consumers will always be wary of paying for something intangible. And there's always the chance of things like this happening.

A major, related problem I have with the service is its seemingly random denial of products or services to Silver members. I thought that you only had to have a Gold account if you wanted to play games over Xbox Live. Since I'm not much into multiplayer, I only upgrade to Gold periodically. But then, with just my Silver membership, I found out I couldn't stream Netflix. And I couldn't download "Charlene I'm Right Behind You," by Stephen and the Colberts for Rock Band. And on and on and on...

Well, what else would you expect from the company responsible for Windows Vista?

Fallout 3? Patched.

2009-01-14T14:04:00.000-08:00

Everyone's favorite post-apocalyptic RPG, Fallout 3, has been patched. The patch, or "title update," (gag) was released on Tuesday. This forum post explains what the patch fixes.

Go ahead and hit that link, because it seems like it fixes a lot of stuff that should have been in the original game, like "Items now work properly," and "NPCs now don't randomly die." I fear this could resurrect the debate we've been talking about since this generation started: Are patches a good thing or a bad thing?

On the one hand, the argument goes, they're bad because they encourage developers to be lazy when testing the final product for bugs. It just leaves the early adopters of games as free beta testers. On the other, games would have bugs whether or not patches existed, and we should just be glad bugs can be fixed.

I suppose it's a moot point; patches are here to stay. They've been around on PC games for years, so maybe I should go ask a PC gamer. Oh, wait, I forgot; no one plays games on PCs anymore.

More nonsense about violent games

2009-01-14T10:45:00.000-08:00

Sigh. Here we go again. A House representative introduced a bill that would mandate warning labels on all games rated Teen or higher. As the Wired blog noted, it seems kind of dumb to put warning labels on something that already has a clear rating. However, at least this is a step up from Congress' previous attempts to simply ban violent games altogether.

What is it with Congress and warning labels? First it was cigarettes, then it was heavy metal music, and now it's video games. Do they seriously believe that, say, there are people who were going to smoke a pack of cigarettes, noticed the warning label, and then decided to quit and take up eating celery instead? I suppose I shouldn't have a problem with this; after all, how would a label on a game hurt me? It wouldn't, of course, but it is kind of frustrating to see Congress waste time with fluffery like this.

Guitar Hero: Metallica hits March 29?

2009-01-13T16:41:00.000-08:00

Everyone's favorite video game retailer, GameStop, is listing Guitar Hero: Metallica's release date as March 29. We all know how reliable the dates on GameStop's website are, but I see no reason to disbelieve them now. March 29 is a Sunday, which is quickly turning out to be the day music games are released. (Guitar Hero: World Tour, Rock Band 2)

I'm looking forward to this game - with vocals and drums added, it should be much better than last year's disappointing Aerosmith edition. The Metallica songs on Rock Band are a blast to play, and I can't wait to see myself rendered as Lars Ulrich in video game form.

Game Review: AC/DC Live Rock Band Track Pack

2009-01-13T11:29:00.000-08:00

Let's be clear. AC/DC Live: Rock Band Track Pack, recently released for Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and PlayStation 2, is simply a normal batch of DLC for Rock Band, but released on a disc, because that is what AC/DC wants. The band doesn't like their songs to be released as singles, so this track pack is taken from their 1991 concert at Donington Park, in England.

When you look at it from that perspective, the price seems a little exorbitant. They're charging $40 for 18 songs. When you notice the usual Rock Band track price is $2, you realize you're paying a premium for this, especially since you have to pay for songs you probably won't like.

That being said, it's AC - freakin' -DC. The songs are a hell of a lot of fun to play. "Dirty Deeds," "You Shook Me All Night Long," "Highway to Hell," and "Hells Bells" are among the best. The drumming is lean, pounding, and visceral. The vocals are screamy and larynx-shredding. And, of course, the guitar riffs are monstrously huge.

But there are some problems. Malcolm Young's rhythm guitar parts can't be played, because Rock Band doesn't offer the option to play rhythm guitar. The second guitarist always plays bass. And, it will always feel weird to me to hear Brian Johnson sing "Highway to Hell," or "Dirty Deeds," because those songs weren't written for him. Being that this is a live show, the outros can be pretty long, sometimes a minute or more, which gets irritating. And finally, not all the songs are very much fun. "High Voltage," for instance, is particularly bad.

If you think this will be similar to last year's Guitar Hero: Aerosmith and render the band members in video game form, or anything like that, you are mistaken. Like I said before, this is simply some DLC released on a disc. And if you look at it like that, you won't be disappointed. 4 out 5 stars.

Microsoft: No new console for a while

2009-01-12T16:51:00.000-08:00

The Xbox 360 is already three years old. Can you believe it? I can't. It seems like just yesterday I was unwrapping my shiny new Sega Genesis. Usually at this point in a console's life cycle, you at least begin to hear rumors of a new machine, but so far this generation, there has been nothing. Can Sony's continued insistence that the PS3 will last a decade actually not be totally false?

As for the 360, it's not going anywhere for a while. The San Jose Mercury News reports on that Microsoft president Robbie Bach says that the current generation's life cycle will be a little longer than previous ones.

I get that. The original Xbox felt more like test console than a true, full-blown gaming system. Microsoft was brand new to consoles; they were just testing the waters. But now they've delved head-first into this generation. And the PS2 was number one for almost six years, so it's not inconceivable for the 360 to last at least that long.

Charting Sony's failures

2009-01-12T10:48:00.000-08:00

Floating around the Internets has been this, Sony's ridiculous chart about how much better the PS3 is than the Xbox 360 or Wii. What a load of nonsense.

As you'll no doubt notice, everything on there is just stuff Sony includes in the console - thus driving its price up - but Microsoft leaves as optional add-ons. For instance, Wi-Fi functionality is built into the PS3, but to get that on the Xbox, you have to buy an $100 accessory. While $100 is much too expensive for a device like that, at least Microsoft isn't forcing consumers to pay for it with the price of the system.

GiantBomb made their own hilarious parody of this chart. Jeff Gerstmann - is there anything you can't do?

Game Review: Mirror's Edge

2009-01-11T20:27:00.000-08:00

Mirror's Edge is a polarizing affair. On the one hand, it's always nice to see a game try something totally new. On the other hand, it has a few too many issues for a clear-cut recommendation, and has that kind of "close, but no banana" kind of a feel to it.

You play as Faith, a "runner" in a futuristic, unnamed city. The government is a totalitarian dictatorship, and runners are used to deliver documents back and forth, usually under a hail of gunfire. The plot revolves around a false murder accusation on Faith's sister, and you actually don't do many delivery tasks in this game.

Mirror's Edge is a first-person parkour game. You run around the gleaming city jumping over things and sliding under things and shimmying up things and bouncing off things. One button is for upwards movement, and one is for downwards movement. It definitely has elements of the 3-D Prince of Persia games and even some good old-fashioned platforming, but Mirror's Edge brings it all together in a way never before seen in gaming.

It's played from a first-person perspective, an extremely gutsy design feature, and a word not often spoken without being immediately by "shooter." But I think there's a reason it's not used more often. The third-person perspective allows for a wider view, important in a game where finding the next path as quickly as possible is important. But more seriously, platforming is almost impossible when you can't see your character's feet. Mirror's Edge attempts to compensate for this by allowing you a view of much of your character's body. Look down, and you'll see everything below Faith's waist. But this is a clunky solution, because it's really annoying to have to look down at your feet and then back up to see where you're going every few seconds.

There is combat in Mirror's Edge, but it sucks. The game acts like combat is optional, imploring you to simply run right past the enemies, and you can do this sometimes. But often, you're forced to fight. You can attempt to disarm the bad guy by hitting a button at the exact right moment, but you need to have perfect timing to pull this off. I don't think I did it once during all my time with the game. And if you need to fight more than one enemy, forget it. Just load up your last checkpoint right now.

When Mirror's Edge works, it works great. You skim over rooftops and fly across gaps and everything's great. But it doesn't often work, usually due to its trial-and-error nature. There is one and only one path through each level, and that path is often not very obvious. You can hold a button to point Faith towards your goal, but this is an imprecise solution, because sometimes it points you towards your long-term goal (some door 300 yards away) or your short-term goal (a nearby ramp), and it's not always clear which. Expect to do a lot of dying in this game before you finally figure out the way out of the level.

Graphically, Mirror's Edge is breathtaking. The city is a gleaming, shimmering white, and you can see for miles when you're outside. Your view of the city will make you want to go exploring, but of course, you cannot do any exploring, as the game is strictly linear. The shimmering environment of stark whites and primary colors offers a nice contrast from gaming's usual browns and grays.

Bizarrely, the cutscenes aren't done using the usual in-game engine like in most games. They're animated affairs reminiscent of nothing so much as eSurance commercials. It's a strange dichotomy I never got used to.

Overall, Mirror's Edge is a classic case of a game that tries something new, and should be commended for that, but falls short of actually being terribly fun to play. It's worth a rental, if only to enjoy the beautiful city, but it has a few too many issues and is over much too quickly for anything more than that. 3 out 5 stars.

It is time, my friends

2009-01-11T19:10:00.000-08:00

It's time for a new blog on video games. Video game journalism is a ridiculous hodge-podge of boring business news and dishonest reviews. Okay, so not every reviewer is full of it, but many are. It's time I stepped in and cleaned this place up a bit. This blog won't be just another boring gaming news bla-bla, it will find for you the most relevant gaming information out there, as well as tell you what games you should play and what ones you shouldn't be wasting your time with. Get ready. You're about to get a faceful of reason.