|
 So it's that time of year again. TGS time that is. For those of you unaware, it's the Tokyo Game Show I'm referring to. Every year since 1996 in Chiba, Japan vendors come together in much the same way they do with E3 and Leipzig (GC) and show off the latest and greatest. It's the last major trade show before the holiday season kicks off in full swing.
Just to give you an idea of the scope of last year's event, there were 148 companies represented, showcasing 650 games with 176,000 people in attendance.
Personally I found both E3 and Leipzig 2007 a bit of a letdown as far as coverage, new products and press conferences. And not because there's no major system launch this year, sme of the biggest years for trade shows have been in between. My theory was that they were all holding out for TGS because it's so late in the year and would resonate stronger in consumers minds come the holidays. "Bombard the people with media and hype and the dollars will flow" so to speak.
Some of the more interesting rumors and speculation have been a PS3 price cut to combat the release of Halo 3 this month, Nintendo being a no-show and Microsoft unveiling yet more "exclusives" (if you can call them that).
But do we care anymore? Hasn't everyone already made their list of games to buy this year? Do we really need to see more Halo 3, Super Mario Galaxy or LittleBigPlanet because we're already as pumped as we can be? Can anything unveiled at TGS even make it in time for the last Quarter of this fiscal year let alone 2007?
Of course it's always nice to confirm your interest in a game with more media coverage like screenshots and gameplay footage. But like many this year I'm a bit weary of giving a damn about the press conferences and news. E3 used to be a special time of year when you practically lived for the scraps of gaming news they'd throw at you.
Now I'd rather be excited about games I'm getting after Christmas. I already have my list, no need to ruin the momentum of it by over-analyzing and over saturation of the hot games. Holiday 2008 is a long long ways a way. Let me know what I have to look forward to between January and June of '08 because E3 in May is too far off.
So let's hope for a good TGS this year filled with news, footage and surprises that whet the appetite, drain the wallet and induce insomnia. Otherwise like the boy who cried wolf, no one will care next year.
Keep it tuned to RF Generation for Tokyo Game Show 2007 coverage from now until the actual show Thursday September 20th to Sunday September 23rd.
Interesting article over at Joystiq where Michael Kelbeugh, the head of Retro Studios confirmed no online multiplayer for Metroid Prime 3. So far by browsing the forums, websites and blogs around the internet you can see there are mixed reactions to this. Mind you I'm not a Metroid fan by any means but it does raise some important questions. Why does it matter, and why do some genres get away with it while others are never questioned for not having it.
Having played multiplayer games across several systems, both as casual recreation and competitive league play I have a well rounded opinion of it. I do think certain circumstances demand online play for certain games. A game like Metroid Prime 3 is one of those ones that sits on the fence.
The long-time gamer in me thinks Metroid and multiplayer seems odd for a series that established itself as a lonewolf game where it was you against a galaxy full of evil. The new age of gaming side of me says this game is supposed to prove once and for all what the Wii remote/Nunchuk can do for a FPS, and to a lesser extent as an online deathmatch controller as well. That also seems to be the consensus of gamers after reading this news as well. Mixed opinion on both sides, perhaps some motivated by fanboy-ism, but most just wanting an online Wii game for a change.
Has the Wii been pushed to it's limit? Or has the development team at Retro Studios been pushed to it's max as far as resources and time? Or a decision by Nintendo themselves not to allow multiplayer? Hard to say, but these days a game tends to get negatively criticized by a lack of online play.
Speaking generally, over the the last few years several genres of games have been "online or bust" across many platforms. Part of the Xbox's success has been it's online service, and Part of the Gamecube's disappointment has been it's lack thereof. The PS2 has straddled the fence and PC keep trucking along as always. Then the handheld market burst onto online gaming with games like Mario Kart DS. After that it seemed reviewers would give a game a -.5 or -1.0 in there review scores just based on whether it had online play or not.
Meanwhile RPG's, racing games and puzzle games are struggling to find a happy medium for determining whether they should include it as well. Racing games have a hard time because 30 or 60 frames per second buffering textures and whatnot with multiple cars on screen is tough for any system to do well. RPG's are hard because they rely on story as well as eye-candy which makes online difficult as well.
It's almost like creativity and project vision has to take a backseat to industry demand and the critics. Perhaps that's what has made gaming feel more corporate and stale to many people. You can get away with it in a game like Mass Effect or Okami, but heaven forbid you even try it in a first person shooter or a racing game. How many would sacrifice quality in Metroid Prime 3 to have an online mode? Probably way too many. Retro studios will get away with it this time around but they may be at the end of their rope.
No online in 2007 is almost "jumping the shark" for a series, no matter how fantastic a single-player game it is. That's the kind of pressure that makes way too many games suffer because of split resources in making online and offline together. Even a game like Halo 3 has been quoted by Bungie execs as saying it isn't the prettiest game it could be so online will run smoother. Would a trimmed down game engine for online be so bad if the single player game looked like Mass Effect or Bioshock? Wouldn't 1v1 deathmatches in Metroid be better than nothing?
According to an article posted last week, 2 days from now (June 28) GameTap will unveil it's gaming service for the Macintosh platform. "Turner's business is taking other people's content, repackaging it, and re-popularizing it," says Vice-President of Content Ricardo Sanchez, "The idea for GameTap was very much the same." He is speaking of course of Turner Broadcasting System who owns and operates the GameTap service
This means Intel Macs will have access to over 500 titles first starting with GameTap's "Lite" service and eventually leading into it's "deluxe pay-to play" later this summer. Mac users will also be able to view GameTap TV, which among many features includes TV shows, interviews, game trailers and more.
All of this will be possible using a new software technology known to Mac users as "Cider" which adapts windows based games for use on Intel equipped Macintosh computers. Cider which itself is a evolution of "WINE" (a linux emulator that runs windows apps) will make GameTap a seamless experience by making games virtually drag and drop without lengthy installs. The team is also confidant that the games themselves will run smoothly regardless of the fact they are being run through an emulator on an emulator. This is the same method EA Games will use to bring 6 hit PC titles to Macs later this year.
Even though the service will be restricted to Intel based Macs, Mr. Sanchez has said that using the deluxe service will enable Mac and PC users to play against one another in multi-player games.
The best part about this is for Mac users is that if successful they may expand the service into areas currently being used by PC users such as GameTap Indies where new original games are distributed, episodic games such as Sam & Max or the upcoming Grimm Tales. A lot of potential to help Mac gaming move into more of a mainstream presence than it has been in recent years.
GameTap to bring classic gaming service for Mac via www.pcworld.com
|
|
|
|
