Listen, I've always had all the respect in the world for the United States when it comes to science and military operations. Part of that I'm sure comes from a "home field" bias, a standard feeling of patriotism, but I've always felt pretty confident in the ability of Americans to execute plans.
But I've got to say, this business about the satellite has got me really wowed about where we are scientifically. Word is, we've successfully targeted and destroyed the fuel tank on the satellite, which had posed something of a threat to life were it to come crashing down to Earth. Now, granted, these satellites are pretty large, but the main body of the device was a paltry 15 feet long. This object, with a decaying orbit, was targeted by an SM-3 missile and, according to all reports thus far, successfully destroyed to the point that the debris poses no immediate threat.
If it were a stationary object, it'd be pretty impressive to hit the fuel component squarely from hundreds of miles away. But we're talking about shooting a moving satellite out of the sky whose orbit is decaying. Out of the sky! Do you know how ridiculously large the sky is?
Alright, that's enough gushing for now, especially since there's still a chance that the mission was a failure. But it looks good, and I think that speaks volumes towards what science can accomplish. So be nice to your local nerds; they may be able to pinpoint your bedroom from a missile silo.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Blog Reborn
I've changed the URL of this blog, as well as its title, and you can look forward to a more diverse set of discussion topics going forward. I'll still talk about video games, because that's something I really enjoy talking about. But we'll make it a wider array of topics, for those of you who might not be very interested in the next Final Fantasy game (though I have to wonder why the hell not).
So expect posts on TV, movies, video games, music, food, travel, and my painfully uneventful life. And the occasional sweet online deal.
So expect posts on TV, movies, video games, music, food, travel, and my painfully uneventful life. And the occasional sweet online deal.
N
I'm sure a lot of you have already played this game, as I remember playing it way back when I was a 25-year-old in the dorm in Altoona (which was perhaps the most awful experience I've ever had). Anyways, it's called N, where you're a ninja hopping around, grabbing gold coins, flipping switches, and trying to escape levels or something. There's a story, but really, it's just a puzzle game. Anyways, it's sweet ass fun, so check it out if you're bored and want to kill some time.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Video Game Blog?
I've honestly been checking back here on this blog at least once a week, sometimes many times a week, and thinking to myself, "Alright, let's write something up for a blog post." And try as I might, I just can't think of what to "blog" about. I think part of my problem is that I'm not at all on the cutting edge of anything having to do with video games. I don't buy all the newest games (not having a job impedes that), I don't get out there and check out all the little Flash games online, and I don't read a particularly large number of articles concerning video games. I just like playing video games.
I could talk about how my brother, cousin, and I have recently gotten back into Diablo II, but what is there to say about Diablo II that hasn't been said? That I like listening to albums by The Police when I'm playing it? While I'm sure there are a lot of Police fans out there, I don't know that they'd find a blog about that particularly engaging.
I check out one video game "blog," though it's as much for the comics as anything else (http://www.penny-arcade.com). I read what they have to say, and I find it interesting, often humorous, and sometimes compelling. I really believe that I've got that kind of writing ability, and perhaps with a subscription to GameFly (if that site still exists) I'd have enough experience with new games (and thus a reason to be interested in the upcoming titles) to compose those kind of lovely blogs. As is, I just keep playing the old games. Is there a way to make playing old Nintendo/SNES/PC games exciting?
Well, I intend to find out. There have got to be some good blogs out there that tend to focus on older games, and I'm devoting the next week or ten to finding and analyzing them. In the meantime, I'll pray I'm struck with inspiration on a game-related topic for you, the readers. That's what it's all about, you know. The readers.
And stroking my massive, massive ego.
I could talk about how my brother, cousin, and I have recently gotten back into Diablo II, but what is there to say about Diablo II that hasn't been said? That I like listening to albums by The Police when I'm playing it? While I'm sure there are a lot of Police fans out there, I don't know that they'd find a blog about that particularly engaging.
I check out one video game "blog," though it's as much for the comics as anything else (http://www.penny-arcade.com). I read what they have to say, and I find it interesting, often humorous, and sometimes compelling. I really believe that I've got that kind of writing ability, and perhaps with a subscription to GameFly (if that site still exists) I'd have enough experience with new games (and thus a reason to be interested in the upcoming titles) to compose those kind of lovely blogs. As is, I just keep playing the old games. Is there a way to make playing old Nintendo/SNES/PC games exciting?
Well, I intend to find out. There have got to be some good blogs out there that tend to focus on older games, and I'm devoting the next week or ten to finding and analyzing them. In the meantime, I'll pray I'm struck with inspiration on a game-related topic for you, the readers. That's what it's all about, you know. The readers.
And stroking my massive, massive ego.
Sunday, December 9, 2007
Star Trek Online
Listen, I'm gonna go ahead and come right out and say it: I'm a nerd. I like all the stuff nerds like: Star Trek, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, computers, video games, and the like. So when I heard that there would be a massive online multiplayer Star Trek game, I was obviously delighted. The concept of crewing a starship in the Star Trek universe was very appealing, and, barring some foul-up, should be a lot of fun.
See this article:
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/50065
For those of you who aren't fans of reading, the article says that a new company has taken over the development of the game, and is planning on setting it up to be a more casual (their word, not mine) experience.
Vomit.
Are you kidding me? The most enjoyable games are those that are in fact too complex. I don't want a game that has been dumbed down for the masses; I want the game that every gaming company wants to make: easy to learn, hard to master. When I hear that they want to make it a "casual" game, I'm thinking it's going to be more like the Sims online or something.
Also mentioned in the article is that the company is exploring a different payment structure, where there wouldn't be a month-to-month fee, but you would have to pay for extra features inside the game. Apparently this strategy has been very successful in Korea. Well that's great, except this isn't Korea. What exactly am I going to have to pay for inside the game? Flight school? Engineering lessons? Transportation? Food? I don't like this, not one bit.
I play World of Warcraft. I've tried out Star Wars: Galaxies, Final Fantasy XI, Dungeons & Dragons Online, and Lord of the Rings online, and I found all of them to be seriously lacking when compared to WoW. I was disappointed, but not surprised. The Star Wars universe has its own flaws and foibles, so it's only fitting that its video game counterparts have some of the same problems.
But when it comes to complexities and fanship, Star Trek blows Star Wars out of the water. You can't give "Trekkies" a subpar effort; they'll lose their shit. The one thing I like about that is that, in those vehement supporters of the Star Trek universe, I've got a group of dedicated advocates who will do their best to ensure the game lives up to the standard of Star Trek. Many previous Star Trek games have disappointed, but an MMO should be held to a higher standard. You're not just creating an adventure. You're regenerating the entire Star Trek universe that thousands of people already know cover-to-cover, so to speak. You can't mess this up; they won't stand for it.
The main difference is that the average Star Wars fan is a casual fan, often young, and not necessarily a critical thinker. The average Star Trek fan expects a high level of discourse when they talk about their show, and certainly will expect a genuine representation of their universe from a game purported to offer gamers the true "Trek" experience.
Maybe this is all for nothing, and it'll end up being awesome, and everyone will go home happy. But I'm not holding out hope.
See this article:
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/50065
For those of you who aren't fans of reading, the article says that a new company has taken over the development of the game, and is planning on setting it up to be a more casual (their word, not mine) experience.
Vomit.
Are you kidding me? The most enjoyable games are those that are in fact too complex. I don't want a game that has been dumbed down for the masses; I want the game that every gaming company wants to make: easy to learn, hard to master. When I hear that they want to make it a "casual" game, I'm thinking it's going to be more like the Sims online or something.
Also mentioned in the article is that the company is exploring a different payment structure, where there wouldn't be a month-to-month fee, but you would have to pay for extra features inside the game. Apparently this strategy has been very successful in Korea. Well that's great, except this isn't Korea. What exactly am I going to have to pay for inside the game? Flight school? Engineering lessons? Transportation? Food? I don't like this, not one bit.
I play World of Warcraft. I've tried out Star Wars: Galaxies, Final Fantasy XI, Dungeons & Dragons Online, and Lord of the Rings online, and I found all of them to be seriously lacking when compared to WoW. I was disappointed, but not surprised. The Star Wars universe has its own flaws and foibles, so it's only fitting that its video game counterparts have some of the same problems.
But when it comes to complexities and fanship, Star Trek blows Star Wars out of the water. You can't give "Trekkies" a subpar effort; they'll lose their shit. The one thing I like about that is that, in those vehement supporters of the Star Trek universe, I've got a group of dedicated advocates who will do their best to ensure the game lives up to the standard of Star Trek. Many previous Star Trek games have disappointed, but an MMO should be held to a higher standard. You're not just creating an adventure. You're regenerating the entire Star Trek universe that thousands of people already know cover-to-cover, so to speak. You can't mess this up; they won't stand for it.
The main difference is that the average Star Wars fan is a casual fan, often young, and not necessarily a critical thinker. The average Star Trek fan expects a high level of discourse when they talk about their show, and certainly will expect a genuine representation of their universe from a game purported to offer gamers the true "Trek" experience.
Maybe this is all for nothing, and it'll end up being awesome, and everyone will go home happy. But I'm not holding out hope.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Beowulf: The Game
GameStop has Beowulf: The Game on a massive price drop from $59.99 down to $19.99 for both the Xbox 360 and the Playstation 3. I've heard good things about it so far in limited reviews, and for twenty bucks, it's not that much of a risk to take a chance on it.
Saturday, December 1, 2007
Used Games Holiday Deals
Gamestop has a ton of used games on sale leading up to the holiday season. Additionally, they've got a couple of coupons you can use (though only one coupon per order):
- AFF25 gives you 25% off all used games
- SAVER gives you free shipping
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Expansion Packs
When I was a kid, I hated expansion packs. I felt like the game company was robbing me, asking for more money just so that I could have a few more levels, a few more features, a little more functionality. And as a video game kid, I couldn't help but comply. Thirty dollars more for the Lord of Destruction expansion for Diablo II? You're an ass, Blizzard. Why didn't you just include this in the original game?
But I was wrong. Dead wrong, in fact, 95% of the time. It's true, a lot of the stuff included in the Diablo II expansion probably could've been included in the original game, though it obviously would've taken some time to get it resolved and programmed and tested and produced. But hey, what's a few more months when you're talking about thirty whole dollars? Well, it's time for the next game to come out, like Dungeon Siege for example.
But more than that, how about the fact that it is thirty dollars? Expansion packs very rarely rival the original game in price, and often, shortly after the expansion comes out, a full package include the game, expansion, and occasionally a strategy guide becomes available for $50. The "Battle Chest," as it's sometimes called. Take that into consideration the next time you pay full price for the newest Tiger Woods, or Madden, or 2K game. Expansion packs offer about the same amount of new content as the annual iteration of the popular sports games, but are available for substantially less money than the original game.
Let's cite a few examples of particularly impressive expansion franchises (Blizzard will dominate the list, but they dominate gaming, so it's reasonable).
World of Warcraft - The Burning Crusade expansion offered a brand new continent, two new races, a new profession, hundreds of new items, monsters, and skills, and a few more "instances," or dungeons, to those unfamiliar with the game. The next expansion, set for this winter, will add another continent, another new profession, a new class (far more interesting than a new race), siege weapons and destructible buildings, and another bevy of new items, monsters, skills, etc. The new expansion, in fact, is the main reason I'm continuing to play and pay for World of Warcraft. I've always wanted to be a death knight.
Starcraft - The Brood War expansion was one of the earliest expansions in my gaming career. It offered a few new units (not too impressive), but also offered completely new campaigns, with a full compliment of missions to undertake that rivaled and perhaps even surpassed the original campaigns, at least in terms of difficulty. That shit was hard.
Half-Life - Not along the same conventional expansion pack lines, but Half-Life spawned a number of expansions, such as Opposing Force, Blue Shift, and Team Fortress. On top of that is the immensely popular Counter-Strike, which started as an independent mod of Half-Life, but was developed into an official release. All of these games were relative successes on some level, and they're all built on the same framework of the original Half-Life. Chip, I promise, someday I'll play that set you bought me for my birthday a few years ago.
However, to be completely fair, there is one game franchise that has completely murdered the concept of an expansion pack to the point of obscenity: The Sims. The Sims came out with seven total expansion packs from August 2000 to October 2003, and while each was available for a reasonable price of $20-$30, the rapidity with which they were released suggests that they were not delayed by coding or testing constraints, but rather in an attempt to generate as much revenue as possible from each set of added features. While Maxis and Electronic Arts are entitled to take whatever path they choose to released their product, it has made me wary of purchasing new games, knowing that the potential for several expansion packs in the near future exists.
But The Sims is the exception and not the rule. For the most part, expansion packs offer game companies the opportunity to respond to requests and suggestions from their respective gaming communities, and expand and enhance their video game experiences. As a sincere gamer, I'm all for the production of top-quality titles, and I like the idea that, if enough people think a certain new feature or game change is a good idea, the company has the chance to integrate it into the game through an expansion pack.
And now you know part of the reason I refuse to buy brand new sports games.
But I was wrong. Dead wrong, in fact, 95% of the time. It's true, a lot of the stuff included in the Diablo II expansion probably could've been included in the original game, though it obviously would've taken some time to get it resolved and programmed and tested and produced. But hey, what's a few more months when you're talking about thirty whole dollars? Well, it's time for the next game to come out, like Dungeon Siege for example.
But more than that, how about the fact that it is thirty dollars? Expansion packs very rarely rival the original game in price, and often, shortly after the expansion comes out, a full package include the game, expansion, and occasionally a strategy guide becomes available for $50. The "Battle Chest," as it's sometimes called. Take that into consideration the next time you pay full price for the newest Tiger Woods, or Madden, or 2K game. Expansion packs offer about the same amount of new content as the annual iteration of the popular sports games, but are available for substantially less money than the original game.
Let's cite a few examples of particularly impressive expansion franchises (Blizzard will dominate the list, but they dominate gaming, so it's reasonable).
World of Warcraft - The Burning Crusade expansion offered a brand new continent, two new races, a new profession, hundreds of new items, monsters, and skills, and a few more "instances," or dungeons, to those unfamiliar with the game. The next expansion, set for this winter, will add another continent, another new profession, a new class (far more interesting than a new race), siege weapons and destructible buildings, and another bevy of new items, monsters, skills, etc. The new expansion, in fact, is the main reason I'm continuing to play and pay for World of Warcraft. I've always wanted to be a death knight.
Starcraft - The Brood War expansion was one of the earliest expansions in my gaming career. It offered a few new units (not too impressive), but also offered completely new campaigns, with a full compliment of missions to undertake that rivaled and perhaps even surpassed the original campaigns, at least in terms of difficulty. That shit was hard.
Half-Life - Not along the same conventional expansion pack lines, but Half-Life spawned a number of expansions, such as Opposing Force, Blue Shift, and Team Fortress. On top of that is the immensely popular Counter-Strike, which started as an independent mod of Half-Life, but was developed into an official release. All of these games were relative successes on some level, and they're all built on the same framework of the original Half-Life. Chip, I promise, someday I'll play that set you bought me for my birthday a few years ago.
However, to be completely fair, there is one game franchise that has completely murdered the concept of an expansion pack to the point of obscenity: The Sims. The Sims came out with seven total expansion packs from August 2000 to October 2003, and while each was available for a reasonable price of $20-$30, the rapidity with which they were released suggests that they were not delayed by coding or testing constraints, but rather in an attempt to generate as much revenue as possible from each set of added features. While Maxis and Electronic Arts are entitled to take whatever path they choose to released their product, it has made me wary of purchasing new games, knowing that the potential for several expansion packs in the near future exists.
But The Sims is the exception and not the rule. For the most part, expansion packs offer game companies the opportunity to respond to requests and suggestions from their respective gaming communities, and expand and enhance their video game experiences. As a sincere gamer, I'm all for the production of top-quality titles, and I like the idea that, if enough people think a certain new feature or game change is a good idea, the company has the chance to integrate it into the game through an expansion pack.
And now you know part of the reason I refuse to buy brand new sports games.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Tiger Woods 08 - Wii
Nothing beats a good golf game. Any sports enthusiast, whether they play golf or not, should own at least one golf game for their video game console. I have Tiger Woods 2004 for my PC, then I got an Xbox and got Tiger Woods 07 for the Xbox. Now that I have a Wii, it was only natural to get Tiger Woods 08.
Here's the lowdown:
Gameplay: The Tiger Woods series are all pretty typical as far as game play is concerned. From one year to another, the only major differences are the addition and subtraction of golf courses and EA's addition of a "new feature." The one thing that makes this game unique is the controls that allow the Wii to create a more realistic golfing experience. Its not perfect, but its good.
The controls, which is my first concern that I research before purchasing a Wii game, are fairly intuitive. You swing the Wii remote like you would a golf club. You have the option of practicing your swing as much as you like too, which is almost a necessity when trying to finesse a shot. I have noticed that the swing can not be too large. If your back swing brings the Wii Remote over your head and points at the TV, it probably will not pick up on the rest of the down swing. I have also found it to be a little tricky to make a swing that is not 100% or greater. You really have to slow down your motion. This could be the game telling me that my golf technique needs a lot of work (and it probably does), but I doubt that is the case. Putting is a little different. You still make a natural putting motion (and its probably a more realistic swing than you make during a typical swing), however the practice mode is a little different. They call it "Putt Preview" and when you enter the Putt Preview mode, a timer starts to count down. You only have so much time to preview your putt. There is a lot of time for previewing your putt, however, the timer is shared for the entire round. If you spend a lot of time on one green previewing your putts, you will want to conserve your time on another green or risk running out of time and losing the ability to preview putts.
All this talk about the Normal Swing Mode, and I have nearly forgotten the other swing modes. There are two other swing modes. One allows you to swing the remote in any direction as long as you go one way, then the other. This allows people to swing while sitting down. I tried it once and did not care for it too much. The other swing mode requires the Nunchuk and is the traditional swing moving the joystick down for the back swing and forward for the down swing.
Getting back into the game, the player creation remains to be as specialized as its always been. Every little detail can be included. I have heard about the Xbox 360 and PS3 having a automatic player creation with the use of a digital photo or two. Unfortunately, that did not make it to the Wii. I was looking forward to it and it did not make the jump.
Taunts are back, which were in a previous Tiger Woods, but not 07. I'm not sure exactly how efficient they are because I have not yet tried any of them, but that was always fun. There is also a confidence meter for your individual golfer. Depending on the course, the type of shot, the difficulty of the shot, and your abilities, a meter shows your confidence in making the shot. Its a pretty interesting feature. If you play one course a lot and you are in a similar situation attempting a particular shot that you have attempted before, your confidence meter is higher than it would be on a native course, attempting a rare shot, and it increases your chances of making the shot.
The game modes are extremely similar to Tiger Woods 07. They include the Tiger Challenge (though with a LOT more content), the PGA Tour season mode, all the different round options (stroke play, match play, etc.). The Mini Games are similar as Tiger Woods 07 too. I think there is a new putt-putt mini game, however, I have yet to try it out.
Graphics: The graphics could use some work. There is a great deal of realism, but I think it could use a little work and attention. I believe the graphics look cleaner on Tiger Woods 07 for the regular Xbox. They look alright, I just think there should be a smoother transition when things move following shots and previewing holes. The animals that are occasionally seen on courses are extremely unrealistic and incredibly disappointing. They should not have been included.
Sound: EA sports has always done a decent job with sounds. Its nothing too special. The occasional chirp or the sound of wind blowing through a tree. The soundtrack is always something to admire with EA sports games too. They did not miss a beat here either.
Replay-ability: Despite the graphics, this game has a lot of replay-ability. There is always something to do, whether its following the PGA Tour season or taking on another Tiger Challenge, there is a LOT of content here to keep players coming back.
Wrap-up: A great game for the Wii. I have read this in a few reviews and I will repeat it here because it stands true: If you own Tiger Woods 07, its probably not worth getting Tiger Woods 08. EA Sports will have to come up with something radically different to get people hopping on 09. The past couple years have produced extremely similar games. Regardless, any Tiger Woods game is worth owning on whichever system you currently own.
Here's the lowdown:
Gameplay: The Tiger Woods series are all pretty typical as far as game play is concerned. From one year to another, the only major differences are the addition and subtraction of golf courses and EA's addition of a "new feature." The one thing that makes this game unique is the controls that allow the Wii to create a more realistic golfing experience. Its not perfect, but its good.
The controls, which is my first concern that I research before purchasing a Wii game, are fairly intuitive. You swing the Wii remote like you would a golf club. You have the option of practicing your swing as much as you like too, which is almost a necessity when trying to finesse a shot. I have noticed that the swing can not be too large. If your back swing brings the Wii Remote over your head and points at the TV, it probably will not pick up on the rest of the down swing. I have also found it to be a little tricky to make a swing that is not 100% or greater. You really have to slow down your motion. This could be the game telling me that my golf technique needs a lot of work (and it probably does), but I doubt that is the case. Putting is a little different. You still make a natural putting motion (and its probably a more realistic swing than you make during a typical swing), however the practice mode is a little different. They call it "Putt Preview" and when you enter the Putt Preview mode, a timer starts to count down. You only have so much time to preview your putt. There is a lot of time for previewing your putt, however, the timer is shared for the entire round. If you spend a lot of time on one green previewing your putts, you will want to conserve your time on another green or risk running out of time and losing the ability to preview putts.
All this talk about the Normal Swing Mode, and I have nearly forgotten the other swing modes. There are two other swing modes. One allows you to swing the remote in any direction as long as you go one way, then the other. This allows people to swing while sitting down. I tried it once and did not care for it too much. The other swing mode requires the Nunchuk and is the traditional swing moving the joystick down for the back swing and forward for the down swing.
Getting back into the game, the player creation remains to be as specialized as its always been. Every little detail can be included. I have heard about the Xbox 360 and PS3 having a automatic player creation with the use of a digital photo or two. Unfortunately, that did not make it to the Wii. I was looking forward to it and it did not make the jump.
Taunts are back, which were in a previous Tiger Woods, but not 07. I'm not sure exactly how efficient they are because I have not yet tried any of them, but that was always fun. There is also a confidence meter for your individual golfer. Depending on the course, the type of shot, the difficulty of the shot, and your abilities, a meter shows your confidence in making the shot. Its a pretty interesting feature. If you play one course a lot and you are in a similar situation attempting a particular shot that you have attempted before, your confidence meter is higher than it would be on a native course, attempting a rare shot, and it increases your chances of making the shot.
The game modes are extremely similar to Tiger Woods 07. They include the Tiger Challenge (though with a LOT more content), the PGA Tour season mode, all the different round options (stroke play, match play, etc.). The Mini Games are similar as Tiger Woods 07 too. I think there is a new putt-putt mini game, however, I have yet to try it out.
Graphics: The graphics could use some work. There is a great deal of realism, but I think it could use a little work and attention. I believe the graphics look cleaner on Tiger Woods 07 for the regular Xbox. They look alright, I just think there should be a smoother transition when things move following shots and previewing holes. The animals that are occasionally seen on courses are extremely unrealistic and incredibly disappointing. They should not have been included.
Sound: EA sports has always done a decent job with sounds. Its nothing too special. The occasional chirp or the sound of wind blowing through a tree. The soundtrack is always something to admire with EA sports games too. They did not miss a beat here either.
Replay-ability: Despite the graphics, this game has a lot of replay-ability. There is always something to do, whether its following the PGA Tour season or taking on another Tiger Challenge, there is a LOT of content here to keep players coming back.
Wrap-up: A great game for the Wii. I have read this in a few reviews and I will repeat it here because it stands true: If you own Tiger Woods 07, its probably not worth getting Tiger Woods 08. EA Sports will have to come up with something radically different to get people hopping on 09. The past couple years have produced extremely similar games. Regardless, any Tiger Woods game is worth owning on whichever system you currently own.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
HaloCountry
Since HaloNation seems to escape us with every attempt, we are making a solid attempt to get people together for HaloCountry.
What is HaloCountry? Getting together a serious group of people online for some Halo2 custom games.
Leave Saturday evening, November 3rd open for some serious Halo2 online gaming with some great company.
Contact Joe Mattingly or myself (or respond to this blog) if you have any questions
What is HaloCountry? Getting together a serious group of people online for some Halo2 custom games.
Leave Saturday evening, November 3rd open for some serious Halo2 online gaming with some great company.
Contact Joe Mattingly or myself (or respond to this blog) if you have any questions
Friday, October 19, 2007
"Inappropriate" Video Games
If you're in the loop as far as video game news goes, you're already aware that Soldier of Fortune: Pay Back has been banned from being sold in Australia. If you haven't heard, there's a brief article about it on Gamespot that you'll want to read before continuing with this blog entry.
Being someone who disagrees with censorship at just about every level, my opinion on this is pretty predictable. Refusing to give people the option to experience a work of art is wrong. And there's no question that, on all relevant levels, and to anyone who appreciates them, video games are as much works of art as novels, songs, poems, paintings, or movies. The amount of creative energy that goes into creating a video game is tremendous, and, if any of you care to differ, I'll be happy to toss in another blog in the future outlining all of the different ways a video game qualifies as art. In fact, I'll probably do it anyways, regardless of your level of interest.
Back to the matter at hand, however, what kind of place has Australia become? Isn't that where the UK sent all their criminals? Are government officials afraid that, if the citizenry is exposed to these violent images, they'll revert to their murderous, criminal ways? I mean, the United States government does a decent job of trampling free speech rights from time to time, but just about anything that doesn't involve child pron is fair game (I intentionally use a misspelling there, "pron," to avoid the kind of Google searches I'm not looking for).
Check out this list of games that were "refused classification" in Australia, which means they cannot be sold in the country:
Grand Theft Auto isn't just a game in the U.S.; it's a whole phenomenon. It's spawned countless mimics, like Saints' Row (really fun game, by the way) and Tony Hawk's Underground 2. To think that the people of Australia are playing a different, toned down version of the game is troubling. As Americans, we think all the time about how many countries in the Middle East have oppressive laws, forcing the rules of their religion on the general populace. But it's a fair bet that most people in those countries are Muslims, and take their religion seriously, so the government is implementing laws that reflect the desires of its constituency.
It seems to actually be a little bit worse in a place like Australia, where most video games are okay. It's okay to be sort of violent, or sort of sexual, but there's a point (and an arbitrary one at that) beyond which you're not allowed to venture.
As an aside, the clips I saw of the game looked really interesting, and knowing now that it's considered particularly graphically violent, I'm going add it to my list of games to wait for to drop to $20-$30 and purchase. (I never buy anything new; I'm a cheapskate, remember?)
Being someone who disagrees with censorship at just about every level, my opinion on this is pretty predictable. Refusing to give people the option to experience a work of art is wrong. And there's no question that, on all relevant levels, and to anyone who appreciates them, video games are as much works of art as novels, songs, poems, paintings, or movies. The amount of creative energy that goes into creating a video game is tremendous, and, if any of you care to differ, I'll be happy to toss in another blog in the future outlining all of the different ways a video game qualifies as art. In fact, I'll probably do it anyways, regardless of your level of interest.
Back to the matter at hand, however, what kind of place has Australia become? Isn't that where the UK sent all their criminals? Are government officials afraid that, if the citizenry is exposed to these violent images, they'll revert to their murderous, criminal ways? I mean, the United States government does a decent job of trampling free speech rights from time to time, but just about anything that doesn't involve child pron is fair game (I intentionally use a misspelling there, "pron," to avoid the kind of Google searches I'm not looking for).
Check out this list of games that were "refused classification" in Australia, which means they cannot be sold in the country:
- Manhunt
- Grand Theft Auto III
- Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
- Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude
- and apparently various others...
Grand Theft Auto isn't just a game in the U.S.; it's a whole phenomenon. It's spawned countless mimics, like Saints' Row (really fun game, by the way) and Tony Hawk's Underground 2. To think that the people of Australia are playing a different, toned down version of the game is troubling. As Americans, we think all the time about how many countries in the Middle East have oppressive laws, forcing the rules of their religion on the general populace. But it's a fair bet that most people in those countries are Muslims, and take their religion seriously, so the government is implementing laws that reflect the desires of its constituency.
It seems to actually be a little bit worse in a place like Australia, where most video games are okay. It's okay to be sort of violent, or sort of sexual, but there's a point (and an arbitrary one at that) beyond which you're not allowed to venture.
As an aside, the clips I saw of the game looked really interesting, and knowing now that it's considered particularly graphically violent, I'm going add it to my list of games to wait for to drop to $20-$30 and purchase. (I never buy anything new; I'm a cheapskate, remember?)
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Fable: The Lost Chapters
I finally completed the "expanded" version of Fable this past weekend. For those of you who've never played either version, it's similar to the original Legend of Zelda. You control your character with a 3rd-person Grand Theft Auto style point of view, and move him through various zones, killing enemies and completing quests. The general setting is a standard medieval realm with swords, bows, magic, etc.
The game has a series of gold (primary) quests that progress the story, as well as silver (optional) quests that become available at different times during the game. At a number of points during the story, specifically in determining how you complete quests or which optional quests you accept, you can choose to make "good" or "evil" decisions. While the big selling point of this game is how your experience changes based on your decisions, I didn't find the two paths to be substantially different, which was disappointing. If you spared character A, their assassins would come after you later. If you killed character A instead, character C's assassins would come after you. Small changes in dialogue don't constitute a unique gaming experience.
That being said, the game is enjoyable, as long as you're able to accept that you can't play it twice through as you might with other games that change more dramatically based on your decisions.
Now, to address the "Lost Chapters" portion. There is definitely additional content, scattered throughout the story as well as an extra set of quests after the end of the original game. While I don't think this extra content justifies a full-price purchase if you already own the first game, spending $20 at this point to get the updated version isn't a terrible idea, and if you don't own either, you definitely want to go with the Lost Chapters version, if only because it's simply a better economic decision. The additional 2-5 hours you'll spend playing the added pieces of the game for essentially the same price as the original is obviously worth it.
Overall, the Fable entity as a whole is a nice basis for a sequel (the upcoming but still a ways off Fable 2), for which I'm pretty excited. Fable 2 sounds like it will have greater player immersion, and hopefully they will have really deepened the impact of "good" and "evil" decisions throughout the game.
And if you're wondering, yes, I only play games that have been out at least a year. I'm still enjoying NCAA Football '05 and Madden '05.
The game has a series of gold (primary) quests that progress the story, as well as silver (optional) quests that become available at different times during the game. At a number of points during the story, specifically in determining how you complete quests or which optional quests you accept, you can choose to make "good" or "evil" decisions. While the big selling point of this game is how your experience changes based on your decisions, I didn't find the two paths to be substantially different, which was disappointing. If you spared character A, their assassins would come after you later. If you killed character A instead, character C's assassins would come after you. Small changes in dialogue don't constitute a unique gaming experience.
That being said, the game is enjoyable, as long as you're able to accept that you can't play it twice through as you might with other games that change more dramatically based on your decisions.
Now, to address the "Lost Chapters" portion. There is definitely additional content, scattered throughout the story as well as an extra set of quests after the end of the original game. While I don't think this extra content justifies a full-price purchase if you already own the first game, spending $20 at this point to get the updated version isn't a terrible idea, and if you don't own either, you definitely want to go with the Lost Chapters version, if only because it's simply a better economic decision. The additional 2-5 hours you'll spend playing the added pieces of the game for essentially the same price as the original is obviously worth it.
Overall, the Fable entity as a whole is a nice basis for a sequel (the upcoming but still a ways off Fable 2), for which I'm pretty excited. Fable 2 sounds like it will have greater player immersion, and hopefully they will have really deepened the impact of "good" and "evil" decisions throughout the game.
And if you're wondering, yes, I only play games that have been out at least a year. I'm still enjoying NCAA Football '05 and Madden '05.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
