Sorry for the outage yesterday folks - we were attempting to optimize some of our databases in an attempt to help with the performance issues and it was a bit overaggressive.
We've restored the databases, and made some changes to help with forum performance by splitting some of our larger threads (very overdue for the Small Scores thread). However, we're still struggling with I/O performance on the server itself, which Bickman has been taking the lead on and discussing with our host provider.
We have a few options available to us depending on the actions we need to take, and it's my hope that this all gets sorted out by the end of the week, in one way or another. In the mean time, feel free to chat with us in our IRC channel until the forums are taken out of Maintenance Mode: #RFGeneration, or use the QuakeNet webclient link: http://webchat.quakenet.org/?channels=RFGeneration
After finishing Remember Me, I mentally placed it on the shelf in my mind labeled "glad I finished, also glad I'm done playing it." On that imaginary row also sits El Shaddai, Enslaved, and even Walking Dead Season One. (That last one mainly due to how poorly it ran/played on PS3, and I read the 360 version played even worse.) Games I wanted to experience, mainly due to the art design, story, or experience of the game's world.
Games I kept plodding through, often despite not really enjoying the gameplay much of the time.
That can seem counter-intuitive to people not as easily enraptured with the medium of video games as I can be. Much like a audiophile closing out everything but a sublime piece of music, a movie lover watching the same film dozens of times, or a sports team fan painting their bodies and making it to every game, I have a passion for my specific pastime, a deeply-rooted affection for the hobby I've enjoyed since my youth.
That doesn't really explain why I sometimes play through games I don't necessarily enjoy playing. It may lead assumptions to the opposite; having quite the knowledge base of available interactive entertainments (and a decently-sized pool from which to choose from at home) why would I stick with something not so fun, instead of booting up the next game in my backlog or replaying a favorite? In an admittedly somewhat laughable (and pretentious-sounding) response, I sometimes do it for art.
To those who do not perceive video games as art, I'm not writing to convince otherwise. There is a different manner to frame the concept though, one to which I've always gravitated to by default. Let's start with some components; A graphic artist, using different mediums, constructs the design assets to be used in-game. A musician, some using circuit boards, others using symphony orchestras, writes and conducts the pieces of music for the game. Sometimes, a writer develops a story the game is to tell. Each of these components, when removed (or even completely divorced from) the wholly constructed video game, could be judged and critiqued for artistic merit, and would in general be considered pieces of 'art' themselves.
For example, sometimes a game's art assets are published as a book, displaying mediums such as watercolor, pencil, and CG. Albums of instrumental music written for a video games are sometimes compared to other moving, emotional works of audio expression. And while video game stories are often (and honestly, probably deservedly so) lambasted as being of little relevance compared to great literary works, occasional gems of worth arise, as in any literary genre.
In other words, once taken apart, a video game's individual components could easily be judged as art. And yet once compiled, with the added layer of interaction, such a thing is seen by some to reduce the parts to less than a whole in terms of artistic merit. Yet the interactivity, the 'gameplay' as it were, is yet another delicate component of creativity, balance, and experience; an art. Make these components serve a game, and the interactivity becomes the trunk of a tree that, to some critics, makes all of the beautiful leaves uselessly fall off. Even the roots of history, technology, and innovation that fed the entire construct is somehow automatically irrelevant.
As a gamer, I've always felt that a video game's gameplay should be the core, and ideally all other components serve that end. But sometimes like a painting that just never comes together, or a song that just doesn't hit that sweet spot between the ears, gameplay is not as fun as a player wants it to be. Perhaps the genre just doesn't connect. (I'm not much of a modern sports game player.) Maybe there are technical problems. (Hello, terrible frame rate and input lag on Walking Dead.) Perhaps despite everything coming together, it just doesn't feel 'fun.' (I've really, really tried to enjoy the latest Gran Turismo, the Killzone series, and even the earliest Tony Hawk games, but they never 'clicked' with me.)
However, sometimes the rest of the game is so compelling, that the gameplay takes a backseat to the desire to see the entire experience through. Such was the case with Remember Me. While I appreciated the intended design of the customizable combo melee combat, and how the rhythm of button presses integrated into gameplay and even music, it just felt 'off' to me the whole time. Maybe I was so used to the superlative design of Batman: Arkham Asylum, maybe I just never got the 'flow' of the game engine, maybe I just really really wanted a 'counter' mechanic, either way I didn't enjoy the combat. Or the platforming. Or the level design.
Why on earth did I keep playing?
I adored the gameworld. The Neo-Paris, cyberpunk art design. The interesting, high concept ideas such as memories-as-currency. The music, animation, setting, and sound design sold the experience very well. I wanted to explore every nook and cranny I was given; here was something interesting, and while I couldn't explore where I wanted to go, the glimpses were worth it.
I bought the art book before I got the game; I think that may have automatically put me in some form of hipster territory.
Anyway, I treated Remember Me as I have many other games that showed me an enthralling place. I toured it like a museum, absorbing the art displayed all around, taking in this strange, interesting place. Sure, I got frustrated when I was shown something inaccessible that piqued my interest and it sometimes felt like I was tripping as much as walking, but it was fascinating, different, and most importantly, worthwhile. Like any good museum.
A friend of mine once visited and stood staring at our huge bookshelves full of video game strategy guides almost all night long. He'd take one down, thumb through it for awhile, and then replace it with another. After a few hours (!) I joked that he could just walk a few feet over and play most of those games instead of looking at pictures of them. He gave a slight frown and shook his head; he said that, anymore, just looking through guides and remembering them, looking at the art, seeing all the little nuances recorded in the guide, was as fun as going back and playing them.
I can't say that's entirely true for me, but I think I get what he's saying. Sometimes I don't have several hours to pour into a game, but I want to revisit it. This fellow showed me I have a gigantic stack of old tour guides right in the next room.
Next time I want to revisit Remember Me, I'll probably do so through the beautiful hardcover art book instead of firing up the game, but you never know. I have a lot of virtual Art museums I hope to peruse one day. 
 |
Posted on Oct 17th 2013 at 06:49:36 PM by ( noiseredux) Posted under PC |
[img width=640 height=908]http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/box/7/8/2/655782_243868_front.jpg[/img]
XCOM: Enemy Unknown
2K Games, PC (2012)
If you’re one of the handful of folks who actually read my blog you might be saying to yourself “wait a minute… you already wrote about this game.” And you’d be right. I wrote about the Xbox 360 version a couple months back, but a lot has changed since then. You see I had found myself in a position where I needed a new PC. And once I realized the new PC was able to run some new computer games, I started spending a lot of time (and money) on Steam. Thanks to a particularly handsome sale which got me Enemy Unknown along with five of its predecessors for less than I paid for the 360 version alone, I found myself once again heading a team of troops in an effort to rid the earth of an alien takeover.
[img width=700 height=369]http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/901009552997311086/C5DD084033D60AEB35E55167833BB9F05A412BFA/[/img]
On my seventh attempt at starting a campaign, I finally saw Enemy Unknown to the end. And as great a feeling as that was, there was actually an even bigger milestone here. When I had tallied up the time spent on both versions of the game, I realized I had put in 105 hours. There’s no way for me to go back and add up all the time I’ve spent on something like say Street Fighter II over the years, but this is the first time I’ve knowingly spent triple-digit hours on a single game. Certainly in such a small window of time - about four months.
So what would drive someone with such a poor attention-span to devote so much time to a single game? The obvious answer is obvious. Enemy Unknown is truly one of the most unabashedly fun games I’ve played in a long time. The battle system is just so riveting, it was easy to spend an hour or more on a Mission and still feel that “just one more before bed” feeling when it was over. But there’s also a lot more to it than just this basic answer.
[img width=700 height=369]http://cloud-4.steampowered.com/ugc/901009531491243567/F9BC1D9B3E4B798BA8994207177315B5D90A022A/[/img]
The story (aka: something I normally don’t care all that much about in a strategy game) was great fun. The alien-invasion/paranoia vibe and pulp-inspired dialogue between missions really kept me interested. The music was phenomenal and I truly hope we see a soundtrack release. But what ultimately sucked me in the most was the progression. That is, even after 20, 30, 40 hours of gameplay I was finding myself still learning much of the finer nuances of Enemy Unknown. It felt like each new start-up would find me better prepared for a campaign. And once I had wrapped my head around base management (get those satellites up ASAP!) and managing terror levels, I started to feel in much greater control.
I suppose it’s also slightly tough to talk about this game without mentioning the emotional attachments you get to each soldier. This is an element that FireAxis implemented perfectly. To use it to greater effect, I named each new hire after a friend. This made it so much easier to keep track of who everyone was. Instead of having to to try to keep track of which snipers had climbed the ranks, I could easily recall that MrPopo and Fastbilly were my stars because I had that association in my mind.
[img width=700 height=369]http://cloud-3.steampowered.com/ugc/901009552902386872/F566FBBE12F062E0D57FE57786DDD68440B1EF48/[/img]
I’d also like to mention that I really did enjoy the PC port of this game. Although having played it on consoles, I can tell you that they’re not miles apart. I did encounter some slight late-game bugs on PC, which I have no idea if they were present on 360 or not. But I enjoyed the convenience of having the quick-link to the Steam forums right from the launcher, and more importantly the screenshot feature. I can tell you that I spent lots of time madly tapping F12 throughout my playthrough. In fact all the pictures in this very blog post were taken in-game by me personally.
I’m quite certain my last post regarding Enemy Unknown was a glowing one. But after all this time with it I can now proclaim quite positively that this game would rank within my Top 5 games of this entire generation. A bold statement for sure. But even after 100+ hours, I’m looking forward to the Enemy Within expansion that is just around the corner.
So we've been playing Beyond: Two Souls, and very much enjoying it. And while I do my best to be careful about reading reviews or even previews to games into whose story I want to invest, curiosity lead me to read occasional blurbs and conclusions.
And to no surprise, (especially concerning games by Quantic Dream) I found very polarized opinions and more than one conclusion claiming it was the most difficult game thus far to put a numbered score upon. I read statements alluding to or outright accusing director David Cage as a frustrated film-maker in the wrong medium, and the game and plot itself akin to a SyFy miniseries with a few button presses thrown in.
In the past I've seen the same criticism of everything from Hideo Kojima's Metal Gear Solid series to the FMV craze started by Dragon's Lair and mostly killed by Sega CD. From one end of the quality spectrum to another, even critical darlings such as Telltale's Walking Dead has detractors claiming it as little more than a Choose-Your-Own Adventure graphic novel.
It seems an obvious statement, that we all have different preferences in gaming, and while there can definitely be agreement about technical flaws such as bad framerates and (unintentionally) sluggish controls, ideally gaming culture in both critical and commercial circles would give appreciation to all variations of interactive entertainments. Sadly, we all know, this is not the case.
Part of the problem with rating video games, indeed most media, is that while there are methods of determining technical merits or faults, concepts like 'fun,' 'enjoyment,' or even 'entertainment' is so subjective that each person experiences it differently. There are designs that appeal to greater demographics, such as Tetris, Wii Sports, and Super Mario Bros. However, that doesn't automatically make less commercially successful games less entertaining; I really enjoyed the critically panned Aliens: Colonial Marines, Dead Space 3, and Halo Wars.
However, instead of just shrugging it off as a matter of preference, sometimes games are completely dismissed because of assumptions and preferences. Many comments concerning Beyond: Two Souls claim that there is too much watching and not enough playing, that the gameplay is too simple, and that because these ratios do not meet a certain unnamed target the game itself is not worthwhile. (There is also criticism of the story quality, another subjective quantifier.) Again, there are technical faults that can negatively effect the overall quality of the game, but most of the negativity leveled at Beyond: Two Souls seems to come from a reviewer's desire for the game to be something altogether different than what it is trying to be.
To completely dismiss a game because the gameplay design doesn't parallel other games seems akin to complaining that Madden doesn't have enough racing or puzzle-solving. Beyond: Two Souls is not supposed to have combat like Street Fighter. Walking Dead was not designed as an RPG. Even Dragon's Lair could be considered to have more interactivity than most of the extremely popular endless running games. The very element that makes games unique, interactivity, has not been (and arguably cannot be) subject to universal, specific requirements, other than simply being present. A movie is, by nature of the medium, not interactive; giving any outside agency to a viewing audience, and it is no longer simply a movie, but a different form of interactive entertainment. Is it fun? Worth 'playing?' It's all up to the person experiencing.
I for one have a great appreciation for many games that some hardly if at all consider 'games.' Sewer Shark remains one of my favorites of the early cd-rom era, and I'm the first to admit the thin veil of gameplay over switchable video segments. Yet the player agency was 'enough' for me to have a great time with it, and I still load up the 3DO version every now and then. It's not the fact that I enjoy it that makes it a game; if it were a movie, I wouldn't have watched it more than a time or two. I have fun with it because I enjoy playing, interacting with it. Dragon's Lair, for as many people that have long since outgrown its initial awe factor, still gets constantly ported to anything that will run it, and for as much maligned as the FMV genre of gaming is, there are many fans who still play them.
As we play Beyond: Two Souls, I do sometimes get frustrated at not being able to do what I'd like at times. But its the same desire that lead me to drive for that volcano in Battlezone, or shoot the dog in Duck Hunt. Once gaming gained 'sandbox' and 'open-ended' game designs, I found that without these constraints I lost interest more quickly. I may have loved Legos as a kid (and still do) but I found that when it comes to video games, my personality would rather look for ways to run left in Super Mario Bros. than play Minecraft. To each their own, and that's the point; games like Beyond: Two Souls are not less of a game, just a game with a different design in mind.
And as video games expand, so do ambitions to explore more and different things with them. Perhaps more pointedly, if Walking Dead and Beyond: Two Souls did not play as they do, folks like my Beloved would have far less interest in them, and that's justification enough for me.
I tend to brag about my true gaming 'Holy Grail,' my beloved gamer wife. She may not get to play often, and would describe her skillset as more Words with Friends than Dark Souls, but any chick whose gaming history includes Albert Odyssey, Crazy Taxi, and the original Legend of Zelda has cred in my book. 
However, my Beloved's latest gaming experiences haven't involved her playing; she's also my co-op partner without a controller. In the last year we've completed the Mass Effect Trilogy, Binary Domain, Bioshock Infinity, Catherine and many others, cuddled together in a two-person recliner. She may not be pressing buttons, but she's sharing the game with me, discussing story in slow moments, thumbing through a strategy guide, or pointing out things in the environment I miss. During slower moments such as RPG grinding, she may have a book in her lap or article on her phone, yet her attention is at a moment's notice. Like a co-driver in professional Rally racing, she isn't just another warm body in the adjacent seat, shouting preemptive directions and adding weight distribution; she's a partner, experiencing a version of what I'm experiencing, and helping when my attention is diverted. Primarily, she's there to share my adventures and have fun.
This method of co-op gaming doesn't limit itself to this dynamic; I love finding excuses to sit down with any friend and go through a game together, even single player. When the first Silent Hill movie released in theaters, me and a fellow Silent Hill enthusiast buddy named Mike sat down with the first two Silent Hill games, drenching ourselves in the dim atmosphere and reliving the mood before going to the movie. It didn't matter that only one of us played at a time; the other person was helping to solve puzzles or navigating the occasional labyrinthine environment.
Often a game needs no excuse for this form of co-op other than being a great game; the above experience happened again with a different friend for Resident Evil 4, a game we wanted to play immediately upon release. We stayed up several nights, occasionally swapping the controller between each other. The same thing happened later with Condemned: Criminal Origins. (If it weren't for Pat playing navigator with the guide's map, I'd have never found my way through that game!) We later played through Resident Evil 5 together, and while we hugely enjoyed the built-in co-op, I can't say it was a better or worse experience; just a different way to play together.
Pat has been gracious enough to show me through the entirety of every Metal Gear Solid game (except the first, I did go through that one myself) including every easter egg and hidden scene (he's a bit of a Metal Gear completionist) and if it were not for him, I'd likely never have experienced, much less enjoyed, that series nearly as much as I do now. Pat and I have completed everything from Rescue Rangers and Contra to Gears of War 1-3 together, yet some of my favorite gaming co-op memories with him are ones in which one of us didn't have a controller.
I've shared it here before, but it fits well in this article. Before some of my close friends passed away, I had some wonderful memories of us gaming all night together, passing a controller around for Battle for Olympus, Castlevania III, and Eternal Darkness, among others. Those games now have even more precious memories attached than a fun gameplay experience. Some even have save files or passwords of the last moments of time we spent hanging out. Call me sappy, but it keeps good thoughts readily accessible once in a blue moon when missing those friends over times past.
For the first time, my Beloved recently shared from the playing side: I watched (and jumped along-side) her as she played the Walking Dead Season 1. Next up, we've already penned in Beyond: Two Souls once it comes out next week. When we play games featuring less... walking dead things, our kids are always chomping at the bit to grab a controller, though they're just as ready to cheer on mom and dad on those tough bosses or time trials. We've also begun searching for more games such as Super Mario Galaxy, certain Final Fantasy titles, and the Tales of... series that have asymmetrical co-op designs, where a secondary player can help at a more relaxed, even sedentary helper role that can be ideal for children, friends who want to hang out, or a significant other who wants to be involved.
It can take a bit of effort to develop such a socially inclusive atmosphere. Western society doesn't exactly lend itself anymore to family and friends all gathering around the single living room TV for a few rounds of Combat or Super Mario Bros/Duck Hunt. It is now industry standard to have our entertainment designed to be spread across as many personal devices as possible. And to be sure, some nights we all just want to do our own thing. But the purposeful, intentional inclusion of a social aspect to our gaming has paid in dividends, and (if you couldn't tell) I highly recommend it.
[img width=700 height=599]http://www.lolbrary.com/content/878/have-you-tried-turning-it-off-and-on-again-23878.jpg[/img]
Site's been slow for you? Yeah, us too.
We have been running over our logs and settings and are in contact with our host as well to try to sort out exactly what is going on.
Please be patient. Your calls are very important to us. Have you considered buying an extended warranty? *shakes head* Sorry, went in to call center mode for a second.
We know just how important this site is to you guys. Personally, it means the world to me to have this site up and running well for everyone to experience. We hope to have everything running better very soon.
Don't forget to keep it on channel 3! (Even if there is a little static every now and then.)
Our submissions were slightly up this month from our 2028 total in July and saw an increase of 2730 submissions for the month of September (2620 game submissions and 110 hardware entries). A big thanks to all of you who contributed this month!
Those with over 100 submissions for the month of September include:
Tynstar 789 (TOP SUBMITTER!!!)
CoinCollector 394
Shadow Kisuragi 266
thegreatska 179
Sirgin 161
ericeskapade 139
Nice work guys and please keep those submissions coming in!
September's top three approvers were Shadow Kisuragi (418), Tynstar (266), and Paully3433 (130).
There have been a total of 33,985 submissions in 2013 to date. With 3 more months until the end of the year, we will need a total of 16,015 more submissions to meet our goal of 50,000 (that's approximately 5,339 submissions each month). Let's continue to chip away at it and hit our goal as a community! Thank you.
Before I seem like one of those jaded 'leave me alone and let me game' types the last entry may have implied, let me bring up another rare opportunity this new console generation is going to give;
Something shiny that gives an excuse for us all to gather 'round the TV and hang out.
One of the many changes in gaming culture that happened from growing out of a niche hobby into a mainstream staple, is that inevitably the 'newness' of video games is long gone. No longer a novelty box with extra chords plugging into that wooden framed 25"-er, chances are grandma plays a few social games on facebook and your parents kill a few hours with Angry Birds or Candy Crush on an iPad/iPhone/calculator watch. (Do they still have those?)
Nowadays, it is likely more people you know play some form of video game than don't, and that sure wasn't true for most of us in our youth. Video games are now so entrenched in our society that pretty much anything electronic is expected to feature some interactive 'for fun' element. I'm waiting for my kids to ask what else our digital thermostat 'plays.'
Whereas in the past, millions of marketing dollars were spend just to get people to be aware of, and understand what is, a new console, now billions of marketing dollars are spend to regenerate excitement beyond a 'meh, slightly better graphics and now I wave my arms at a camera that may or may not be spying on me.'
Back in the day, if you were the first on the block to own a 2600, NES, or Genesis, suddenly you had friends you didn't know the name of, asking for a turn. In my C64 days, more kids came through our living room than the local arcade. And two player games could get riotous, in a good way, with everyone fidgeting excitedly as they stared at the action onscreen and awaited their turn.
It may sound like I'm only waxing nostalgic, pining for bygone days where the freshness of video games brought more excitement and attention. Living rooms in our modern world aren't exactly 'Leave it to Beaver' style family gathering spaces anymore. In fact, Nintendo is largely criticized as being out of touch with modern gamers by designing the Wii U as a device made for such an environment. Local multiplayer focus instead of online focus? A private screen to play on so someone else could watch the 'big TV' while you play games in the same room? Hey Nintendo, did you focus test this thing in the 80s?
Unless Nintendo, true to their word, really isn't interested in more FPS and GTA experiences. Instead of catering to that environment, they are giving the tools to generate the experiences such as the one outlined in my youth. When Christmas day comes and the kids open up that Wii U, we're going to have a blast with four-player Super Mario Wii U. We're going to spend some family time puzzle-solving through Scribblenauts Unlimited. And when the kids finally go to bed, Wind Waker HD and I have some catching up to do. Probably while my beloved watches Scrooged on our 'big TV.'
But let's not even count the Wii U. By carefully cultivating an environment that encourages a group to hang out in the same area, weekend gaming is always socially rewarding. Our collection is not just out on display; it is all set up and ready to go. TVs are lined up, old and new systems next to each other, just waiting to be played. Our family is very much into social gaming, and most of the time we're not on all on the same game. As much fun as it is to have an intense Halo LAN match, hilarious 8 player Bomberman game, and full Rock Band setup going, our friends are comfortable turning on a single player game and just spending time together while we all play what we're in the mood for.
Its kind of the 'older adult' version of that youth experience; everyone knows they can come in and just enjoy themselves, play what they want (respecting kids bedtimes and M rated games, etc.) and still be social, even engaging. Or just sit, relax and enjoy the environment and friends without expectation.
Which brings us back around to the advent of the PS4. For the first time since the 360/PS3 launch, we have something new and interesting to plug in and try out. Interest and even excitement can be contagious in a group of friends, and those who could care less often still find themselves with controller in hand, trying out the new hardware. For the first time in a long time, a group stares at a single player experience as player one takes the machine through its paces. Folks debate the differences in graphics and control, and for brief moments something new and engaging is shared amongst like-minded people. At least for a little while, every new game that comes out is something to at least try, and see if anything new is brought to the table.
In the modern age of gaming, sometimes we forget how near-magical it really is to have such wonderful toys. Maybe some of us are too-far gone to care, and some never have. But with the right mindset, we don't have to try and recapture lightning in a bottle. We just have to remember what its like to be excited the next time a thunder cloud comes, bottles ready.
[img width=507 height=360]http://i1029.photobucket.com/albums/y359/necrom99/playthru3_zpsc78bd8de.jpg[/img]
As some of you might have seen in the comments section on the September playthrough, I mentioned to Fleach that it might be a good idea to consider running two playthroughs each month, one modern and one classic. Well, we kicked the idea around a little over several PMs and even posted a forum topic to get some feedback on the idea from members. It seems that the majority of those who participated in our poll felt that it would be a good idea and might encourage more participation from a wider variety of collectors. Fleach, Bil, and GrayGhost will continue to host the modern playthrough, while yours truly [and possibly another member] will be responsible for the retro playthrough (me and my big mouth......).
All members new and old are encouraged to participate in a playthrough if you can and we'd really love to have some of you join us for both! We love your feedback on the games and it's a great deal of fun discussing all the ins and outs of gameplay and things we like and don't like about particular titles.
As usual, we are attempting to keep the playthroughs manageable in terms of time played and are trying to pick titles that many of you already own or those that are affordable and somewhat easy to find. The modern playthrough will cover games from the PS2/GC/XBox up to the present, while the retro playthrough will consist of titles from the PS1/N64 and prior. As usual, we are open to any suggestions on titles you might like to play each month and welcome any assistance in determining weekly goals and achievements on the threads or via PM.
So here we are, our first month of October is approaching and what better way to start off our split playthroughs than with a few horror titles. This month, the modern playthrough will be Fragile Dreams: Farewell Ruins of the Moon for the Nintendo Wii and the retro playthrough will be Castlevania II: Simon's Quest for the NES. Please join us!
Link to discussion thread and a list of goals and achievements for Fragile Dreams: Farewell Ruins of the Moon: http://www.rfgeneration.c...m/index.php?topic=13029.0
Link to discussion thread and a list of goals and achievements for Castlevania II: Simon's Quest: http://www.rfgeneration.c...topic=13030.msg185483#new
[img width=600 height=300]http://www.gamekyo.com/images_1/bd26874aa79c85e6ab50038c3355110420111224154340.jpg[/img]
Until only a few months ago I vehemently detested any handheld since the GameBoy Advance. The graphics paled in comparison to what the latest living room systems could produce. Games were released on tiny cartridges that I could easily lose underneath a piece of furniture and forget about. The GameBoy Advance SP came out and I could care less. Then the DS and its various iterations received the same reception. Sony's PSP and Vita were not even on my radar.
Then something happened.
My bulky home consoles started getting fewer and fewer JRPGs. "Is the sub-genre on its way out?" I thought. The games that tickled a soft spot in my heart had to be hiding somewhere. I then saw games news outlets reporting on Final Fantasy: Bravely Default and Etrian Odyssey Untold, and my ears perked up a little. After reading some previews and watching brief gameplay videos I was sold. These were games I were longing for, but there was a problem: they were for the 3DS. How could such great looking Role Playing games be slated for release on portable console? Who would even want a handheld when one could spend roughly $50 more to get a fully HD game system? That was my argument that naively justified my unwillingness to consider the handheld market.
While trekking across America in The Last of Us, experiencing the monomyth in Journey, and saving my son in Heavy Rain I was silently craving a JRPG. I resisted buying a 3DS by telling myself the screens were too small. I held out against the XL redesign by saying the colour choices were not attractive. Much to my surprise Nintendo announced the black 3DS XL and I thought it looked like something I might actually want. Two highly intriguing titles were on the horizon after all. So, with the release of the sleek obsidian coloured handheld I jumped aboard the ship, and I like where its taking me.
[img width=240 height=180]http://is1.myvideo.de/de/movie6/7e/thumbs/2858005_3.jpg[/img]
Having found the new home of my favourite genre left me wondering why these developers began to favour the different platform.
The JRPG was once synonymous with the SNES and gained even more steam on PlayStation 2. Gamers had titles including Chrono Trigger, EarthBound, Final Fantasy X, and Odin Sphere. Part of the RPG experience was budgeting one's time and sitting in front of TV to save the world. This was the domain of the genre and it made sense because as console technology improved developers were able to craft grander epics with increasingly beautiful visuals. I firmly believed JRPGs weren't going to leave the living room thinking that the XBox 360 and PS3 would offer me with the next enthralling odyssey. However, the current generation of gaming stations didn't receive as many of these games as their predecessors. The games relocated onto the DS and PSP, and even series that originated on the home console appeared on these 4 inch screens.
The home consoles were left with cliche, trope-laden, painfully linear games that resulted in long time fans wanting more at best, and feeling burnt out at worst. Meanwhile someone on a bus was commanding an army or crawling through maze-like dungeons. Perhaps the Japanese gaming style was the catalyst of this change where mobile gaming dominates over the living room experience. Moreover, those who grew up playing Phantasy Star and Robotrek now have jobs, families, and responsibilities that take them away from a 40+ hour epic. So it's completely reasonable that these games shifted to the pocket sized platforms.
In a way this could also be seen as JRPGs honouring their roots. These games, after all, are about the stories at the core. Without long cutscenes and voice acting to rely upon, any weakness in the narrative are easily exposed. Thus the focus has returned to the plot and character development which is paramount to any RPG. The handheld JPRGs take on more a "all-killer-no-filler" approach to the experiences they offer.
Many are quick to say that the JRPG is dead, but that's not true. One just needs to know where to find them. The genre that went stale found a breath of fresh air on Nintendo's 3DS and Sony's PSP or Vita. There's more new ideas and adventures to experience while commuting and during shorter periods of quiet down time. With few exceptions like PS3's upcoming The Guided Fate Paradox, RPG fans have reason to get excited again but they will just be playing on a different, smaller screen.
So, I picked up our family's special Zelda edition Wii U today. I've been happily updating the system and testing a few used games (bought on sale in anticipation of the system), and as I write I'll be downloading Wind Waker, despite reserving the physical copy that comes with a Gannondorf statue.
All of this is being done out of site of the kids, and once I'm done, it'll all be packed up and hidden... for over three months.
The Wii U is our family's Christmas gift to our family, and our boys are eagerly saving up chore money until then to buy their own games. I'll admit, it will take a bit of mental hand-slapping to pack it up all up again and be patient, but such is the duty of a responsible parent. And in the meantime, we do own a *few* other games I could play.
After several updates to the system and each game, as well as the network setup, it definitely reminded me of an unfortunate advantage our older consoles had; plug and play.
Gamers my age likely remember a Christmas or birthday that painted this scenario:
First, a younger us excitedly tearing the wrapping off a new Atari/Coleco/Intellivision/NES/Genesis/SNES/Sega CD/Turbo Grafx/Game Boy/Neo Ge-HA! WE WISHED!!- etc. and after mom/dad/uncle/older sibling figured out how to connect it to the TV, we slapped that first cartridge in and a new, unexplored (besides store demos), vibrant, virtual world awaited us. Part of the appeal was the immediacy; once that system was hooked up, all that was required was finding a controller and game and you were good to go.
Now, every new system requires some form of setup. Sometimes we get by just inputting a region and name, but nowadays we have profiles, internet setup, firmware updates, game updates, day one patches, and on and on. One of the things that made me slow to incorporate the PS3 into my common gaming was how often I would purchase a new game, unwrap it, pop it in... and mandatory installs or updates required me to spend anywhere between five minutes to a few hours (looking at you, Gran Tourismo 5) before I could actually play. For a guy who's game time is often measured in less than an hour, even a fifteen minute chunk of un-interactive screen staring means I'm thinking of a different game to play.
All this time setting up the Wii U (not to mention downloading Wind Waker!) made me feel bad for any younger kids who gets a new Xbox One, PS4, or Wii U on Christmas... and then have to wait while online accounts are set up, profiles created, updates delayed due to server overloads, installs required...
Yeah, boo-hoo, first world problem, not a biggie. Make those rug-rats go play football in the snow or play a real board game with Grandma while they wait, just like we had to do when we didn't even have a game system to wait on!
Which got me thinking about how picky we really are about games. My preference over the years for consoles instead of PC gaming developed in part because of the setup required for computer gaming. Nowadays though its pretty much the same; install, check for patches/updates, customize the controls, create a save-game... am I playing on a PC or a 360/PS3? With social media integration, messaging services, and apps such as Netflix, there is often little difference. Some gamers delight in this; a 'share' button on their controller, DV-R for their gameplay, instant tweets over gamerscore.
I know I can be a cranky old-timer when it comes to gaming, but most of the time, if I could skip signing in to my game machine altogether, I would. My 'gaming career' of scores, time spent on games, and K/D ratios can be fun to keep track of and compare/compete with friends, but there is a reason I have my profiles set to "always show offline." I game in very different, often dichotomic moods; sometimes to survive a Horde of Locusts with fellow Gears in co-op bliss, sometimes to blow things up alone to work out frustrations. Sometimes to get a quick, frantic fix of some Robotron 2084; sometimes to play a slow marathon of Tetris while my brain processes the backlog queue. Point is, the game machine is there to 'serve' my use, and somehow in the name of features and connectivity, we've enslaved ourselves to maintaining them. Just keeping the 360 LAN updated so my friends and I can sit and play anything we want any given weekend can be a tremendous chore of keeping each system and hard-drive updated and correctly connected for any game we'll possibly play.
And in a thought that could easily generate enough content for another article, this perpetually required attention extends from consoles to the games themselves. I lose interest in games like GTAIV because of the required in-game social maintenance for virtual characters. I have a difficult enough time keeping up with all my real-world social responsibilities; making sure Niko calls his girlfriend or relative may sell a more realistic experience, but when gameplay breaks down to what feels like tedious exercises to me, I quickly lose interest. I recognize this as a 'different strokes for different folks' paradigm, of course; I've completed many a JRPG or StratRPG that bored my beloved to tears. (Gave her plenty of time to read, though.)
Perhaps therein lies one of the many reasons classic cartridge systems are always connected across our home; we're always a few seconds away from another round of Super Mario 3 or Galaga.
And now I can't wait to hear my kids ask about that collection of giant, black, 'vinyl Blu-Rays' under the entertainment stand...
 |
Posted on Sep 13th 2013 at 05:35:47 PM by ( slackur) Posted under Early Adopters, NES,SNES,PS,PS2,PS3,PS4,XB360,BBQ,OMG,RLY |
Every time new video game consoles come out, we hear the same antagonism.
Why on earth would we functionally pay a premium for a brand-new piece of hardware that
a.) is at its most expensive upon the launch window,
b.) naturally begins with fewer games than any time in its lifecycle,
c.) has not been tested for longevity or long-term reliability,
d.) is unproven for consistent support in games and accessories,
e.) has full priced, first generation games that likely cannot compete with the slew of hardware pushing, cheaper games made during the last few years of the previous console,
f.) requires an entirely new batch of full-priced controllers, accessories, dongles, do-dads, batteries, pieces, parts, gumballs, etc.,
g.) almost always have a dreaded equivalent to the Great N64 Game Drought, and
h.) will have a better, cheaper, newer version out by the time it proves itself?
To that, I say: ...yup.
Really, if someone is not the type to buy a console at launch, they are probably not wired to be convinced by exciting sales pitches or exuberant fanboyism. I've worked in video-gaming retail for over a decade, including the two biggest retailers, as well as mom-and-pop stores (R.I.P., Endless Entertainment), and while I've convinced some folks who were on the fence about buying a launch console, I learned not to trying changing the mind of a level-headed nay-sayer.
And I understand their logic! If you're not 'into' a launch system, it would likely be a colossal waist of money. However, that does not mean early adopters are automatically being ridiculous either. This far into our industry's history, there are now visible trends that help make launch window purchases more palatable, even preferable.
(Keep in mind this is being written by a guy who bought an Atari Jaguar and all the trimmings at launch. If your name is not Redd, you probably just winced. )
First off, the most important thing for a game console: games.
Everyone knows that it takes at least a year or two for a console to come out with some games that would make it worth owning. (Or longer, in the case of Game.com. We're still waiting.) Except, that's not universally true. Sure, it takes years for a console's library to pick up steam, but there are too many examples of launch window games that carried their respective systems enough to warrant the initial purchase, at least for many people.
Some of the best examples include:
Combat (A26)
Donkey Kong (Coleco)
Super Mario Bros. (NES)
Tetris (GB)
Blue Lightning (Lynx)
Super Mario 64 (N64)
Ridge Racer (PSX)
Halo (Xbox)
For many gamers, the cost of the system was justified simply to play these launch games, with the expectation that other great games would eventually follow. Of course, no discussion on the topic is complete without mentioning the greatest selling video game of all time (as of April 2013), Wii Sports. Sure, it makes many of us groan just to mention it, but it cannot be denied than much like Tetris on Gameboy, gamers and 'non-gamers' alike bought the system just to play that game without really having an expectation to play anything else on it. There is such a mass appeal to play that one thing that the cost of the system is worth it, as if it were a machine built with just that game to play. I have to admit all these years later, I still enjoy a round of Wii Sports Bowling. My guess is that many of the 'haters' who initially liked Wii Sports before the Wii became known as the Great Waggle Shovelware Box would still have fun with a few rounds of multiplayer Wii Sports.
There are other reasons early-adopters are not necessarily unthinking fanboys. As much criticism (often earned) as Gamestop and its ilk get from their pre-order schemes, often folks use pre-orders as a lay-away plan to get a system they could not afford otherwise. $400+ is a lot to come off of at once, but $20 every two weeks for a few months? Much more do-able. Obviously, it would make more sense to just save that much out of each check and exert self-control, but I'm no money coach. Plus, often there are pre-order incentives for reserving, or perhaps the system is a gift for a specific date (Christmas, birthday) and the cut-off for system availability is much earlier. There are indeed a few scenarios in which buying a launch system makes practical financial sense, as much as buying video games ever makes practical financial sense. 
For 'core' gamers, there may be another incentive for early adoption. Historically, as consoles reach later redesigns of hardware, the thought that a console gets better with each iteration is a bit of a misnomer.
Sure, there are stacks of broken 1st gen 360s and PS2s to argue otherwise (many of them are stacked in my garage.) but consoles almost universally begin to lose features for every revision. The examples are everywhere;
As much desired as a top-loader NES is, it outputs exclusively in RF, and has visible line noise.
Buying a Sega Genesis with the best components requires a weekend college course and study guide (http://www.sega-16.com/fo...-Genesis-2s-from-bad-ones) but its pretty universal to say that the last versions, Model 3, are stripped down and incompatible with certain games and hardware.
My Super Nintendo Model 2 has no power LED and no native RF, S-Video, or RGB, all supported in the first model.
The original Playstation revisions lost ports used for cheat devices and (more importantly to me) system linking.
The PS2 lost its own system linking iLink port. The slim model, designed without the necessary expansion bay for the hard drive, was released the same year as Final Fantasy XI, a game that required the HD. (Boy, do I remember that. I finally convinced myself to invest in FFXI a week before the Slim was revealed.) As problematic as the PS2 system became for disc read errors, the lack of effective internal cooling meant that the Slims had their own hardware problems.
The PS3, in a rush to follow its lineage, has lost everything from USB ports, operating system options (linux), and video playback with anything besides HDMI, to backwards compatibility options (as has the Nintendo Wii.)
The Xbox360 lost its own propriety memory card ports (while gaining USB drive options, which did not help my stack of memory cards used for LAN profile swapping.)
I miss being able to play GBA games on the later DS models, and newer, brighter screens also included more ghosting.
Even the new, slimmer Vita is catching criticism for replacing the OLED screen for a newer LCD tech.
Admittedly, sometimes the difference is just personal preference; I like the feel of the original, wider Atari Lynx, and the second, smaller model (despite better battery life) was still way too big to be truly portable. Another example for me is the PS3; despite how monolithic the first generation was, all of the revisions felt cheaper and cheaper.) I prefer the heft and locking mechanism of the PSP 1000, and though it does have ghosting I like that better than the artifacts on the 2/3000.
Granted, most of what was lost in these revisions do not effect the majority of people playing games on them, and were dropped to save cost accordingly. Many features can be restored or even improved through hardware modification. And the last generation continued to add to a console's abilities (and ads) for everything from better video output to Netflix support. But a case can be made that early versions of gaming hardware include features that make them preferable to later models, and are therefore worthwhile investments. (I'm not joking when I say that part of my desire to buy an early model PS4 is directly related to Sony's history of re-designs.)
In the end, its about what a gamer wants to play. The same rules apply to a launch console as it does to every other console: don't buy a system if nothing is out or on the horizon that you want to play. I'm excited for Battlefield 4 and Destiny, and I don't game on PC, so a launch PS4 fit my parameters, especially since I have one reserved and pay a little at a time. With the Playstation Plus service promising free games starting at launch, it made the most sense to me.
Even if a difficult economy wasn't a concern, any large entertainment purchase should be a matter of thoughtful consideration, and not a snap-decision. Perhaps the same could be said about being critical of early-adopters.
Episode 17 discussion thread: http://www.rfgeneration.c...rum/index.php?topic=12633
Get the show at http://www.collectorcast.com
Follow the Collectorcast on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Collectorcast
Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/Collectorcast
On Stitcher (enter Promo Code RFGeneration): http://www.stitcher.com/RFGeneration
On iTunes: http://itunes.apple.com/u...collectorcast/id524246060
On YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/DukeTogo74
Each time a new HD remake or Digital Remaster gets released, if you listen closely you will hear a collective sigh of disappointment that comes from long time collectors. The common thought is that this diminishes the value of the original release of a game. Is there any merit to this though?
This month we take a look at HD remakes, compilations, remastered games and digital re-releases and see how each affects the value of the original release prior to, during and long after the new release is available. Is your Earthbound cart going to depreciate drastically after the Wii U e-shop release? Let's find out!
As always, for your listening pleasure is several hours of the finest gaming scores dug up by the deal hunters on the rfgeneration.com forums!
Show notes:
Genesis Audio Comparison: http://youtu.be/WuIjwgPIQtg
Price Charting: http://videogames.pricecharting.com/
Action 53: http://www.infiniteneslives.com/aux20.php
Music: Blades of Steel (NES)
0:25 Intro
20:07 Small Scores
3:55:15 Main Topic: Do rereleases impact collectable values?
5:57:15 Outro
Hey guys! I'm late on this one, but we have another set of thanks to give out for August!
In August, we had 2550 submissions! 2324 of those being games and the other 226 were hardware. That's back up from our summer lull of July! This month also pushed us over 30,000 submissions on the year! Thanks to everyone who submitted!
The top submitters for August were: ApolloBoy with 1043 submissions! Nearly half! Then there was Shadow Kisuragi with 328, thegreatska with 236, Sirgin with 154, and ericeskapade with 127 to round out the other members with over 100 submissions.
The top approvers for August were: Shadow Kisuragi with 390, Tynstar with 215, Paully3433 with 198, and ApolloBoy with 118!
Great job everyone! Let's keep up the awesome work!
Video game collecting can be a strange thing, no?
Here's my reflection that produced the above thought (not that its the first time I came to said conclusion.) I just finished the DLC chapter of Dead Space 3, called Awakened. I completed the game once solo and a second time co-op, which is how I played the latter.
The DLC chapter was well written for what it was, quite short (2 to 2.5 hours or so), and mostly served as a story lead-in to a theoretical sequel, since DS3's original conclusion brought a sense of definitive closure to the series. I'm glad I played it, and given my head-shaking, nope-nope attitude toward gaming's digital future (and present) I'm glad I waited until the DLC was on sale before picking it up.
As a consumer, I have sent the message to Microsoft and EA that I absolutely refuse to purchase digital-only gaming content... unless I really want it and I can get it for cheap. Looking back, that's the story of my purchase history. Fair enough. I may be hypocritical, but at least I'm consistently so.
What I find even more strange is my willingness to purchase retro games for much more than digital content, even games I know I will likely put little to no time into playing.
A rough but telling example; both me and my DS3 co-op buddy refused to pay more than $5 for the Awakened DLC. It is something we desired to play, but we likely would have never budged on our plan if the content did not go on sale.
And yet if I ever saw Cheetahmen II or, heaven forbid, Stadium Events, for $10, Of course I'd buy them. Or $15, or $50, or... yeah. Keep in mind, if I bought them, I would not 'flip' them, selling at profit, so I would not be operating under the obvious financial motivation. It would be part of the media collection we use to connect with people.
Now, I'm well aware of how awful Cheetahmen II plays, and that I already own Stadium Events in all but name and cart-label with World Class Track Meet. Therefore, aside from morbid curiosity, I have no desire to play either. I would not be interested in selling them. I don't consider myself a hoarder. (Why are you laughing?) I also do not like the idea of flaunting physical possessions in the face of someone who desires but does not own such things.
So why on earth would I pay much, much more for something I would not play, and inversely I am reluctant to purchase something I am ready and willing to enjoy?
Its easy to use the ''because I don't want to support digital instead of physical copies" excuse, but that doesn't apply to the games that are already out on disc, and I am awaiting a sale or price-drop. Of course money is the next, or even first excuse, but why then do I still spend money on old games I won't play? I'm sure I'm not alone on this site when it comes to occasionally scouring the 'net to find some retro games for cheap, even games I have no desire to actually play through.
For some, it can be a fun meta-game, looking at huge collection numbers, comparing or even competing on collection size or subgenre completion. Much like achievements or trophies, these arbitrary numbers are part or even most of how these gamers enjoy gaming. Why?
For the same reason an RPG fan is at a loss to explain how grinding and random-looking number screens are fun when discussing such with a non-fan.
Or when an MMORPG player is discussing guilds and patches and expansions to someone who thinks Azeroth is a term they forgot in Geometry class.
Or when telling a Battlefield fan how their preferred game is a sub-par Call-of-Duty clone, and witnessing how virtual violence can in fact translate to IRL violence.
Or the annual Madden/Fifa fan discusses at length to me how great/disappointing their game/franchise/team/player/mascot is this year.
Or the same reason I still go to movie theaters, despite having a home entertainment system that outclasses many of them:
We are all wired to not only enjoy different things, but also with preferences on how we enjoy them. And not just for acquiring or collecting; some of us have a favorite chair/couch/plastic crate/floor/nimbus cloud that we game from, and cannot fully enjoy otherwise. Some refuse to play on anything but original hardware, including arcade cabs; some will not pay more than $10 for any video game period, and for some of us, the hunt for cheap retro games we'll probably never play is a game itself, and is as fun as actually playing a game.
My current 'Holy Grail' gaming search is for a CIB Beyond Shadowgate, the last game of my youth that was stolen and never replaced. And yet, even if I could, I wouldn't trade for it a single memory of the gaming hunts my beloved and I have enjoyed. And we've shared countless ones.
Some things are just far more valuable to me.
Video game collecting can be a strange thing.
|
