Yesterday I reported that a Sega of America marketing executive (Mr. Almeda) said that Sega wouldn't release Yakuza 3 in the west because it would sell poorly. Today, the source of such horrible news, Matt Furtado of the Examiner, edited his article stating that (As i kind of predicted, or at least hoped, in my last article) what he reported was just Mr. Almeda's personal opinion, and not the official standpoint of Sega of America. It's interesting to see that he also removed Mr. Almeda's name, probably to keep him out of trouble with his superiors for having said something to a journalist that he probably shouldn't have.
Well. I personally hope that Mr. Almeda's opinion isn't shared by his colleagues of Sega of America, because honestly (As I already described in my previous article) it's based on an entirely flawed premise. Yakuza 2's sales were seriously hindered by the lack of any advertising and marketing effort (It wasn't even dubbed in english).
Of course an absolutely half assed release like that wouldn't sell. The trick is not to do the same error again, and to release Yakuza 3 (and not only Yakuza 3) with the marketing effort any good game needs to be known and appreciated by the general public.
I'm seriously surprised that a marketing professional really missed that.
Maybe, though, this big scare we got will be useful, as the thousands of annoyed to absolutely enraged comments on several portals and blogs probably shown Sega of America that just maybe they might be understimating Yakuza 3's potential fanbase.
After all it has absolutely top-notch graphics, a great fighting system and a lovely story (and the Yakuza is definitely a concept that's already familiar to the western public, given the truckloads of anime, manga and themed movies that are now part of the pop culture). What else do they think it's needed for a game to sell well? You got it. Advertisement and a good english edition done with the right budget, possibly before the game gets old and we start playing on a Playstation 4.
Do try, Sega, pretty please.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Thursday, July 30, 2009
The Wild hunt comes to Warhammer Online
It's been a lil while since I talked about Warhammer Online (Yes, for the ones that are wondering, I'm still playing full force and currently busy clearing the Tomb of the Vulture Lord. I wish it didn't feel as Virtual Reality this much, given that the hot weather here is killing me), so here I am.
This september a new live event will start, named "The Wild Hunt", and featuring a whole 6-men instanced dungeon that will give Warhammer players some new challenges.
The mechanics of the event itself seem quite interesting. The two realms will have to duke it out in RvR during a PQ (separated by tier, so even low level players will be able to participate), while the spirit of Kurnous (the elven god of the Hunt) will curse some of them. Those will have to "pass" the curse to other players (friend or foe) before it expires, or they will be turned into pigs. Once the PQ is won the realm will earn entrance to the dungeon and 6-men group will be able to face the forces of Nature inside, until the final battle against the avatar of Kurnous itself.
Of course it's all lined with phat loot (including an item that will go in a brand new "live event" equipment slot), trophies and questlines.
The scope of this live event honestly surprised me. I was already surprised by Mythic being willing to spend so many resources to create scenarios for time-limited events, but a whole dungeon for something that will last no more than a few weeks? Well, all the better for us.
Some say that Warhammer Online may be on the verge of death. I personally disagree, given how much fun I'm still getting in the game, and I'm for sure not the only one. Mythic and EA seem to disagree as well, looking at how many resources they're still allocating to the game. Now what I'd really like to see is the announcement of a boxed expansion (Bretonnia, please Mythic, pretty please?), but I guess that'll come when the time is right.
One thing that left me a bit dumbfonded, though, is the lore part of the event. As a long time Warhammer player, I've been used to see the Wild Hunt as an Wood Elven "holiday", while Mythic introduced it as an High Elven one. While plausible, given that High Elves and Wood elves share pretty much same pantheon (and pretty much nothing else, besides heritage and pointy ears), I would have preferred it to be flavored entirely on the Wood Elves, that are one of the most charming and unique races of the Warhammer World. After all the art shown in the official page related to the event definately looks wood elvish and has very little to do with High Elves.
In any case, looks like I have to hurry and complete my Tyrant Armor set. New things to do are showing up on the horizon.
I won't be the only one, by the way, given that a new Mac version of the game has been announced (the Beta is already available). I'm pretty curious to see how the children of Steve Jobs will welcome the game.
This september a new live event will start, named "The Wild Hunt", and featuring a whole 6-men instanced dungeon that will give Warhammer players some new challenges.
The mechanics of the event itself seem quite interesting. The two realms will have to duke it out in RvR during a PQ (separated by tier, so even low level players will be able to participate), while the spirit of Kurnous (the elven god of the Hunt) will curse some of them. Those will have to "pass" the curse to other players (friend or foe) before it expires, or they will be turned into pigs. Once the PQ is won the realm will earn entrance to the dungeon and 6-men group will be able to face the forces of Nature inside, until the final battle against the avatar of Kurnous itself.
Of course it's all lined with phat loot (including an item that will go in a brand new "live event" equipment slot), trophies and questlines.
The scope of this live event honestly surprised me. I was already surprised by Mythic being willing to spend so many resources to create scenarios for time-limited events, but a whole dungeon for something that will last no more than a few weeks? Well, all the better for us.
Some say that Warhammer Online may be on the verge of death. I personally disagree, given how much fun I'm still getting in the game, and I'm for sure not the only one. Mythic and EA seem to disagree as well, looking at how many resources they're still allocating to the game. Now what I'd really like to see is the announcement of a boxed expansion (Bretonnia, please Mythic, pretty please?), but I guess that'll come when the time is right.
One thing that left me a bit dumbfonded, though, is the lore part of the event. As a long time Warhammer player, I've been used to see the Wild Hunt as an Wood Elven "holiday", while Mythic introduced it as an High Elven one. While plausible, given that High Elves and Wood elves share pretty much same pantheon (and pretty much nothing else, besides heritage and pointy ears), I would have preferred it to be flavored entirely on the Wood Elves, that are one of the most charming and unique races of the Warhammer World. After all the art shown in the official page related to the event definately looks wood elvish and has very little to do with High Elves.
In any case, looks like I have to hurry and complete my Tyrant Armor set. New things to do are showing up on the horizon.
I won't be the only one, by the way, given that a new Mac version of the game has been announced (the Beta is already available). I'm pretty curious to see how the children of Steve Jobs will welcome the game.
No more Yakuza for western gamers?
Matt Furtado of the Examiner just dropped the bomb. During a conversation with a Sega marketing executive (Ray Almeda), he's been flat out told that Yakuza 3 won't be published in the US (which probably excludes Europe as well) because Yakuza 2 only sold about 40000 copies, and this makes them assume that Yakuza 3 won't sell as well.
This is not the first time that I radically disagree with Sega of America's marketing execs. Many of them seem to be of the idea that Japanese games with a strong Japanese flavor wouldn't sell well in the west.
Well, I'm sorry but I have to disagree again. It means to be quite a bit out of touch with the audience to actually miss the fact that the Japanese culture is extremely popular in the west (even thanks to the popularity of the Manga and Anime market). Games retaining a strong Japanese flavor definitely have the potential to sell well, if not better than many western counterparts. Why? Because the market isn't oversaturated by them (while it definitely is oversaturated by the tens of western-made FPSs and TPSs most of which lack any decent storytelling and character development). One of the main reasons why the Playtstation 3 isn't selling as well as it could be is that the brand has always been associated with a good number of quality Japanese games, while now such games are missing, and many Japanese franchises actually migrated to the competition.
But Yakuza 2 sold only 40000 copies in the US.
Before writing off the franchise, though, one should ask himself the reason of such a commercial debacle. Expecially since it's not that hard to actually understand.
First of all, Yakuza 2 was released well into the lifespan of the Playstation 3, when the Playstation 2 was shifting it's target more and more towards casual low-cost gaming. Simply enough, the PS2 was not a console able to grant big sales to that kind of game anymore.
Let's not forget, then, that Yakuza 2 was released in the US a whole two years after it's release in Japan. It was, by all means, quite an old game compared to many newer releases.
Finally, let's get to the third and focal reason. Did you see any real advertisement for the release of Yakuza 2 (or Yakuza at that)? TV ads? Magazines? Let's not even talk about street ads. Zero. Nada. Zilch.
Yakuza 2 (just as much as Yakuza), was released without a scrap of a marketing campaign to help it sell. Many people didn't even know it was released until they actually (and accidentally) saw it on the shelves.
Unfortunately Sega is not new to this kind of problem. It started with the Dreamcast. It's lack of widespread success in the west was mostly due to the lack of advertising. Even Valkyria Chronicles had a seriously lacking marketing compared to the scope of the title.
Now I wonder. How can the marketing executives of Sega of America expect to sell a game that's already old, on a last-generation console without any kind of advertising and marketing campaigns? To be honest I doubt anyone would really expect it to sell well with those premises, despite the undeniable quality of the game. Games don't sell by themselves anymore, and that's any games. Even the biggest franchises struggle when the marketing isn't up to par.
Considering the flashy marketing stunts Sega did in Japan for the launch of Yakuza 3, I find it hard to understand why Sega of America insists on releasing their games without proper advertising campaigns. As much as I find it hard to understand why, given the priemises, the lack of high sales figures surprises them.
I'm almost on the verge of wondering if someone at Sega of America isn't purposedly sending on the shelves Japanese games without the proper advertisement to persuade the Sega Japan's management that they need to concentrate more on western gamers and that Japanese games don't have a market in the west. Of course it's completely absurd, since I doubt people would shoot themselves in the foot, damaging their own results, without an immediate benefit. But some of the honestly questionable marketing policies I described in this post almost brought me to consider that idea.
Maybe they should try releasing an high profile title like Yakuza 3 with the proper advertisement (like they did in Japan), without waiting two years since the original release (it does NOT take two years to work on the localization of ANY game, not even nearly). I'm pretty sure they'd be surprised by the game's performance, expecially given the extremely positive buzz recently given to the franchise by the press (but again, maybe it'd be a good idea to release before the buzz subsides?).
Personally, I'm pretty damn sure it would sell a lot better than absolutely unsightly western-made games like Golden Axe: Beast Rider.
Obviosuly, the comments of all the readers of the sites that reported the news show absolute outrage. People are already starting to talk about petitions and boycotts.
I can only hope this is all a misunderstanding and that Mr. Furtado mistook the personal opinion of Mr. Almeda for the official stance of the company. I asked for a comment over Twitter. We'll have to wait for a possible answer.
This is not the first time that I radically disagree with Sega of America's marketing execs. Many of them seem to be of the idea that Japanese games with a strong Japanese flavor wouldn't sell well in the west.
Well, I'm sorry but I have to disagree again. It means to be quite a bit out of touch with the audience to actually miss the fact that the Japanese culture is extremely popular in the west (even thanks to the popularity of the Manga and Anime market). Games retaining a strong Japanese flavor definitely have the potential to sell well, if not better than many western counterparts. Why? Because the market isn't oversaturated by them (while it definitely is oversaturated by the tens of western-made FPSs and TPSs most of which lack any decent storytelling and character development). One of the main reasons why the Playtstation 3 isn't selling as well as it could be is that the brand has always been associated with a good number of quality Japanese games, while now such games are missing, and many Japanese franchises actually migrated to the competition.
But Yakuza 2 sold only 40000 copies in the US.
Before writing off the franchise, though, one should ask himself the reason of such a commercial debacle. Expecially since it's not that hard to actually understand.
First of all, Yakuza 2 was released well into the lifespan of the Playstation 3, when the Playstation 2 was shifting it's target more and more towards casual low-cost gaming. Simply enough, the PS2 was not a console able to grant big sales to that kind of game anymore.
Let's not forget, then, that Yakuza 2 was released in the US a whole two years after it's release in Japan. It was, by all means, quite an old game compared to many newer releases.
Finally, let's get to the third and focal reason. Did you see any real advertisement for the release of Yakuza 2 (or Yakuza at that)? TV ads? Magazines? Let's not even talk about street ads. Zero. Nada. Zilch.
Yakuza 2 (just as much as Yakuza), was released without a scrap of a marketing campaign to help it sell. Many people didn't even know it was released until they actually (and accidentally) saw it on the shelves.
Unfortunately Sega is not new to this kind of problem. It started with the Dreamcast. It's lack of widespread success in the west was mostly due to the lack of advertising. Even Valkyria Chronicles had a seriously lacking marketing compared to the scope of the title.
Now I wonder. How can the marketing executives of Sega of America expect to sell a game that's already old, on a last-generation console without any kind of advertising and marketing campaigns? To be honest I doubt anyone would really expect it to sell well with those premises, despite the undeniable quality of the game. Games don't sell by themselves anymore, and that's any games. Even the biggest franchises struggle when the marketing isn't up to par.
Considering the flashy marketing stunts Sega did in Japan for the launch of Yakuza 3, I find it hard to understand why Sega of America insists on releasing their games without proper advertising campaigns. As much as I find it hard to understand why, given the priemises, the lack of high sales figures surprises them.
I'm almost on the verge of wondering if someone at Sega of America isn't purposedly sending on the shelves Japanese games without the proper advertisement to persuade the Sega Japan's management that they need to concentrate more on western gamers and that Japanese games don't have a market in the west. Of course it's completely absurd, since I doubt people would shoot themselves in the foot, damaging their own results, without an immediate benefit. But some of the honestly questionable marketing policies I described in this post almost brought me to consider that idea.
Maybe they should try releasing an high profile title like Yakuza 3 with the proper advertisement (like they did in Japan), without waiting two years since the original release (it does NOT take two years to work on the localization of ANY game, not even nearly). I'm pretty sure they'd be surprised by the game's performance, expecially given the extremely positive buzz recently given to the franchise by the press (but again, maybe it'd be a good idea to release before the buzz subsides?).
Personally, I'm pretty damn sure it would sell a lot better than absolutely unsightly western-made games like Golden Axe: Beast Rider.
Obviosuly, the comments of all the readers of the sites that reported the news show absolute outrage. People are already starting to talk about petitions and boycotts.
I can only hope this is all a misunderstanding and that Mr. Furtado mistook the personal opinion of Mr. Almeda for the official stance of the company. I asked for a comment over Twitter. We'll have to wait for a possible answer.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Of sin, retibution and excessive bashing
I think everyone, by now, knows about the ComicCon contest issued by Electronic Arts and temed after their upcoming Dante's Inferno game. It invited the contestants to portray themselves while doing "acts of lust" with a "booth babe".
Of course this caused an enormous outrage that triggered a whole truckton of criticism more or less from everywhere and EA's apologies. Of course such apologies weren't really accepted or even listened by anyone and the bashing went on, and is still going on now.
This post of mine will probably stir some nice, warm hatings aimed in my own direction, but the ones that have read this blog for a long time probably know well that I can't care the less.
Here's, my personal opinion on the whole controversy. EA did a PR blunder, no question about it. It's not the first nor the last we'll see from them or other game developers/publishers. Marketing isn't an exact science, and it happens more often that people think, that an inexperienced and overzelous PR will create an event with the potential to offend some, or many, without even noticing. I did as well, long ago (luckily with much less disastrous and widespread consequences). It's a lesson I learned the hard way.
That said, it's been blown WAY out of proportion.
Why? because for the average bored blogger or twitter looking for attention Electronic Arts is an easy target. What better way to raise the masses than to issue a crusade against the evil giant of the videogaming market? The nemesis of every small and honest developing studio? The cruel mistress that rules them all with her salt-coated whip?
You can be 100% sure that, if the same blunder was made by a small development studio or by one that happens to have the favor of the masses (say Bethesda for instance) the problem would have had less impact than a soap bubble.
But it's EA, so people immediately looked for their handy torch and pitchfork.
What really debaffles me is the lack of coherence in this whole matter.
The contest seemed to be made to appeal to that stereothypical leecherous basement-dwelling otaku/nerd hybrid that can't wait for a better chance to lay his sticky fingers on the luscious body of a booth babe.
It seems to me that the subsequent crusade called on the same specimen of gamer that waits for no better chance than one to look like a little brave Zelda ready to raise his Master Sword of armchair forum bashing and show off while defending the poor vulnerable and fragile booth babe princesses from the evil EA dragon.
Personally, I know quite a few ladies that work at gaming/anime/electronics/car conventions as booth babes, and none of them are fragile or need armchair defenders in any figure or scale. They're quite strong individuals, well aware of their own appeal on the male audience, and well able to hold their own against the occasional idiot that dares to extend his hands inside their personal space.
Sorry if this bursts some bubbles, but a booth babe that lacks this kind of abilities doesn't really last long in that kind of business.
They're no princesses in peril, and if you misbehave around them, you're probably the one that's gonna find himself in trouble.
And that's (besides the patience they have to put up with what is often an unpleasant crowd) exactly the reason why i have the utmost respect for them.
EA has been accused of sexism, commercial exploitation of the female body, up to extremes like "promotion of rape culture", and so forth.
This is kind of funny. The whole concept of "booth babe" (and similar concepts like Race Queens, Hooters girls and so forth), is sexist and an exploitation of the female body. And EA hasn't been the first, nor the last, in this and in other markets, to use the appeal of beautiful ladies to gather attention, in so many ways that one could fill a quite sizeable marketing manual about it (and I don't exclude that one or more already exist). How many "booth dudes" do you see at conventions dedicated to products generally vieved as aimed to a majority of males? Not many, isn't it?
The funny thing is that I'm ready to bet that a very sizeable percentage of the ones that consumed their fingertips while bashing EA over this, did in their mind, exactly the same "acts of lusts" (or much worse) "encouraged" by the contest on an innumerable amount of unknowing booth babes during their years of convention going.
How many of the blogs that raised the torches and the pitchforks against EA, rack up readers during each and every convention by posting whole slews of pictures of seductive booth babes and cosplayers in skimpy clothing?
Even the definition of "booth babe" itself is sexist, as it uses the term "babe", that isn't normally used to refer to ladies whose main point of attraction is above their eyebrows. I found it funny that many bloggers suddenly discovered the funny sounding definition "costumed representatives", to cover their own confortably seated rears with a nice shiny coat of political correctness.
I wonder why, instead of wasting all their energies at bashing EA on what is just a result of sexism in gaming (and not only gaming) conventions, people don't show a little of coherence and start protesting against the real core of the problem, which is the widespread use of booth babes itself.
I'd dare guess that the many males that committed their "acts of bashing" aren't doing that because they definitely enjoy the commercial exploitation of the lovely bodies of the ladies in question, and if such a practice was to be eliminated, they would be deprieved of a moment of delight for their eyes. On the other hand the ladies that are in such business and that protested would lose a job.
Protesting is nice, as long as it's convenient, I guess.
Let's not even start about the hundreds over hundreds of videogames that exploited, since the start of the electronics era, the image of the scantly clad female body in order to sell more copies.
Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't even dream to protest against that (given that I personally don't have any problems at admitting that I enjoy it myself), but I didn't blow the Dante's Inferno matter out of proportion as well.
Unfortunately coherence is a rare merchandise nowadays.
As a final note, I found extremely funny that PixelPoet of Gaygamer.net sent in a commendable entry of himself with one of the amazingly few "booth dudes", but when he got chosen as runner up for the contest, he decided to turn it into his own PR stunt, refusing EA usage of the picture and publicly posting a sermon in which he basically explains us how much EA sucks and how much he thinks that he's better than them (basically lowering himself to the level he's criticizing, if not worse).
He seems to like to be "cheeky". Then I'll allow myself to be cheeky as well. I may be wrong but the the booth guy in the picture doesn't exactly seem overjoyed about the attentions and physical contact he's receiving. He looks, indeed, quite embarassed (I'd be embarassed too if I was suddenly approached by someone with that kind of fashion sense...). Is PixelPoet going to protest against himself for bothering the poor man?
Too bad, because he started nicely with that picture but the final stretch was run quite poorly.
Because, of course, bashing on the evil giant is easy. It's a big target, after all.
Of course this caused an enormous outrage that triggered a whole truckton of criticism more or less from everywhere and EA's apologies. Of course such apologies weren't really accepted or even listened by anyone and the bashing went on, and is still going on now.
This post of mine will probably stir some nice, warm hatings aimed in my own direction, but the ones that have read this blog for a long time probably know well that I can't care the less.
Here's, my personal opinion on the whole controversy. EA did a PR blunder, no question about it. It's not the first nor the last we'll see from them or other game developers/publishers. Marketing isn't an exact science, and it happens more often that people think, that an inexperienced and overzelous PR will create an event with the potential to offend some, or many, without even noticing. I did as well, long ago (luckily with much less disastrous and widespread consequences). It's a lesson I learned the hard way.
That said, it's been blown WAY out of proportion.
Why? because for the average bored blogger or twitter looking for attention Electronic Arts is an easy target. What better way to raise the masses than to issue a crusade against the evil giant of the videogaming market? The nemesis of every small and honest developing studio? The cruel mistress that rules them all with her salt-coated whip?
You can be 100% sure that, if the same blunder was made by a small development studio or by one that happens to have the favor of the masses (say Bethesda for instance) the problem would have had less impact than a soap bubble.
But it's EA, so people immediately looked for their handy torch and pitchfork.
What really debaffles me is the lack of coherence in this whole matter.
The contest seemed to be made to appeal to that stereothypical leecherous basement-dwelling otaku/nerd hybrid that can't wait for a better chance to lay his sticky fingers on the luscious body of a booth babe.
It seems to me that the subsequent crusade called on the same specimen of gamer that waits for no better chance than one to look like a little brave Zelda ready to raise his Master Sword of armchair forum bashing and show off while defending the poor vulnerable and fragile booth babe princesses from the evil EA dragon.
Personally, I know quite a few ladies that work at gaming/anime/electronics/car conventions as booth babes, and none of them are fragile or need armchair defenders in any figure or scale. They're quite strong individuals, well aware of their own appeal on the male audience, and well able to hold their own against the occasional idiot that dares to extend his hands inside their personal space.
Sorry if this bursts some bubbles, but a booth babe that lacks this kind of abilities doesn't really last long in that kind of business.
They're no princesses in peril, and if you misbehave around them, you're probably the one that's gonna find himself in trouble.
And that's (besides the patience they have to put up with what is often an unpleasant crowd) exactly the reason why i have the utmost respect for them.
EA has been accused of sexism, commercial exploitation of the female body, up to extremes like "promotion of rape culture", and so forth.
This is kind of funny. The whole concept of "booth babe" (and similar concepts like Race Queens, Hooters girls and so forth), is sexist and an exploitation of the female body. And EA hasn't been the first, nor the last, in this and in other markets, to use the appeal of beautiful ladies to gather attention, in so many ways that one could fill a quite sizeable marketing manual about it (and I don't exclude that one or more already exist). How many "booth dudes" do you see at conventions dedicated to products generally vieved as aimed to a majority of males? Not many, isn't it?
The funny thing is that I'm ready to bet that a very sizeable percentage of the ones that consumed their fingertips while bashing EA over this, did in their mind, exactly the same "acts of lusts" (or much worse) "encouraged" by the contest on an innumerable amount of unknowing booth babes during their years of convention going.
How many of the blogs that raised the torches and the pitchforks against EA, rack up readers during each and every convention by posting whole slews of pictures of seductive booth babes and cosplayers in skimpy clothing?
Even the definition of "booth babe" itself is sexist, as it uses the term "babe", that isn't normally used to refer to ladies whose main point of attraction is above their eyebrows. I found it funny that many bloggers suddenly discovered the funny sounding definition "costumed representatives", to cover their own confortably seated rears with a nice shiny coat of political correctness.
I wonder why, instead of wasting all their energies at bashing EA on what is just a result of sexism in gaming (and not only gaming) conventions, people don't show a little of coherence and start protesting against the real core of the problem, which is the widespread use of booth babes itself.
I'd dare guess that the many males that committed their "acts of bashing" aren't doing that because they definitely enjoy the commercial exploitation of the lovely bodies of the ladies in question, and if such a practice was to be eliminated, they would be deprieved of a moment of delight for their eyes. On the other hand the ladies that are in such business and that protested would lose a job.
Protesting is nice, as long as it's convenient, I guess.
Let's not even start about the hundreds over hundreds of videogames that exploited, since the start of the electronics era, the image of the scantly clad female body in order to sell more copies.
Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't even dream to protest against that (given that I personally don't have any problems at admitting that I enjoy it myself), but I didn't blow the Dante's Inferno matter out of proportion as well.
Unfortunately coherence is a rare merchandise nowadays.
As a final note, I found extremely funny that PixelPoet of Gaygamer.net sent in a commendable entry of himself with one of the amazingly few "booth dudes", but when he got chosen as runner up for the contest, he decided to turn it into his own PR stunt, refusing EA usage of the picture and publicly posting a sermon in which he basically explains us how much EA sucks and how much he thinks that he's better than them (basically lowering himself to the level he's criticizing, if not worse).
He seems to like to be "cheeky". Then I'll allow myself to be cheeky as well. I may be wrong but the the booth guy in the picture doesn't exactly seem overjoyed about the attentions and physical contact he's receiving. He looks, indeed, quite embarassed (I'd be embarassed too if I was suddenly approached by someone with that kind of fashion sense...). Is PixelPoet going to protest against himself for bothering the poor man?
Too bad, because he started nicely with that picture but the final stretch was run quite poorly.
Because, of course, bashing on the evil giant is easy. It's a big target, after all.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Il-2 Sturmovik: Birds of Prey will have DLC planes
One of the most interesting characteristics of the old Il-2 Sturmovik flight simulators was the sheer amount of planes that the developer added to it over the years via patches or expansions. Many old fans like me actually wondered if 1C Games was going to do the same with Birds of Prey.
Well, good news! Answering to a message of mine on Twitter (i'm starting to love that lil website, I will admit to it) the developer confirmed that Birds of Prey will indeed provide DLC planes down the line. So, if you're sad because you're favourite warbird isn't included in the initial release, you can rest at ease, there might still be some hope for you (and me, since my beloved Macchi MC.205 isn't there).
The only thing that still saddens me is the divide that will be created in the existing community by the game running on two different consoles. I can already see heated discussions between the roster of glorious old squadrons on which platform would be the best to be adopted "officially", and I'm pretty sure many will split up for good. It's a sad consequence of the market of nowadays and the lack of a PC version, I'm afraid, but we'll have to live with it.
Well, good news! Answering to a message of mine on Twitter (i'm starting to love that lil website, I will admit to it) the developer confirmed that Birds of Prey will indeed provide DLC planes down the line. So, if you're sad because you're favourite warbird isn't included in the initial release, you can rest at ease, there might still be some hope for you (and me, since my beloved Macchi MC.205 isn't there).
The only thing that still saddens me is the divide that will be created in the existing community by the game running on two different consoles. I can already see heated discussions between the roster of glorious old squadrons on which platform would be the best to be adopted "officially", and I'm pretty sure many will split up for good. It's a sad consequence of the market of nowadays and the lack of a PC version, I'm afraid, but we'll have to live with it.
Monday, July 27, 2009
More info about Valkyria Chronicles 2
Sega finally released some more information about Valkyria Chronicles 2, and as promised I'm feeding your hungry minds what I managed to gather:
First of all, something about the main characters of the story (the transliteration of the names may not be correct, we'll have to wait for the official one, unfortunately):
Aban Hadens, 17 years old: Aban is brash and spirited youngster that entered the Academy because of the dying wish of his order brother. He's hot-blooded and his youth is easily seen through his actions. He often acts reacting to the situation at hand and he's well known for doing it before actually thinking it over
Jerry, 17 years old: He's a young Darksen with the dream of becoming an hero, and Aban's best friend. His passions are normally kept well hidden behind his cool behavioir. While amazed by Aban's energy, their tactical ideas often collide.
Colette Kolhaas, 17 years old: she's a somewhat clumsy girl that aims to become a medic. Despite her clumsiness, she's serious and very focused on her work. She often influences the mood around her and laughs easily, often ening up causing some kind of trouble
The Mistery Girl: Her true affiliation is unknown, but she carries a shield and a whip-lance that identify her as a Valkyria. How will she influence Aban's story?
Something more has been said about the story itself.
Just before the civil war against the Gallian Revolutionary Army starts Aban is made class president of the academy's class G, which is made of the school's most bothersome students. That forces him to take care of strategy and tactics, in which he's not that well grounded. But with the help of his friend Jerry he'll manage to motivate his class to fight as one, facing the enemy and the rivalry against class A, made of the school's elite students.
While the gameplay will remain pretty much faithful to the BLiTZ system used for the previous Valkyria game, a few innovations will be brought to the table: the kind of weapons, training and customization options have been increased for both infantry and tanks (and infantry will even change it's looks depending on what kind of equipment they're given).
In addition to this, a new gauge called "Morale" has been added to the UI, hinting to the fact that the player will also have to take care of the soldier's mental condition in addition to the physical ones.
While in the first game battles were fought on single maps, it seems that the sequel will feature multi-stage maps that will probably increase the complexity of the action.
Finally (and this will for sure please many), Sega announced the possibility of online play (further features are still unknown) via the PSP ad-hoc mode.
That's all for today. If you want to see more pictures you'll find some at Game Watch (the site is in Japanese). Unfortunately they're pretty small, but that's PSP resolution for you :D
One thing is for sure, for a portable game they look quite great.
First of all, something about the main characters of the story (the transliteration of the names may not be correct, we'll have to wait for the official one, unfortunately):
Aban Hadens, 17 years old: Aban is brash and spirited youngster that entered the Academy because of the dying wish of his order brother. He's hot-blooded and his youth is easily seen through his actions. He often acts reacting to the situation at hand and he's well known for doing it before actually thinking it over
Jerry, 17 years old: He's a young Darksen with the dream of becoming an hero, and Aban's best friend. His passions are normally kept well hidden behind his cool behavioir. While amazed by Aban's energy, their tactical ideas often collide.
Colette Kolhaas, 17 years old: she's a somewhat clumsy girl that aims to become a medic. Despite her clumsiness, she's serious and very focused on her work. She often influences the mood around her and laughs easily, often ening up causing some kind of trouble
The Mistery Girl: Her true affiliation is unknown, but she carries a shield and a whip-lance that identify her as a Valkyria. How will she influence Aban's story?
Something more has been said about the story itself.
Just before the civil war against the Gallian Revolutionary Army starts Aban is made class president of the academy's class G, which is made of the school's most bothersome students. That forces him to take care of strategy and tactics, in which he's not that well grounded. But with the help of his friend Jerry he'll manage to motivate his class to fight as one, facing the enemy and the rivalry against class A, made of the school's elite students.
While the gameplay will remain pretty much faithful to the BLiTZ system used for the previous Valkyria game, a few innovations will be brought to the table: the kind of weapons, training and customization options have been increased for both infantry and tanks (and infantry will even change it's looks depending on what kind of equipment they're given).
In addition to this, a new gauge called "Morale" has been added to the UI, hinting to the fact that the player will also have to take care of the soldier's mental condition in addition to the physical ones.
While in the first game battles were fought on single maps, it seems that the sequel will feature multi-stage maps that will probably increase the complexity of the action.
Finally (and this will for sure please many), Sega announced the possibility of online play (further features are still unknown) via the PSP ad-hoc mode.
That's all for today. If you want to see more pictures you'll find some at Game Watch (the site is in Japanese). Unfortunately they're pretty small, but that's PSP resolution for you :D
One thing is for sure, for a portable game they look quite great.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Are retro games better than modern games?
Once in a while journalists find themselves with absolutely nothing to write about. When that happens thay'll often recur to dummy topics to fill a few pages and do their job with the least possible effort.
In more or less all branches of journalism the "old times were SO much better" is possibly the most effective between such dummy topics.
Gaming is no exception. So when a journalist writes a dissertation on how retrogaming rules it all, it's pretty much safe to assume that he had nothing better to say to fill those few pages and earn his salary.
It's not that I don't like retrogaming. I love my NES, my SNES, my Genesis and so forth, but I find the argument about retro games being so much better than modern games to be flawed at best, nonsensical at worst.
The last (at least to my knowledge) of such articles was written by Blake Snow on the MSNBC website.
Snow starts with a pretty sensationalistic "I hate to break it to you, but you’re wasting your money on so called “next-gen” video games."
If he could have been more condescending than that, I doubt I know how.
But let's move on to the reasons why he thinks next-gen videogames are so bad compared to retro ones:
1: They play longer
Really? Do they? Sure, some retro games were definitely long. But there are just as much modern games that are just as long. Most current RPGs play for over 40-50 hours, and the introduction of free roaming sandbox games has brought to the table games with an almost infinite playtime, well beyond the completion of the main story.
Let's add to it the fact that DLCs often offer lots of additional gameplay and let's not forget the introduction of online multiplayer, that adds a quite sizeable amount of replayability.
I'd venture to say that, in average, modern games have the potential to be played as long or longer than retro games.
Let's talk about retro games. Are we sure that they were that long in average? Really, really sure? Mr. Snow probably forgets that a large chunk of oldies but goldies were direct or semi-direct ports from arcade games, which were purposedly designed to last just a few hours, because, you know, arcades close at night, and the player had to be given a chance to finish the game during the opening hours. Most of those games SEEMED to last longer simply because of the lack of an efficent save function, that forced the gamer to restart from scratch when he ran out of coins.
This doesn't mean that the actual game lasted longer. It simply artificially forced you to play it more. In the end it depends on the genre more than on the time in which a game is conceived. RPGs last long now, as they lasted long then. Action, fighting and platfiorm games were short in average back then, and they are the same now.
2: They're more challenging
Again: really? While many retro games were made artificially more difficult to force you to put more coins into the devil's machine, challenge is definitely still present in modern games. The only difference is that, with time, the ability to select the difficulty level of a game became more and more widespread. Is it a bad thing? I wouldn't say so. No one prevents the hardcore gamer from, you know... executing the two button presses to change the difficulty level to the hardest. You think modern games are unchallenging, mr. Snow? Try upping the difficulty. It isn't that hard.
3: They ("are" I guess...) more straightforward
So, our dear mr. Snow thinks that having a complex story with plot twists and that, oh my god! Makes you doubt about what side you're on, is a flaw.
Well, I'm sorry Mr Snow. Would you say the same about movies, or books? Storytelling has always been an important element in videogames. Actually (and unfortuntely) we're now living a moment in which deep and convoluted stories are too often neglected by many developers. We have even too much shovelware in which the gameplay is excessively straightforward.
This not to mention the undeniable fact that convoluted storylines were well present in older games as well. The Final Fantasy series wasn't born yesterday, and there are hundreds of similar examples of deep storytelling in old games. Oops.
Why can't you just save the princess? Maybe because actually knowing the reasons why such princess has been kidnapped is better than just having a totally flat and generic bad guy wake up one morning and decide he wants to kidnap a totally generic and random princess?
4: They're more durable
Are we talking about games or hardware here? Because it seems to me that someone is getting confused.
In any case, while modern gaming hardware might be a tad more brittle, you won't see that many NES controller that survived unscathed being thrown against a wall.
This not to mention another simple but very important fact. While modern gaming systems are more prone to damage, when you DID damage a console in the times of the NES or SNES you were in serious trouble. Overcomplicated or even non-existant warranty systems meant that more often than not you were better off buying a new console than waiting for it to be repaired or replaced. And back in the day consoles weren't cheap.
Now, if your Xbox 360 gets the red ring of death, you'll receive a new or repaired one in a few days, with very little hassle and for free.
5: They're more creative
Mr. Snow seems to be pushing the flawed argument that having less tools to design a game means that such development will automatically involve more creativity.
Going by the same reasoning, a street painter that uses only chalks would be more creative that Michelangelo, that had a wide array of paints to work with while he was painting the Sistine Chapel.
Interesting.
Then he goes into a climax of logical fallacies with a "But overall, next-gen games are known for being more insipid, and retro ones much more memorable."
Known by whom?
First of all, some older games are memorable, because, yes, they are in the realm of memories. I'm pretty ready to bet that in fifteen years from now just as many modern games will be considered just as memorable as the ones that now are considered retro.
Moreover, sure, many retro games are memorable (in a wide sea of junk. But of course the junk isn't remembered, and as such isn't considered). Just a many "next-gen" games can be considered just as memorable. Masterpieces like Metal Gear Solid 4, Mass Effect. Call of Duty 4, Valkyria Chronicles, Fallout 3, Ace Combat 5... I could go on listing very memorable games for hours.
The only real difference is that the junk and shovelware that accompanies such titles in the next-gen market is still in front of our eyes every single time we enter a gaming shop. The junk and shovelware that accompanied the memorable games in the age of retrogaming is now forgotten (since it wasn't memorable), leaving us only the fond memories of the good games.
Sure, in his defense Mr. Snow wrote a previous article in which he listed his five reasons why modern games beat retro ones (and such list was equally condescending, and pretty much nonsensical), but it doesn't change the fact that this article tries to feed us a lot of educated guesses and cheap "popular wisdom" that have very little to do with actual gaming.
Between retro games there were a lot of memorable gems. There are just as many now. Better graphics doesn't mean less creativity, nor more creativity. It means just that, better graphics.
It's really a pretty simple concept: the quality of a game isn't linked to the period in which it has been developed or published.
So, well, I hate to have to "break it" to you, Mr. Snow. The money we spend on "next-gen" hardware and software is quite well spent. Next time you find yourself with nothing interesting to write about, try global warming. That one always works.
In more or less all branches of journalism the "old times were SO much better" is possibly the most effective between such dummy topics.
Gaming is no exception. So when a journalist writes a dissertation on how retrogaming rules it all, it's pretty much safe to assume that he had nothing better to say to fill those few pages and earn his salary.
It's not that I don't like retrogaming. I love my NES, my SNES, my Genesis and so forth, but I find the argument about retro games being so much better than modern games to be flawed at best, nonsensical at worst.
The last (at least to my knowledge) of such articles was written by Blake Snow on the MSNBC website.
Snow starts with a pretty sensationalistic "I hate to break it to you, but you’re wasting your money on so called “next-gen” video games."
If he could have been more condescending than that, I doubt I know how.
But let's move on to the reasons why he thinks next-gen videogames are so bad compared to retro ones:
1: They play longer
Really? Do they? Sure, some retro games were definitely long. But there are just as much modern games that are just as long. Most current RPGs play for over 40-50 hours, and the introduction of free roaming sandbox games has brought to the table games with an almost infinite playtime, well beyond the completion of the main story.
Let's add to it the fact that DLCs often offer lots of additional gameplay and let's not forget the introduction of online multiplayer, that adds a quite sizeable amount of replayability.
I'd venture to say that, in average, modern games have the potential to be played as long or longer than retro games.
Let's talk about retro games. Are we sure that they were that long in average? Really, really sure? Mr. Snow probably forgets that a large chunk of oldies but goldies were direct or semi-direct ports from arcade games, which were purposedly designed to last just a few hours, because, you know, arcades close at night, and the player had to be given a chance to finish the game during the opening hours. Most of those games SEEMED to last longer simply because of the lack of an efficent save function, that forced the gamer to restart from scratch when he ran out of coins.
This doesn't mean that the actual game lasted longer. It simply artificially forced you to play it more. In the end it depends on the genre more than on the time in which a game is conceived. RPGs last long now, as they lasted long then. Action, fighting and platfiorm games were short in average back then, and they are the same now.
2: They're more challenging
Again: really? While many retro games were made artificially more difficult to force you to put more coins into the devil's machine, challenge is definitely still present in modern games. The only difference is that, with time, the ability to select the difficulty level of a game became more and more widespread. Is it a bad thing? I wouldn't say so. No one prevents the hardcore gamer from, you know... executing the two button presses to change the difficulty level to the hardest. You think modern games are unchallenging, mr. Snow? Try upping the difficulty. It isn't that hard.
3: They ("are" I guess...) more straightforward
So, our dear mr. Snow thinks that having a complex story with plot twists and that, oh my god! Makes you doubt about what side you're on, is a flaw.
Well, I'm sorry Mr Snow. Would you say the same about movies, or books? Storytelling has always been an important element in videogames. Actually (and unfortuntely) we're now living a moment in which deep and convoluted stories are too often neglected by many developers. We have even too much shovelware in which the gameplay is excessively straightforward.
This not to mention the undeniable fact that convoluted storylines were well present in older games as well. The Final Fantasy series wasn't born yesterday, and there are hundreds of similar examples of deep storytelling in old games. Oops.
Why can't you just save the princess? Maybe because actually knowing the reasons why such princess has been kidnapped is better than just having a totally flat and generic bad guy wake up one morning and decide he wants to kidnap a totally generic and random princess?
4: They're more durable
Are we talking about games or hardware here? Because it seems to me that someone is getting confused.
In any case, while modern gaming hardware might be a tad more brittle, you won't see that many NES controller that survived unscathed being thrown against a wall.
This not to mention another simple but very important fact. While modern gaming systems are more prone to damage, when you DID damage a console in the times of the NES or SNES you were in serious trouble. Overcomplicated or even non-existant warranty systems meant that more often than not you were better off buying a new console than waiting for it to be repaired or replaced. And back in the day consoles weren't cheap.
Now, if your Xbox 360 gets the red ring of death, you'll receive a new or repaired one in a few days, with very little hassle and for free.
5: They're more creative
Mr. Snow seems to be pushing the flawed argument that having less tools to design a game means that such development will automatically involve more creativity.
Going by the same reasoning, a street painter that uses only chalks would be more creative that Michelangelo, that had a wide array of paints to work with while he was painting the Sistine Chapel.
Interesting.
Then he goes into a climax of logical fallacies with a "But overall, next-gen games are known for being more insipid, and retro ones much more memorable."
Known by whom?
First of all, some older games are memorable, because, yes, they are in the realm of memories. I'm pretty ready to bet that in fifteen years from now just as many modern games will be considered just as memorable as the ones that now are considered retro.
Moreover, sure, many retro games are memorable (in a wide sea of junk. But of course the junk isn't remembered, and as such isn't considered). Just a many "next-gen" games can be considered just as memorable. Masterpieces like Metal Gear Solid 4, Mass Effect. Call of Duty 4, Valkyria Chronicles, Fallout 3, Ace Combat 5... I could go on listing very memorable games for hours.
The only real difference is that the junk and shovelware that accompanies such titles in the next-gen market is still in front of our eyes every single time we enter a gaming shop. The junk and shovelware that accompanied the memorable games in the age of retrogaming is now forgotten (since it wasn't memorable), leaving us only the fond memories of the good games.
Sure, in his defense Mr. Snow wrote a previous article in which he listed his five reasons why modern games beat retro ones (and such list was equally condescending, and pretty much nonsensical), but it doesn't change the fact that this article tries to feed us a lot of educated guesses and cheap "popular wisdom" that have very little to do with actual gaming.
Between retro games there were a lot of memorable gems. There are just as many now. Better graphics doesn't mean less creativity, nor more creativity. It means just that, better graphics.
It's really a pretty simple concept: the quality of a game isn't linked to the period in which it has been developed or published.
So, well, I hate to have to "break it" to you, Mr. Snow. The money we spend on "next-gen" hardware and software is quite well spent. Next time you find yourself with nothing interesting to write about, try global warming. That one always works.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
The Korean Invasion
While the budding gaming industry of the Chinese giant struggles a bit to expand, expecially due to the absurd regulations to which it's subject (World of Warcraft's case still didn't see a conclusion yet), Korea is a true growing giant in the asian gaming market (on Japan's side) and in the worldwide market as well.
One of the main reasons of such success is probably the talent of some Korean illustrators and character designers, that managed to pitch a style that's partly reminiscent of manga (with some prominent differences) and extremely easy on the eyes to the world's attention.
Names like Juno Jeong (Lineage II and Dragoneer's Aria) or Hyung-tae Kim (the MagnaCarta series and Blade & Soul) are already well established in the videogaming industry, besides quite a few others.
At the beginning it was mostly MMORPGs, that seem to be the true passion of many Korean developers, like NCsoft and Joymax. Games like Lineage II, Silkroad Online, Rappelz, Shaiya, Rohan Online already had a strong penetration in the western gaming market, even due to their free to play business model. They just encourntered some resistance due to their (for some) excessively grindy gameplay that often turns off the western gamer.
That's not all, though, as some Korean artists and developer found prominence with some single player productions. The MagnaCarta series has been quite appreciated even in the west.
This fall we'll see the release of two prominent Korean games, that will probably increase the popularity of the Korean gaming industry even further. One is Aion: The tower of Eternity (I still didn't talk much about it because i didn't get my hands on it long enough to make a judgement, but as of now the first impression is pretty positive), NCsoft's new brainchild, developed to appeal asian and western gamers alike (is it possible? But it seems to be less grindy, and for once, it won't be free to play, so it may definitely succeed). The other is MagnaCarta 2 for Xbox 360, developed by Softmax and published by Banpresto (and by Namco Bandai both in the US and Europe this fall, even if the only official date is the American one: October the 13th). I'm waiting quite eagerly for this one, since I really like Hyung-tae Kim's character design, and the story seems quite intriguing. Hopefully we'll get it in europe without too much delay compared to the US, but "Fall 2009" can't be too far behind October the 13th.
In any case Korea is now definitely another important pole of game development. I can't say I'm unhappy about it. The gaming industry needs another intake of asian taste, since western developers still tend (besides a few prominent cases) to neglect too much the story aspect of their games. Can't wait too see what else they have in store for us.
One of the main reasons of such success is probably the talent of some Korean illustrators and character designers, that managed to pitch a style that's partly reminiscent of manga (with some prominent differences) and extremely easy on the eyes to the world's attention.
Names like Juno Jeong (Lineage II and Dragoneer's Aria) or Hyung-tae Kim (the MagnaCarta series and Blade & Soul) are already well established in the videogaming industry, besides quite a few others.
At the beginning it was mostly MMORPGs, that seem to be the true passion of many Korean developers, like NCsoft and Joymax. Games like Lineage II, Silkroad Online, Rappelz, Shaiya, Rohan Online already had a strong penetration in the western gaming market, even due to their free to play business model. They just encourntered some resistance due to their (for some) excessively grindy gameplay that often turns off the western gamer.
That's not all, though, as some Korean artists and developer found prominence with some single player productions. The MagnaCarta series has been quite appreciated even in the west.
This fall we'll see the release of two prominent Korean games, that will probably increase the popularity of the Korean gaming industry even further. One is Aion: The tower of Eternity (I still didn't talk much about it because i didn't get my hands on it long enough to make a judgement, but as of now the first impression is pretty positive), NCsoft's new brainchild, developed to appeal asian and western gamers alike (is it possible? But it seems to be less grindy, and for once, it won't be free to play, so it may definitely succeed). The other is MagnaCarta 2 for Xbox 360, developed by Softmax and published by Banpresto (and by Namco Bandai both in the US and Europe this fall, even if the only official date is the American one: October the 13th). I'm waiting quite eagerly for this one, since I really like Hyung-tae Kim's character design, and the story seems quite intriguing. Hopefully we'll get it in europe without too much delay compared to the US, but "Fall 2009" can't be too far behind October the 13th.
In any case Korea is now definitely another important pole of game development. I can't say I'm unhappy about it. The gaming industry needs another intake of asian taste, since western developers still tend (besides a few prominent cases) to neglect too much the story aspect of their games. Can't wait too see what else they have in store for us.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Il-2 Sturmovik returns: What can we expect?
There has been a time in which every night I took off to the frigid skies of Russia on my Bf-109, leading my squadron to victory against my allied enemies.
That time was towards the end of the golden age of PC flight simulation, when the Il-2 series, ranging from the first Il-2 Sturmovik to Pacific Fighters, allowed thousands of virtual pilots to fight it out online in an extremely realistic environment and, at last, with a good netcode that allowed for little lag and lots of fun.
The last game of the Il-2 series has been under the radar of most gamers for a long time, after an initial announcement that didn't exactly rock the world, until 1C Games recently allowed several gaming journalists to try it first hand. Now I can definitely say that many are excited about it, because Il-2 Sturmovik: Birds of Prey promises to be the first true combat flight simulator of console gaming's history.
You poissibly already read some articles about it, and since I didn't yet get my greedy hands on the game, I can't add much to them, features-wise. Though, having played to the Il-2 series for years, I think I can try and give you an overview of what we can expect and what sensations you will feel when given free reign of a faithfully simulated world war 2 flying beast.
First of all, let's put this aside, my dear console gamers. Do not even consider the "arcade" and "realistic" (yeah, sure) mode. The only mode that will be really worth to be played will be the simulation mode. That's where Il-2 sturmovik always gave it's best, and that's where the level of challenge will promise the real rewards when you master it.
That's why here I will talk only about the simulation mode, anything else isn't much different from your usual Ace Combat game, and doesn't really need to be introduced.
Maybe you can use the two inferior modes to get some practice and learn the basics, but the earlier you start learning the hard way, the earlier you'll master the hundreds of nuances and caveats of the Il-2 flight models (that according to 1C are the same of the PC games, which is great).
After all, If I can learn to aim with a Joypad (and after a few days with battlefield 1943, people are already afraid of my sniping. I honestly thought I was hopeless), you can learn to handle a fighter at simulation difficulty in Il-2.
Also, you'll soon learn that the single player campaigns are fun, but are nothing else than a prelude to the real game, and that's online, against other human players, so that's where this article will focus.
Let's start with one of the most important elements of Il-2. Forget about external views. Forget about panning your camera around to see if someone is on your tail. No chance.
In the simulation mode of Il-2 your only visual mode is from inside the cockpit. This means that a big part of your field of vision will be occupied by the cockpit's frame and by the gauges from which your life will depend.
You will indeed be able to turn your head around inside the cockpit, but that's it. Most planes will have a big metal hard plate behind your head that will severely hamper your ability to look directly behind you.
Oh, and since i spoke about gauges. Forget about HUDs that tell you your altitude or your speed. You'll have to actually learn reading the gauges and gather the essential data from them.
You're probably asking yourself why I seem so happy about it. That's indeed pretty easy. Because that's fun!
Real World war two pilots had a motto: "the enemy that you didn't see will be the one to shot you down" That worked (and will work) great in Il-2. Just imagine spotting a lone enemy fighter, slowly and carefully getting on his tail, making sure to skillfully keep your plane into his blind spot. Then, after a few minutes of that slow, peculiar formation, you finally manage to get him solidly in your reticle at 150 feet of distance and pull the trigger for just two seconds (don't even think about holding the trigger too long, ammo are horribly limited, like in the real world). Three little explosions at the root of his wings, and the enemy falls to the ground with his wing precisely ripped off.
Taking by surprise and being taken by surprise is the bread and water of the Il-2 virtual pilot. It adds a sensation of thrill that no other combat flight simulator ever gave, and quite often, if you aren't good, the only warning you have before the screen goes black, is the scare you get when you hear and see the cannon rounds streaming around your plane. You allowed someone to get in your blind spot. Bad for you :D
That links with another important element of Il-2: teamwork. The only way not to have a blind spot is to fly formation. To have a reliable wingman watching your tail while you watch his.
Of course flying formation, keeping speed and manouvering syncronized, is something only top pilots can accomplish, expecially in combat. But when you see four planes flying in a perfect Shwarm formation, well, that's a sight to behold, and it's incredibly rewarding when one of such planes is yours.
Creating a working squadron able to effectively communicate and to keep coordination during a dogfight is the true key to winning air battles in the skies of virtual world war two. Veteral players of Call of Duty and the other squad-based FPSs will feel right at home there. If they'll be able to take off, of course.
This is also crucial for identifying who is actually a friend or a foe, because yeah, there are no blue and red dots. Friends and foe have only a way of identification, the shape of their plane (which is often hard to make out from afar), their markings, and communication with your team mates. It's always crucial to make sure that communication lets you know the relative position of your wingmen to you, so that any plane that isn't theirs, even if too far to actually distinguish it's shape, is potentially an enemy.
By the way, forget about the word "balancing". This is war, and if war pitches you against planes that are superior to yours, you'll just have to make do. There won't be any unrealistic help to make sure that your plane will always be up to par with it's oposition.
This brings us to one of the most interesting elements of 1C games' realistic flight models. Each plane will have it's strenghts and weaknesses, and you'll have to make sure to learn them and use them against your opponents, avoiding to fall into their traps, because, of course, they'll try to do the same with you.
To make an example, if you're flying an Hurricane, which is a plane that relies mainly on manuverability, but is a lil weak in top speed and climbing ratem and meet an enemy in a Focke Wulf, which is very powerful, but turns poorly, you'll have to try and lure your opponent in a close pitched turn dogfight, sooner or later he'll fail to retain his speed while turning and will have to straighten his course or stall. That's when you'll be in perfect position to fill his rear with lead.
On the other hand, if you're in a very fast fighter that climbs great and meet a slow and manouverable one, you'll have to avoid turning as much as possible, climb the most that you can while leaving him behind, turn around when he's far enough and can't catch up, and perform a Boom 'n Zoom attack while he'll be struggling to stay in the air to follow you with his sub-par engine.
Of course it's much more complex than that. You'll have to keep in mind your plane's strenghts and weakness against every other one on the field, and every time you'll have to devise the perfect strategy to use your plane's strong points and make his inconsequential. There's a lot more brain work to do as opposed as the usual console FPS. That's where, at least at the beginning, people used to flight simulators will eat console gamers with limited experience for breakfast.
But gamers are fast to catch up, and I'm pretty sure that the ones that won't give up out of frustration for being shot down again and again by enemies that maybe they didn't even see, will soon give life to awesome battles in the sky.
Another important element that differs a lot from the usual console game, is that you will have to nurture and care for your plane. Most of the time, in videogames, you will see people doing plainly suicide actions that will make them come out seriously damaged. That's no real problem for them, because damage has no other consequence than a life bar decreasing.
In Il-2 there's no life bar. The damage you receive isn't linear. You can be hit with a whole bunch of explosive lead in an unimportant area of your plane and suffer just for some minor drag due to the holes, or a single well aimed cannon shot in your fuel tank can turn you into a ball of fire. That's why you won't see veteran pilots running at each other head on. By doing that they expose their engine to enemy fire, and even if they're lucky enough to shot down the enemy and still be in the air afterwards, any damage to their engine will seriously put their mission in jeopardy. When you start smoking the only real solution is to turn tail and return to base, or to look for a field to try a crashlanding and bring at least your (virtual) life home.
I already talked about limited ammo, but most probably won't have figure HOW limited such ammo is. Your most powerful weapon (cannons) normally have only a few seconds of continued firing in them, so using them well is crucial. You'll see yourself firing only when the enemy is very near and the angle of attack is as straight as possible. 0ften you'll be sweating to gain an inch over an enemy, and then an inch more, with your trigger finger trembling and your mind repeating "just a little more...".
When your cannons run out, then you'll be left only with your machine guns (if your plane has any), also called "peashooters", with which you'll have quite an hard time being lethal, forced to achieve difficult headshots into the enemy cockpit, or to aim only for the enemy's most vital areas.
Hoperfully i didn't scare you too much. Yes, it's hard, and it requires a lot of skill. Probably it will redefine many people's very idea of "skill" in videogames. The only thing that come close are racing games at maximum difficulty.
Did you think that racking up headshots in an FPS was skillful? Did you think that dancing around an enemy in a PvP MMO was skillful? Think again.
But as all tasks that require lots of skill, playing games like IL-2 is also extremely rewarding when you finally manage to master ithem. When your kills begin to be in the double digits you'll really start feeling like an ace.
Now that the harcore mumbo jumbo is out of the way, let's talk briefly about a efw things that will for sure interest casuals and hardcore as well. You can forget the bland environments made of satellite pictures console flight games got you used to. In IL-2 cities aren't simply painted into the ground with a few cubes to represent some of them like in Ace Combat. Every single building is 3D and modeled (Sure, not in perfect detail, but detailed enough to fly low and still love the environment around you). While most console flight combat games are modeled to be seen from high altitude, in Il-2 both high altitude and low-altitude combat have the same importance, and as such are equally detailed (and your plane will behave differently depending on how high you are flying). Trees, bridges, ports, landmarks, everything will contribute to make Il-2 a joy for the eyes.
That, of course, isn't important just for graphical eyecandy, since if things will stay as they were in the old games, at simulation difficulty there won't be waypoints marked on your map. You'll actually have to learn to navigate by looking at the map and at the environment around you. Oh the joy!
I remember one of the most fun little details of the old Il-2 games was that when you strafed an enemy car and truck column, little enemy soldiers ran out of it to try and get into cover. It was a very nice touch. Hopefully they kept it for the new game.
I won't even talk about the graphics of the planes (and the crucial visual damage, because most of the times you'll be able to gauge the damage you took, or that your enemy took, just by looking at the holes in your or his planes), because i think the screenshots talk by themselves. It's simply awesome.
Just as awesome as actually flying with and against sizeable formations of planes. The Il-2 engine can handle several tens of planes on screen, which mean that you'll dive into formations of twenty of thirty bombers, just like in real war. The times of going against ten or fifteen planes only are gone.
I think I gave you enough food for thought, for today, and again, I hope I didn't scare you too much. Hopefully many will feel the thrill of the challenge. Those I will wait in the sky in September (Or in August, when the demo will be relesed). I'm pretty sure we'll have lots of fun.
That time was towards the end of the golden age of PC flight simulation, when the Il-2 series, ranging from the first Il-2 Sturmovik to Pacific Fighters, allowed thousands of virtual pilots to fight it out online in an extremely realistic environment and, at last, with a good netcode that allowed for little lag and lots of fun.
The last game of the Il-2 series has been under the radar of most gamers for a long time, after an initial announcement that didn't exactly rock the world, until 1C Games recently allowed several gaming journalists to try it first hand. Now I can definitely say that many are excited about it, because Il-2 Sturmovik: Birds of Prey promises to be the first true combat flight simulator of console gaming's history.
You poissibly already read some articles about it, and since I didn't yet get my greedy hands on the game, I can't add much to them, features-wise. Though, having played to the Il-2 series for years, I think I can try and give you an overview of what we can expect and what sensations you will feel when given free reign of a faithfully simulated world war 2 flying beast.
First of all, let's put this aside, my dear console gamers. Do not even consider the "arcade" and "realistic" (yeah, sure) mode. The only mode that will be really worth to be played will be the simulation mode. That's where Il-2 sturmovik always gave it's best, and that's where the level of challenge will promise the real rewards when you master it.
That's why here I will talk only about the simulation mode, anything else isn't much different from your usual Ace Combat game, and doesn't really need to be introduced.
Maybe you can use the two inferior modes to get some practice and learn the basics, but the earlier you start learning the hard way, the earlier you'll master the hundreds of nuances and caveats of the Il-2 flight models (that according to 1C are the same of the PC games, which is great).
After all, If I can learn to aim with a Joypad (and after a few days with battlefield 1943, people are already afraid of my sniping. I honestly thought I was hopeless), you can learn to handle a fighter at simulation difficulty in Il-2.
Also, you'll soon learn that the single player campaigns are fun, but are nothing else than a prelude to the real game, and that's online, against other human players, so that's where this article will focus.
Let's start with one of the most important elements of Il-2. Forget about external views. Forget about panning your camera around to see if someone is on your tail. No chance.
In the simulation mode of Il-2 your only visual mode is from inside the cockpit. This means that a big part of your field of vision will be occupied by the cockpit's frame and by the gauges from which your life will depend.
You will indeed be able to turn your head around inside the cockpit, but that's it. Most planes will have a big metal hard plate behind your head that will severely hamper your ability to look directly behind you.
Oh, and since i spoke about gauges. Forget about HUDs that tell you your altitude or your speed. You'll have to actually learn reading the gauges and gather the essential data from them.
You're probably asking yourself why I seem so happy about it. That's indeed pretty easy. Because that's fun!
Real World war two pilots had a motto: "the enemy that you didn't see will be the one to shot you down" That worked (and will work) great in Il-2. Just imagine spotting a lone enemy fighter, slowly and carefully getting on his tail, making sure to skillfully keep your plane into his blind spot. Then, after a few minutes of that slow, peculiar formation, you finally manage to get him solidly in your reticle at 150 feet of distance and pull the trigger for just two seconds (don't even think about holding the trigger too long, ammo are horribly limited, like in the real world). Three little explosions at the root of his wings, and the enemy falls to the ground with his wing precisely ripped off.
Taking by surprise and being taken by surprise is the bread and water of the Il-2 virtual pilot. It adds a sensation of thrill that no other combat flight simulator ever gave, and quite often, if you aren't good, the only warning you have before the screen goes black, is the scare you get when you hear and see the cannon rounds streaming around your plane. You allowed someone to get in your blind spot. Bad for you :D
That links with another important element of Il-2: teamwork. The only way not to have a blind spot is to fly formation. To have a reliable wingman watching your tail while you watch his.
Of course flying formation, keeping speed and manouvering syncronized, is something only top pilots can accomplish, expecially in combat. But when you see four planes flying in a perfect Shwarm formation, well, that's a sight to behold, and it's incredibly rewarding when one of such planes is yours.
Creating a working squadron able to effectively communicate and to keep coordination during a dogfight is the true key to winning air battles in the skies of virtual world war two. Veteral players of Call of Duty and the other squad-based FPSs will feel right at home there. If they'll be able to take off, of course.
This is also crucial for identifying who is actually a friend or a foe, because yeah, there are no blue and red dots. Friends and foe have only a way of identification, the shape of their plane (which is often hard to make out from afar), their markings, and communication with your team mates. It's always crucial to make sure that communication lets you know the relative position of your wingmen to you, so that any plane that isn't theirs, even if too far to actually distinguish it's shape, is potentially an enemy.
By the way, forget about the word "balancing". This is war, and if war pitches you against planes that are superior to yours, you'll just have to make do. There won't be any unrealistic help to make sure that your plane will always be up to par with it's oposition.
This brings us to one of the most interesting elements of 1C games' realistic flight models. Each plane will have it's strenghts and weaknesses, and you'll have to make sure to learn them and use them against your opponents, avoiding to fall into their traps, because, of course, they'll try to do the same with you.
To make an example, if you're flying an Hurricane, which is a plane that relies mainly on manuverability, but is a lil weak in top speed and climbing ratem and meet an enemy in a Focke Wulf, which is very powerful, but turns poorly, you'll have to try and lure your opponent in a close pitched turn dogfight, sooner or later he'll fail to retain his speed while turning and will have to straighten his course or stall. That's when you'll be in perfect position to fill his rear with lead.
On the other hand, if you're in a very fast fighter that climbs great and meet a slow and manouverable one, you'll have to avoid turning as much as possible, climb the most that you can while leaving him behind, turn around when he's far enough and can't catch up, and perform a Boom 'n Zoom attack while he'll be struggling to stay in the air to follow you with his sub-par engine.
Of course it's much more complex than that. You'll have to keep in mind your plane's strenghts and weakness against every other one on the field, and every time you'll have to devise the perfect strategy to use your plane's strong points and make his inconsequential. There's a lot more brain work to do as opposed as the usual console FPS. That's where, at least at the beginning, people used to flight simulators will eat console gamers with limited experience for breakfast.
But gamers are fast to catch up, and I'm pretty sure that the ones that won't give up out of frustration for being shot down again and again by enemies that maybe they didn't even see, will soon give life to awesome battles in the sky.
Another important element that differs a lot from the usual console game, is that you will have to nurture and care for your plane. Most of the time, in videogames, you will see people doing plainly suicide actions that will make them come out seriously damaged. That's no real problem for them, because damage has no other consequence than a life bar decreasing.
In Il-2 there's no life bar. The damage you receive isn't linear. You can be hit with a whole bunch of explosive lead in an unimportant area of your plane and suffer just for some minor drag due to the holes, or a single well aimed cannon shot in your fuel tank can turn you into a ball of fire. That's why you won't see veteran pilots running at each other head on. By doing that they expose their engine to enemy fire, and even if they're lucky enough to shot down the enemy and still be in the air afterwards, any damage to their engine will seriously put their mission in jeopardy. When you start smoking the only real solution is to turn tail and return to base, or to look for a field to try a crashlanding and bring at least your (virtual) life home.
I already talked about limited ammo, but most probably won't have figure HOW limited such ammo is. Your most powerful weapon (cannons) normally have only a few seconds of continued firing in them, so using them well is crucial. You'll see yourself firing only when the enemy is very near and the angle of attack is as straight as possible. 0ften you'll be sweating to gain an inch over an enemy, and then an inch more, with your trigger finger trembling and your mind repeating "just a little more...".
When your cannons run out, then you'll be left only with your machine guns (if your plane has any), also called "peashooters", with which you'll have quite an hard time being lethal, forced to achieve difficult headshots into the enemy cockpit, or to aim only for the enemy's most vital areas.
Hoperfully i didn't scare you too much. Yes, it's hard, and it requires a lot of skill. Probably it will redefine many people's very idea of "skill" in videogames. The only thing that come close are racing games at maximum difficulty.
Did you think that racking up headshots in an FPS was skillful? Did you think that dancing around an enemy in a PvP MMO was skillful? Think again.
But as all tasks that require lots of skill, playing games like IL-2 is also extremely rewarding when you finally manage to master ithem. When your kills begin to be in the double digits you'll really start feeling like an ace.
Now that the harcore mumbo jumbo is out of the way, let's talk briefly about a efw things that will for sure interest casuals and hardcore as well. You can forget the bland environments made of satellite pictures console flight games got you used to. In IL-2 cities aren't simply painted into the ground with a few cubes to represent some of them like in Ace Combat. Every single building is 3D and modeled (Sure, not in perfect detail, but detailed enough to fly low and still love the environment around you). While most console flight combat games are modeled to be seen from high altitude, in Il-2 both high altitude and low-altitude combat have the same importance, and as such are equally detailed (and your plane will behave differently depending on how high you are flying). Trees, bridges, ports, landmarks, everything will contribute to make Il-2 a joy for the eyes.
That, of course, isn't important just for graphical eyecandy, since if things will stay as they were in the old games, at simulation difficulty there won't be waypoints marked on your map. You'll actually have to learn to navigate by looking at the map and at the environment around you. Oh the joy!
I remember one of the most fun little details of the old Il-2 games was that when you strafed an enemy car and truck column, little enemy soldiers ran out of it to try and get into cover. It was a very nice touch. Hopefully they kept it for the new game.
I won't even talk about the graphics of the planes (and the crucial visual damage, because most of the times you'll be able to gauge the damage you took, or that your enemy took, just by looking at the holes in your or his planes), because i think the screenshots talk by themselves. It's simply awesome.
Just as awesome as actually flying with and against sizeable formations of planes. The Il-2 engine can handle several tens of planes on screen, which mean that you'll dive into formations of twenty of thirty bombers, just like in real war. The times of going against ten or fifteen planes only are gone.
I think I gave you enough food for thought, for today, and again, I hope I didn't scare you too much. Hopefully many will feel the thrill of the challenge. Those I will wait in the sky in September (Or in August, when the demo will be relesed). I'm pretty sure we'll have lots of fun.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Nintendo needs a crisis to resurrect it's gaming heart
Nintendo's consoles are selling like hotcakes. This is beyond doubt, and marketing-wise, at least on the short term, Nintendo's marketing strategies have proven sound. Will It last?
About that, I'm not sure. Nintendo has more or less abandoned core gaming (probably even due to Miyamoto's hate for depicted violence in videogames. He also seems to hate storyteling, since he said that he doesn't want a deep story in the next Mario Galaxy) to dedicate themselves to their new target, casual gamers.
Sure, they do the occasional metroid, mario and zelda, but that's just a fraction of their production, and very far from the focus of their marketing.
While for now, it seems all good and fine, how will it be in the future?
While a small percentage of casual gamers and non-gamers will actually make the leap and try some more "actual" games, the vast majority will buy a console, the customary wii fit, play with them a little, then stick them in a closet until the next party or the next time they feel the need to work out. More often then not they just get forgotten after a while.
Sure, even if that happens, those consoles and accessories are already sold, and already created a revenue for Nintendo, but in marketing that's not the only element of success.
Those people lack one element that is, instead, present in core gamers. That's brand loyalty.
For them the Wii and the Wii fit are just tools, and as such they can be replaced by tools of other brands if they do the same thing better or cheaper.
For gamers that always loved Nintendo, instead, Nintendo is an important Brand, no less than Gucci or Ferrari. Nintendo's products are cult objects, and even if another brand will produce something similar they will still have a very good chance to be compelled to buy Nintendo's by their brand loyalty.
That's where the problem lies. By ignoring their core fanbase to concentrate that much on casual gamers, Nintendo is hurting their brand loyalty. That happens easily when a fan feels that he's not the main target of a brand anymore.
How many people you hear saying that they "used to love" Nintendo, but now they beel betrayed by Miyamoto and company?
Nintendo will have to pitch in some serious effort to rebuild their brand loyalty.
But are they even trying to do it? At the moment, they don't feel the need to, as they confortably sit on the laurels of their masive sales.
Maybe they think that the occasional Mario game will be enough to rekindle the flame. But will it?
Some of the most hardcore Nintendo fans that still resist despite having been set aside justify Nintendo by telling that it's not their fault if so few good core games are on the Wii. That it's the third parties that can't or won't produce anything decent. That's only partly true. When a third party decides on which consoles to produce their games, they have to consider quite a few elements. One very important element is if the marketing related to that console (and as such it's installed base) matches that of their game. Most software houses that produce deep, complex core games, feel that the marketing on the Wii doesn't fit with their games. Lots of happy, overly smiling families, young kids and elders that one most certanly wouldn't see playing a Grand Theft Auto or a Metal Gear Solid game. They probably wouldn't care the less about such games. Software houses, despite trying a few experiments like Red Steel or No More Heroes (that is probably going to abandon the Wii after the second game, as Goichi Suda hinted), know that the Wii's primary target won't buy their games, and that's primarily Nintendo's fault, because they didn't consider core gamers in their marketing.
That's why third party developers that make games for a core gamer audience prefer to make multiplatform for Xbox 360 and PS3 (that can support similar graphics, while the Wii would need a different engine, and as such an added workload). Because despite the Wii's massive installed base, such games sell much, much better on the two competing consoles combined that what they would sell on the Wii.
Personally I think that what Nintendo needs is a serious crisis. Something that will shake their sense of safety as the dominating brand in the market and that will force them to retink their marketing and strategies.
There has been a minor moment of weakness in Japan, but that didn't last long enough to do the trick. Nintendo just thought it was a momentary problem and continued moving on their casual path.
When Microsoft released the Xbox and found out that it wasn't penetrating the market in any decent way, they rethought their strategy, started fresh, and created the Xbox 360, that despite it's technical shortcoming, is an absolutely lovely console, with a quality and variety in games that Nintendo can only envy.
When Sony found out that the PS3 wasn't selling enough, that it didn't have enough great games to satisfy the core fanbase, they stepped on the accelerator and (despite not cutting the price like many demand, thing that, I think, will come with the PS3 slim) started working VERY hard on their games, producing what is probably the best first-party line-up for the months to come.
Both faced a crisis, and worked hard, in their own ways, to appeal to their core fanbase (and to reach the fanbase of their competitors). The ones that truly benefitted from that are, of course, core gamers, that found themselves with an awesome variety of great games to play. Not from Nintendo.
But what can shake Nintendo's success so much that it could force them to rethink their strategies so radically?
At the moment, Microsoft's Natal and Sony's motion control wands could actually do the trick (Isn't it ironic? I'm not really interested in motion control and waggle, but I guess something good could come out from that, after all).
Both Natal and Sony's wands seem to do a lot of things that the Wii, even with the Motion Plus, can't do. Be it full body and facial recognition or military-like precision. They can create a serious and effective competition for the Wii on it's own playing field, and at the same time, due to Sony and Microsoft's dedication to core gaming, they can expand motion control and waggle's applications to areas that Nintendo didn't even begin to explore (even because Nintendo kind of failed to create the real motion control revolution, most of the games use the wiimote's pointer, not the actual motion control).
If Sony and Microsoft manage to do Motion control better than what Nintendo creatred (and there's a good chance that they will), the crisis I'm hoping for will probably happen. It remains to be seen if such a crisis will be enough to make Nintendo budge and try to recreate that lost brand loyalty in core gamers (which, as of now, are back to the status of a "new target" for them to explore), or if the massive amount of money they made so far will be enough to let them be content despite a very possible slowdown in sales.
That's, of course, a big load of "Ifs". Will it happen? I most certainly hope so, for us, and for Nintendo as well.
About that, I'm not sure. Nintendo has more or less abandoned core gaming (probably even due to Miyamoto's hate for depicted violence in videogames. He also seems to hate storyteling, since he said that he doesn't want a deep story in the next Mario Galaxy) to dedicate themselves to their new target, casual gamers.
Sure, they do the occasional metroid, mario and zelda, but that's just a fraction of their production, and very far from the focus of their marketing.
While for now, it seems all good and fine, how will it be in the future?
While a small percentage of casual gamers and non-gamers will actually make the leap and try some more "actual" games, the vast majority will buy a console, the customary wii fit, play with them a little, then stick them in a closet until the next party or the next time they feel the need to work out. More often then not they just get forgotten after a while.
Sure, even if that happens, those consoles and accessories are already sold, and already created a revenue for Nintendo, but in marketing that's not the only element of success.
Those people lack one element that is, instead, present in core gamers. That's brand loyalty.
For them the Wii and the Wii fit are just tools, and as such they can be replaced by tools of other brands if they do the same thing better or cheaper.
For gamers that always loved Nintendo, instead, Nintendo is an important Brand, no less than Gucci or Ferrari. Nintendo's products are cult objects, and even if another brand will produce something similar they will still have a very good chance to be compelled to buy Nintendo's by their brand loyalty.
That's where the problem lies. By ignoring their core fanbase to concentrate that much on casual gamers, Nintendo is hurting their brand loyalty. That happens easily when a fan feels that he's not the main target of a brand anymore.
How many people you hear saying that they "used to love" Nintendo, but now they beel betrayed by Miyamoto and company?
Nintendo will have to pitch in some serious effort to rebuild their brand loyalty.
But are they even trying to do it? At the moment, they don't feel the need to, as they confortably sit on the laurels of their masive sales.
Maybe they think that the occasional Mario game will be enough to rekindle the flame. But will it?
Some of the most hardcore Nintendo fans that still resist despite having been set aside justify Nintendo by telling that it's not their fault if so few good core games are on the Wii. That it's the third parties that can't or won't produce anything decent. That's only partly true. When a third party decides on which consoles to produce their games, they have to consider quite a few elements. One very important element is if the marketing related to that console (and as such it's installed base) matches that of their game. Most software houses that produce deep, complex core games, feel that the marketing on the Wii doesn't fit with their games. Lots of happy, overly smiling families, young kids and elders that one most certanly wouldn't see playing a Grand Theft Auto or a Metal Gear Solid game. They probably wouldn't care the less about such games. Software houses, despite trying a few experiments like Red Steel or No More Heroes (that is probably going to abandon the Wii after the second game, as Goichi Suda hinted), know that the Wii's primary target won't buy their games, and that's primarily Nintendo's fault, because they didn't consider core gamers in their marketing.
That's why third party developers that make games for a core gamer audience prefer to make multiplatform for Xbox 360 and PS3 (that can support similar graphics, while the Wii would need a different engine, and as such an added workload). Because despite the Wii's massive installed base, such games sell much, much better on the two competing consoles combined that what they would sell on the Wii.
Personally I think that what Nintendo needs is a serious crisis. Something that will shake their sense of safety as the dominating brand in the market and that will force them to retink their marketing and strategies.
There has been a minor moment of weakness in Japan, but that didn't last long enough to do the trick. Nintendo just thought it was a momentary problem and continued moving on their casual path.
When Microsoft released the Xbox and found out that it wasn't penetrating the market in any decent way, they rethought their strategy, started fresh, and created the Xbox 360, that despite it's technical shortcoming, is an absolutely lovely console, with a quality and variety in games that Nintendo can only envy.
When Sony found out that the PS3 wasn't selling enough, that it didn't have enough great games to satisfy the core fanbase, they stepped on the accelerator and (despite not cutting the price like many demand, thing that, I think, will come with the PS3 slim) started working VERY hard on their games, producing what is probably the best first-party line-up for the months to come.
Both faced a crisis, and worked hard, in their own ways, to appeal to their core fanbase (and to reach the fanbase of their competitors). The ones that truly benefitted from that are, of course, core gamers, that found themselves with an awesome variety of great games to play. Not from Nintendo.
But what can shake Nintendo's success so much that it could force them to rethink their strategies so radically?
At the moment, Microsoft's Natal and Sony's motion control wands could actually do the trick (Isn't it ironic? I'm not really interested in motion control and waggle, but I guess something good could come out from that, after all).
Both Natal and Sony's wands seem to do a lot of things that the Wii, even with the Motion Plus, can't do. Be it full body and facial recognition or military-like precision. They can create a serious and effective competition for the Wii on it's own playing field, and at the same time, due to Sony and Microsoft's dedication to core gaming, they can expand motion control and waggle's applications to areas that Nintendo didn't even begin to explore (even because Nintendo kind of failed to create the real motion control revolution, most of the games use the wiimote's pointer, not the actual motion control).
If Sony and Microsoft manage to do Motion control better than what Nintendo creatred (and there's a good chance that they will), the crisis I'm hoping for will probably happen. It remains to be seen if such a crisis will be enough to make Nintendo budge and try to recreate that lost brand loyalty in core gamers (which, as of now, are back to the status of a "new target" for them to explore), or if the massive amount of money they made so far will be enough to let them be content despite a very possible slowdown in sales.
That's, of course, a big load of "Ifs". Will it happen? I most certainly hope so, for us, and for Nintendo as well.
Greenpeace declares war on gaming consoles
While Greenpeace's campaign for awareness about disposing toxic waste coming from consumer electronic products always found me more or less in agreement (while I more or less never approve of their eco-bullying methods, that normally end up giving a bad name to other environmentalist movements and ideals), they're beginning to cross the line a tad.
Today, as reported by Kotaku, Greenpeace released three videos that move away from the informative, interesting tones of their campaign for greener electronics towards the plain sensationalistic and overly agressive.
Maybe they felt that, media-wise, they were beginning to be considered largely inconsequential, so they decided that jumping on the videogame-hating media-bandwagon could have been a good way to whore for some more attention.
Well then, they got some. Maybe not exactly what they were expecting, though. Skimming on comments I read around the internet, from Kotaku to other blogs that reported the news, the vast majority of them goes from harsh criticism to the more vulgar, but not less effective "FU Greenpeace" (and no, they didn't just use the acronym).
While, of course, in a perfect world, consumer electronics (and gaming consoles) not including toxic materials would be a very nice thing, we don't live in a perfect world. Eliminating widely used materials from the production chains requires lots of money, research, and more than everything TIME. They won't just disappear because some eco-bully with a camera and a very basic knowledge of stop motion demands so.
In the Sony-related video, what the thrashed PS3 says is actually (and probably involuntarily on Greenpeace's part) what makes the most sense. For the ones that can't get past the horrible voice acting, here's a transcription without all the mockery and coughing: "Sony will eliminate PVC and BFR from all it's products as and when we'll be satisfied that we can produce products of equal quality in all regards using the alternative materials". Time and research. Totally makes sense.
Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft (and all the other producers) are businesses. While they ARE spending money, time and research to reach that "perfect world" in which consumer electronics don't include toxic materials, they need also to think about their customers. Customers that (rightly) want quality products at affordable prices. Because, you know, part of the research (and as such time) needed to do the changes that Greenpeace demands all and now, are aimed at creating and optimizing production facilities and methods that won't cut into our pockets (that have already been maimed well enough by the crisis of the economy).
So, while the naked theory behind Greenpeace's claims isn't entirely wrong, the method, the demands, and the mockery of the producers' (costly) efforts into making their consoles more environment-friendly is entirely off-key and skimming on defamation.
To be honest, if Greenpeace wants to catch more media attention, there are more valid ways than insulting our intelligence by jumping on the silly media bandwagon against videogames and gamers.
Allow me to steal their own slogan and paraphrase it a little: Tell Greenpeace it's GAME OVER for eco-bullies that don't know how to pick their battles.
Today, as reported by Kotaku, Greenpeace released three videos that move away from the informative, interesting tones of their campaign for greener electronics towards the plain sensationalistic and overly agressive.
Maybe they felt that, media-wise, they were beginning to be considered largely inconsequential, so they decided that jumping on the videogame-hating media-bandwagon could have been a good way to whore for some more attention.
Well then, they got some. Maybe not exactly what they were expecting, though. Skimming on comments I read around the internet, from Kotaku to other blogs that reported the news, the vast majority of them goes from harsh criticism to the more vulgar, but not less effective "FU Greenpeace" (and no, they didn't just use the acronym).
While, of course, in a perfect world, consumer electronics (and gaming consoles) not including toxic materials would be a very nice thing, we don't live in a perfect world. Eliminating widely used materials from the production chains requires lots of money, research, and more than everything TIME. They won't just disappear because some eco-bully with a camera and a very basic knowledge of stop motion demands so.
In the Sony-related video, what the thrashed PS3 says is actually (and probably involuntarily on Greenpeace's part) what makes the most sense. For the ones that can't get past the horrible voice acting, here's a transcription without all the mockery and coughing: "Sony will eliminate PVC and BFR from all it's products as and when we'll be satisfied that we can produce products of equal quality in all regards using the alternative materials". Time and research. Totally makes sense.
Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft (and all the other producers) are businesses. While they ARE spending money, time and research to reach that "perfect world" in which consumer electronics don't include toxic materials, they need also to think about their customers. Customers that (rightly) want quality products at affordable prices. Because, you know, part of the research (and as such time) needed to do the changes that Greenpeace demands all and now, are aimed at creating and optimizing production facilities and methods that won't cut into our pockets (that have already been maimed well enough by the crisis of the economy).
So, while the naked theory behind Greenpeace's claims isn't entirely wrong, the method, the demands, and the mockery of the producers' (costly) efforts into making their consoles more environment-friendly is entirely off-key and skimming on defamation.
To be honest, if Greenpeace wants to catch more media attention, there are more valid ways than insulting our intelligence by jumping on the silly media bandwagon against videogames and gamers.
Allow me to steal their own slogan and paraphrase it a little: Tell Greenpeace it's GAME OVER for eco-bullies that don't know how to pick their battles.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Final Fantasy IV: The after years... Back to the future
With Final Fantasy IV: The after years at last released in Europe (if you aren't subscribed to the Square Enix newsletter or don't check your WiiWare channel often, you might have missed it, since they didn't advertize it that much), my Wii has finally been promoted back to Gaming Console. Due to the lack of interesting games it was unfortunately demoted to the rank of glowing blue table lamp...
In any case I really needed a break from Battlefield 1943. I decided to finally learn to play FPS games with a joypad, and so far it's been as painful as it can be. It's a quite humbling experience when EVERYONE you play with and against in a game is better at it than you. So, if you hate me, a good way to get your revenge for criticizing your favourite games/consoles/sisters, is to get BF1943 on the 360 and look for Abriael. You'll have at least 360 ways to have fun humiliating me repeatedly.
But back to my table la... ahem, to Final Fantasy IV. Let's put aside the "ugly" immediately. Many found the sale of the game as episodic content being something closely skimming on the scam. You have to spend 8 dollars or euros (800 points, and yeah, that's another of the woes of gaming in europe. Publishers don't do an actual conversion between dollars and euros. They simply keep the price in dollars and change it to euros, with the result that every gaming-related product in Europe costs almost one and an half times as much as in the US. Neat, uh?) for the "main game", then 3 dollars/euros for each of the seven character-related episodes, and finallt another 8 for the final episode.
That makes for a grand-total of 37 dollars/euros, which for a WiiWare title might seem a bit excessive.
I would agree with that, if it wasn't that the whole saga (including all the episodes) is a big, long chunk of gameplay that will keep you busy long enough to be worth every penny. On top of it, if, like me, you bought a few games for your Wii and DS, and can't care the least about the gimmicky offers of the Club Nintendo, you'll probably have accumulated enough stars to buy a good slice of the 3700 Wii Points needed for the purchase.
Now that we've put the "pricetag" matter aside, let's talk a little about the game.
Gameplay and graphics-wise, we're back to the late era of 16 bit consoles. Compared to the original version of Final Fantasy IV there are a few improvements in the combat system, and the graphics have been updated more or less to the quality of Final Fantasy VI. That's not THAT much, considering that most of us will play this game on an HDTV, but can't demand too much from what was originally a cellphone game.
To be perfectly honest, this raises a question: Wasn't it better to release this game, oh my God, I know this is a revolutionary idea, on cellphones? Even in the west there are several Japanese developers that publish their games on cellphones, like Konami and Capcom, so I wonder wh y Square Enix didn't simply do the same. If that wasn't possible, why not releasing it for the Nintendo DS? It sure would seem a more suitable platform for a 16-bit-like game like this than the wii...
But in the end, if you bought this game, or are considering buying it, you most probably didn't do that for the graphics, so let's get to the real meat of the matter. The story.
Don't read further if you are one of the three people in the world that didn't play one of the many incarnations of the original Final Fantasy IV yet. It's full of spoilers.
The main character of the game is Ceodore, son of Cecil and Rosa, and heir to the throne of Baron. As his father did before him, he's about to face the test to become a knight. Though, with the reappearence of the second moon, things seem to be going in a mysterious direction. Many of the original characters return in this sequel: besides the aforementioned Cecil and Rosa, everyone else (besides the ones that were dead) makes an appearence, and some have an episode entirely dedicated to their adventures before the reunion in the final chapter.
While each "tale" is a game on it's own, allowing you to skip some if you don't want to spend the entire price, or simply if you aren't interested in a character, at the end of each you'll be prompted to save your game data, allowing you to import the character stats from all the previous tales onto the final chapter. My advice is to do so, but it depends on your wallet and on the time you want to dedicate to this explosion of nostalgia.
The story is engrossing for sure, not to mention, if you played the first game, quite moving in some topical moments. I don't want to spoil it, but I can tell you that i did shed a tear here and there (and I didn't even play it all yet, since several "tales" still have to be released in August and September), even if I guess that Final Fantasy IV being my favourite RPG of all times (thing that has me quite connected emotionally to it), for sure played a role.
If your wii is acting as a nice blue-glowing table-lamp, Final Fantasy IV: The after years might definitely be a good chance to take some dust off your wiimote (or even better, your classic controller) while you wait for some "meaty" games like No More Heroes 2 and Red Steel 2. In my case, it was well worth the price, even if going backwards with technology while moving onwards in the story kind of felt weird...
In any case I really needed a break from Battlefield 1943. I decided to finally learn to play FPS games with a joypad, and so far it's been as painful as it can be. It's a quite humbling experience when EVERYONE you play with and against in a game is better at it than you. So, if you hate me, a good way to get your revenge for criticizing your favourite games/consoles/sisters, is to get BF1943 on the 360 and look for Abriael. You'll have at least 360 ways to have fun humiliating me repeatedly.
But back to my table la... ahem, to Final Fantasy IV. Let's put aside the "ugly" immediately. Many found the sale of the game as episodic content being something closely skimming on the scam. You have to spend 8 dollars or euros (800 points, and yeah, that's another of the woes of gaming in europe. Publishers don't do an actual conversion between dollars and euros. They simply keep the price in dollars and change it to euros, with the result that every gaming-related product in Europe costs almost one and an half times as much as in the US. Neat, uh?) for the "main game", then 3 dollars/euros for each of the seven character-related episodes, and finallt another 8 for the final episode.
That makes for a grand-total of 37 dollars/euros, which for a WiiWare title might seem a bit excessive.
I would agree with that, if it wasn't that the whole saga (including all the episodes) is a big, long chunk of gameplay that will keep you busy long enough to be worth every penny. On top of it, if, like me, you bought a few games for your Wii and DS, and can't care the least about the gimmicky offers of the Club Nintendo, you'll probably have accumulated enough stars to buy a good slice of the 3700 Wii Points needed for the purchase.
Now that we've put the "pricetag" matter aside, let's talk a little about the game.
Gameplay and graphics-wise, we're back to the late era of 16 bit consoles. Compared to the original version of Final Fantasy IV there are a few improvements in the combat system, and the graphics have been updated more or less to the quality of Final Fantasy VI. That's not THAT much, considering that most of us will play this game on an HDTV, but can't demand too much from what was originally a cellphone game.
To be perfectly honest, this raises a question: Wasn't it better to release this game, oh my God, I know this is a revolutionary idea, on cellphones? Even in the west there are several Japanese developers that publish their games on cellphones, like Konami and Capcom, so I wonder wh y Square Enix didn't simply do the same. If that wasn't possible, why not releasing it for the Nintendo DS? It sure would seem a more suitable platform for a 16-bit-like game like this than the wii...
But in the end, if you bought this game, or are considering buying it, you most probably didn't do that for the graphics, so let's get to the real meat of the matter. The story.
Don't read further if you are one of the three people in the world that didn't play one of the many incarnations of the original Final Fantasy IV yet. It's full of spoilers.
The main character of the game is Ceodore, son of Cecil and Rosa, and heir to the throne of Baron. As his father did before him, he's about to face the test to become a knight. Though, with the reappearence of the second moon, things seem to be going in a mysterious direction. Many of the original characters return in this sequel: besides the aforementioned Cecil and Rosa, everyone else (besides the ones that were dead) makes an appearence, and some have an episode entirely dedicated to their adventures before the reunion in the final chapter.
While each "tale" is a game on it's own, allowing you to skip some if you don't want to spend the entire price, or simply if you aren't interested in a character, at the end of each you'll be prompted to save your game data, allowing you to import the character stats from all the previous tales onto the final chapter. My advice is to do so, but it depends on your wallet and on the time you want to dedicate to this explosion of nostalgia.
The story is engrossing for sure, not to mention, if you played the first game, quite moving in some topical moments. I don't want to spoil it, but I can tell you that i did shed a tear here and there (and I didn't even play it all yet, since several "tales" still have to be released in August and September), even if I guess that Final Fantasy IV being my favourite RPG of all times (thing that has me quite connected emotionally to it), for sure played a role.
If your wii is acting as a nice blue-glowing table-lamp, Final Fantasy IV: The after years might definitely be a good chance to take some dust off your wiimote (or even better, your classic controller) while you wait for some "meaty" games like No More Heroes 2 and Red Steel 2. In my case, it was well worth the price, even if going backwards with technology while moving onwards in the story kind of felt weird...
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Eurogamer vs Darkfall: FIGHT!!!
First of all, a bit of history. When Darkfall came out Eurogamer wrote an absolutely ruthless review that nailed Aventurine's MMORPG to a cross with a mercyless score of 2/10. Aventurine got really, really pissed at them due to that, and a quite overblown feud started, with the developer claiming that logs shown that the reviewer played just two hours, and fanboys of the game threatening said reviewer's real life. It was, all in all, a pretty messy affair.
Yesterday Eurogamer published a second review, written by a different journalist (and a pretty respected one at that), Result? 4/10. This is bound to annoy someone to no end.
Let's get down and dirty, and set aside a few things. This article isn't my personal attempt at bashing darkfall. People would claim that I'm biased anyway, given that I appreciate a competing MMO (because "thou shalt not have more than one MMO" yeah, sure). I'll just say that, being a big, fluffy carebear deep in my heart, Darkfall isn't my cup of tea (granted, not being a cup of tea doesn't make it a bad game). While I'm sure some will like it, in my opinion Aventurine fell in the common developing error of the "originality at all costs". They were so bent over making the point that their game was different from any other, that in the end it's different in the fact that other games are fun, and theirs isn't (at least for most). It's a developement error that you see quite a lot, nowadays, with an overcrowded market and everyone striving catch the spotlight.
That said, it might be bad for many, but it's definitely not 2/10 bad, or even 4/10 bad. That goes a little too far in my very personal eyes.
On the other hand, Eurogamer isn't my cup of tea as well. I can't even count their reviews with which I most definitely disagreed. But even here, to each his own.
The real point is that this story gives me the chance to talk again about a couple elements of gaming journalism as a whole.
First of all, it's very true that most gaming journalists spend too little time playing MMORPGs before reviewing them. Most gaming journalists are paid by the word or by the page, and this means that they'll try to chuck out as many reviews as possible to make ends meet at the end of the month. This will also mean that they will have to play a lot of games during said month, and won't probably be able to devote enough time to a game to get a deep enough experience with it. This is expecially true with MMOs. A MMORPG requires a long time to be explored in it's multiple features and environments, and more often than not ten hours aren't definitely enough to have a clear clue of what's really going on in it.
That's why most MMO reviews should be taken with a grain of salt, and more as the "review of the initial impact of the MMO" instead of an overall review. It's still useful, since many gamers will abandon an MMO if it doesn't catch their attention early on, but again, it definitely shouldn't be considered more than that.
The ugly consequence of that is that many developers, as of late, concentrate too much on the initial few hours of gameplay, completely neglecting the rest and expecially the endgame, to trick reviewrs into giving hasty high scores and boost their initial sales. It's of course a risky way of doing business, but some devs seem to be quite fond of it.
On the other hand, seeing Eurogamer's reaction to Aventurine's pressure is a breath of fresh air. My experience in the world of "professional" gaming journalism has shown me things going, more often than not, exactly the opposite way. Can't count the times in which I've seen journalists forced by their editors to change their scores to appease the publisher of the game X or Y. or the same journalists given "fair" warnings that their workplace would have been in jeopardy if they continued to "bash" certain publishers' products. Usually, of course, the poor journalist bows and goes to rewrite the article/score. It's part of the give and take nature of gaming journalism.
So yeah, it's very nice to see an editor that doesn't bow his head to the "almighty developer" and backs up his journalists. Granted, I'm not sure if that would have happened if instead of Aventurine there would have been a more "powerful" developer/publisher, like EA, Ubisoft or Activision, but still, it's one point scored in favor of gaming journalism, and despite the fact that I'll still continue disagreeing with many of their reviews, Eurogamer earned a bit more respect from me. Kudos.
Yesterday Eurogamer published a second review, written by a different journalist (and a pretty respected one at that), Result? 4/10. This is bound to annoy someone to no end.
Let's get down and dirty, and set aside a few things. This article isn't my personal attempt at bashing darkfall. People would claim that I'm biased anyway, given that I appreciate a competing MMO (because "thou shalt not have more than one MMO" yeah, sure). I'll just say that, being a big, fluffy carebear deep in my heart, Darkfall isn't my cup of tea (granted, not being a cup of tea doesn't make it a bad game). While I'm sure some will like it, in my opinion Aventurine fell in the common developing error of the "originality at all costs". They were so bent over making the point that their game was different from any other, that in the end it's different in the fact that other games are fun, and theirs isn't (at least for most). It's a developement error that you see quite a lot, nowadays, with an overcrowded market and everyone striving catch the spotlight.
That said, it might be bad for many, but it's definitely not 2/10 bad, or even 4/10 bad. That goes a little too far in my very personal eyes.
On the other hand, Eurogamer isn't my cup of tea as well. I can't even count their reviews with which I most definitely disagreed. But even here, to each his own.
The real point is that this story gives me the chance to talk again about a couple elements of gaming journalism as a whole.
First of all, it's very true that most gaming journalists spend too little time playing MMORPGs before reviewing them. Most gaming journalists are paid by the word or by the page, and this means that they'll try to chuck out as many reviews as possible to make ends meet at the end of the month. This will also mean that they will have to play a lot of games during said month, and won't probably be able to devote enough time to a game to get a deep enough experience with it. This is expecially true with MMOs. A MMORPG requires a long time to be explored in it's multiple features and environments, and more often than not ten hours aren't definitely enough to have a clear clue of what's really going on in it.
That's why most MMO reviews should be taken with a grain of salt, and more as the "review of the initial impact of the MMO" instead of an overall review. It's still useful, since many gamers will abandon an MMO if it doesn't catch their attention early on, but again, it definitely shouldn't be considered more than that.
The ugly consequence of that is that many developers, as of late, concentrate too much on the initial few hours of gameplay, completely neglecting the rest and expecially the endgame, to trick reviewrs into giving hasty high scores and boost their initial sales. It's of course a risky way of doing business, but some devs seem to be quite fond of it.
On the other hand, seeing Eurogamer's reaction to Aventurine's pressure is a breath of fresh air. My experience in the world of "professional" gaming journalism has shown me things going, more often than not, exactly the opposite way. Can't count the times in which I've seen journalists forced by their editors to change their scores to appease the publisher of the game X or Y. or the same journalists given "fair" warnings that their workplace would have been in jeopardy if they continued to "bash" certain publishers' products. Usually, of course, the poor journalist bows and goes to rewrite the article/score. It's part of the give and take nature of gaming journalism.
So yeah, it's very nice to see an editor that doesn't bow his head to the "almighty developer" and backs up his journalists. Granted, I'm not sure if that would have happened if instead of Aventurine there would have been a more "powerful" developer/publisher, like EA, Ubisoft or Activision, but still, it's one point scored in favor of gaming journalism, and despite the fact that I'll still continue disagreeing with many of their reviews, Eurogamer earned a bit more respect from me. Kudos.
Friday, July 17, 2009
The Valkyria Chronicles 2 Website opens
If you have read my blog for a long time, you probably can guess that I'm keeping my eyes well open for any news related to Valkyria Chronicles 2.
Guess what? Today SEGA opened the official website for the game.
The site is still not finished, and at the moment only three sections are available (news, information and blog), but it mentions that it'll be updated every friday. So I'll definitely keep an eye on it tomorrow, in the case we won't have to wait for next week.
Despite the work in progress status, the site already provides some information on the game (that will be released this winter in Japan. Let's just hope we won't have to wait too long to play it in English). First of all, the story has been elaborated a little. Here it is:
"Two yeas have passed since the war against the Empire . In the southern part of Gallia the armed group "Gallian Revolutionary Army" is raising to prominence, and has declared an upraising to eliminate the Darksen. Again Gallia faces a period of crisis. The civil war has quickly become a serious matter because the regular army was depleted due to the struggle against the empire, and the law prohibits to use the militia to repress a civil rebellion. To face this crisis the government sends to the front the students of the Military Academy"
The premise that sounds just a bit unrealistic (you can't send the militia because of a law, and send the cadets of the academy instead? Wow, smart...), but in the end this is a pretty common anime stereotype, to justify the presence of younger characters on the field of battle, so I'm not that surprised. In any case I hope that the young age of the characters won't lower the level of maturity of the story compared to the first Valkyria Chronicles. Seeing what kind of a gem the story of the previous game was, I'm holding my hopes quite high.
Another interesting tidbit of information we read on the site is the main staff that will work on the game. It's pretty much the same as the one that created the first Valkyria, and, to answer to some doubts raised in the past couple days on the net, the character designer is also the same. Looking at the pictures on the site, the character design itself seem to be definitely characterized by the CANVAS style, so it's pretty safe to assume that we'll see some form of the CANVAS engine even on the PSP (Thank Goodness).
As a little side-note, there's a mailer form in the site for suggestions and questions. It's in Japanese, but hopefully they won't be mad at receiving a few (thousands) of mails from their western fans. If you want to use it, it's pretty standard. The first box is for your email, the second is for the message. Fire away! :D
Guess what? Today SEGA opened the official website for the game.
The site is still not finished, and at the moment only three sections are available (news, information and blog), but it mentions that it'll be updated every friday. So I'll definitely keep an eye on it tomorrow, in the case we won't have to wait for next week.
Despite the work in progress status, the site already provides some information on the game (that will be released this winter in Japan. Let's just hope we won't have to wait too long to play it in English). First of all, the story has been elaborated a little. Here it is:
"Two yeas have passed since the war against the Empire . In the southern part of Gallia the armed group "Gallian Revolutionary Army" is raising to prominence, and has declared an upraising to eliminate the Darksen. Again Gallia faces a period of crisis. The civil war has quickly become a serious matter because the regular army was depleted due to the struggle against the empire, and the law prohibits to use the militia to repress a civil rebellion. To face this crisis the government sends to the front the students of the Military Academy"
The premise that sounds just a bit unrealistic (you can't send the militia because of a law, and send the cadets of the academy instead? Wow, smart...), but in the end this is a pretty common anime stereotype, to justify the presence of younger characters on the field of battle, so I'm not that surprised. In any case I hope that the young age of the characters won't lower the level of maturity of the story compared to the first Valkyria Chronicles. Seeing what kind of a gem the story of the previous game was, I'm holding my hopes quite high.
Another interesting tidbit of information we read on the site is the main staff that will work on the game. It's pretty much the same as the one that created the first Valkyria, and, to answer to some doubts raised in the past couple days on the net, the character designer is also the same. Looking at the pictures on the site, the character design itself seem to be definitely characterized by the CANVAS style, so it's pretty safe to assume that we'll see some form of the CANVAS engine even on the PSP (Thank Goodness).
As a little side-note, there's a mailer form in the site for suggestions and questions. It's in Japanese, but hopefully they won't be mad at receiving a few (thousands) of mails from their western fans. If you want to use it, it's pretty standard. The first box is for your email, the second is for the message. Fire away! :D
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Blood Bowl: strategy, blood and spikey footballs
Blood Bowl
Inserito originariamente da Abriael
Games Workshop has two very well known franchises (besides the abysmal Lord of the Rings, I don't even consider that a GW franchise...), Warhammer and Warhammer 40000. During their over two decades of activities, though, they generated several minor franchises, most of which disappeared after a couple seasons (Man'o'War, Gorka Morka, Necromunda, Mordheim...). One of them, though, even thanks to the fact that the rulebook is distributed for free, survived to this day, and is still considered a cult game between a loyal hardcore fanbase (even online, thanks to the Fumbbl league). That's Blood Bowl.
Blood Bowl is set in an alternate version of the Warhammer Universe in which wars aren't fought on the battlefield anymore, but on a football pitch. Of course the Warhammer folks aren't exactly pacifists, and as such the matches tend to be a tad more bloody than the football ones we're used to watch.
This new Blood Bowl game, developed by the french software house Cyanide (the same that released Chaos League five years ago, got sued by Games Workshop because it looked too much like Blood Bowl, and that walked out of court with an official license to create a new game), basically picks up the original blood bowl rules, turns them in digital form, add some 3D rendering, and slaps the strategy packed blood bowl universe right on your PC, with very little or no adaptation (to the point that you'll actually have dices rolling on your screen). Is that bad? Not at all, because the original Blood Bowl is PERFECT.
Yes, you read well. Blood Bowl (and I mean the tabletop game) is one of the most fun, engaging and addictive gaming experiences I ever put my hands on. You don't believe me? You don't have to. Just go over to Fumbbl and test it for yourself. Of course you won't have the flashy 3D graphics of Cyanide's game, but the game is exactly the same, so if you'll like it and want the 3D graphics on top of it, you'll know where to look. Just be careful, because you won't be pitched against an AI, but against other human players from the get go, and believe me, most of them know the rules inside out.
If you survived the little aforementioned experiment with your limbs and brains intact, and are still interested in this article, let's move on.
In Blood Bowl you will be able to chose between eight races (humans, skaven, lizardmen, orcs, goblins, chaos, wood elves and dwarfs. The actual blood bowl rules include several more, but those will have to come with expansions or mods), create your personalized team (you can even create your own logo) and pitch it against the AI in one-shot matches or in a long-winded campaign, or online, against the aforementioned absolutely brutal human players (the average level of skill is very similar to that of fumbbl, many moved over).
An extremely welcome addition is the hot seat mode, that allows you to challenge another human player on the same computer, simply handing him the keyboard and mouse when it's his turn. I already started torunament evenings with my friends, and boy, it's fun!
The campaign, though, is probably my favourite gameplay method. It's a little more relaxed that the online leagues, and still gives quite a challenge. You'll have to lead your team through several leagues, facing different races (even some that aren't available yet as playable, like the dark elves) and fighting it out against classic teams of the Blood Bowl history, like the Skavenblight Scramblers or the Chaos All Stars. My beloved Quenelles Paladins are maing mince meat of them, Bwahahaha!
The tactical options are quite varied. As your players progress you will have to buy equipment for them, to get new skills that have a very direct impact on the gameplay, and of course you'll have to replace the dead and the badly injured with new players. Because when you find yourself on the pitch against dwarfs sitting on top of a steamroller or chainsaw-wielding goblins, the chances of suffering casualties aren't exactly slim. All in all, the blood bowl rules do an excellent job in allowing the player to identify with his team and to start "caring" about it, adding a lot to the addictive nature of the game.
The gameplay itself is highly tactical (despite a few hiccups of the AI, that sometimes will loose it a little), the options available to each player to create his own tactics and to personalize his team's play, paired with the extreme variation between each team and each race, makes for an ever-changing gameplay, that will often put veteran coaches in front of problems that they didn't predict.
Do you think it being turn-based makes the game less exciting? Think again. Almost every action that involves contact with an opposing player (even just moving through his tackle zone) involves a dice roll. You'll often find yourself sweating while the dices decide your destiny, and cheering at the screen when difficult action (that often involves multiple rolls) succeeds and leads to a spectacular touchdown.
Even just the kick off will keep you on your toe, as special event can and will occur, from the audience invading the pitch and beating down some players from both teams, to threats to the referee that very conveniently will ignore the subsequent fouls.
The level of challenge is ensured by the fact that each team has a "value". The team with the lower value in each match will be awarded an amount of "pocket money" that they will be able to spend on that match only to purchase several advantages: from mercenary players and named star players, to magic scrolls that will allow the audience to cast spell on the pitch, moving on to bribing the referee and so forth.
That's expecially useful in online leagues, where teams with a different value will play against each other quite often. It also poses an interesting dilemma to coaches. To strenghten their team so much that it's value will be bloated and their opponents will be awarded more money, or to keep the value low and earn such advantage themselves?
If you read something about the game's features, you probably noticed that I didn't mention the "real time" mode at all. The reason why i didn't is that it's an horribly implemented, redundant and simply useless afterthought. Cyanide would have done better not implementing it at all and concentrating their budget on polishing the turn based play. if you feel masochistic give it a try, but I can almost guarantee that you'll abandon it for the turn-based gameplay after a couple of matches.
The graphics and the music are quite average, they're nothing spectacular (even if I have to say that the art direction, expecially for the pitches, is absolutely spot-on, and captured the spirit of blood bowl quite well) and, just as much as the animation, can be defined "enjoyable".
There are of course a few flaws, besides the aforementioned real-time mode, the commenters, while funny and well acted at the beginning, tend to become a little redundant, due to the limited number of lines that play over and over during the matches. Some more variation would have done the game well, but in the end anyone that's familiar with sports titles knows that no matter how many comment lines you have, they WILL become redundant after a while. Blood Bowl's ones just become monotonous earlier.
In the end, unless you're a young gamer that can't stomach a turn-based game, Blood Bowl will, despite the flaws here and there, probably offer you several hundreds of hours of addictive gameplay.
At the moment the game is only available for PC (digital download). It will be released on Xbox 360 this september. I'm actually quite curious to see how the online gameplay will benefit from Xbox Live.
Drakensang: a little known gem
There are many games, created with a limited marketing budget, that slip under the radar of most gamers. Many of them are mediocre, some are little unknown gems that deserve more attention than what they get.
Drakensang: The dark Eye is one of those.
During the golden age of pen and paper RPGs in the late eighties, Dungeons and Dragons was the most well known, but many other systems and settings were developed and published. One of the most peculiar and interesting was The Dark Eye, an RPG born in germany and retaining, in it's setting, that lovely germanic feel that made it's dark-medieval setting so unique and charming.
A few years later, it spawned three PC games, known by RPG fans for being most definitely challenging (some would say "hardcore"): Realms of Arkania: Blade of Destiny, Realms of Arkania: Star Trail and Realms of Arkania: Shadows over Riva.
While not as popular as Ultima, The Elder Scrolls or other sagas, the Realm of Arkania series earned a loyal fanbase, expecially due to it's involved storylines (you know I have a weak spot for those) and the peculiar setting.
But after this long introduction, it's time to come back to the modern day. In 2008 the German developer Radon Labs revived the series with Drakensang: The Dark Eye. Unfortunately, due to the low publishing budget, the game was released only in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Luckily digital distribution (Which I normally hate, but I do appreciate the fact that it helps low-budget developers to release their games to a wider audience) opened a new way, and Radon Labs managed (in february 2009) to release Drakensang on Steam.
Initially the game passed way under my radar, but then, thanks to the hint of a friend (Thanks Asuryan :D) I found out about it and immediately downloaded it.
The first impact, I have to admit, has been quite harsh. One of the game's worst flaws glaringly jumped to my eye almost inatantly. There's no visual character customization. Zero. Once you chose your class and gender, you're done, your character's looks are completely standarized and cannot be changed (unless you use a mod, there are a few available, but that doesn't really alleviate the problem). If you're still reading and didn't simply go look for another article on Dragon Age: Origins (can't wait for that one...), I have to say that, after that bump on the road, things got immediately better.
As soon as I selected the "expert mode" in the character creation, i was able to enjoy a very deep skill customization system, importent directly from the pen and paper rules, that literally made me giggle with glee.
Everything can be finely tuned to create the best (or the most appropriate RPG-wise, depending on what one is looking for) character possible. One of the most interesting features, for instance, is that you don't have just to decide how many points to assign to a certain weapon. You also have to "plan" how to train in such weapon. If to concentrate more on attack or parry. You can even spec a weapon as defensive and another as offensive, increasing your versatility. I have to admit that such little details are a delight for an old RPG veteran like me.
The game itself is surprisingly well made. The graphics are lovely, expecially due to a wise use of HDR and lighting, and the wide variety of environments. Unfortunately, due to the limited budget, you can't expect the freedom of action and movement of Oblivion, but if you liked games like Baldur's Gate you'll feel right at home. The structure is the same. A main story that involves the investigation on an old friend's murder and will expand as your character progresses, spotted by many sub-quests that range from solving complex puzzles to more "social" or investigative ones, making for a variety that probably won't leave you wanting.
Combat is actually where the old Baldur's Gate fans will feel right at home. While you can face every enemy in real time, the pause function works exactly like in BG and it's successors, allowing you to take your time and evaluate the situation before assigning a queue of actions to every character. The tactical depth created by this solution makes every fight unteresting, as one can experiment with different combinations. Add to this the character customization and a quite smart wounding system (a character or monster can be killed not only by depleting his hit points, but also by inflicting five critical strikes that will gradually cripple his performance) and you can understand that Drakensang is quite a lot more than what initially meets the eye.
The NPC companions that will acompany you during your adventure are actually quite interesting themselves, each one with his or her personal story and involvement in the main plot, enriched by a voice-acting work that's quite good, expecially if compared to the usual quality of non-english productions.
So, Is Drakensang a perfect game? Of course no. In addition to the lack of visual character customization, you'll notice a few other flaws, mostly due to the low development budget. The crafring system could have been more varied, and the involvement and interaction with the companions could have been a little more complex. There's no romance whatsoever, and you know that, at least for me, this is a quite serious flaw.
Even considering the downsides i just mentioned, Drakensang remains a breath of fresh air in the field of computer RPGs; a partial return to a glorious past that many were hoping for.
It's not as "big" as Dragon Age will be (hopefully), but it's definitely worth trying while we wait. For sure i can say that it occupied 56 hours of my time in a very entertaining way.
Drakensang: The dark Eye is one of those.
During the golden age of pen and paper RPGs in the late eighties, Dungeons and Dragons was the most well known, but many other systems and settings were developed and published. One of the most peculiar and interesting was The Dark Eye, an RPG born in germany and retaining, in it's setting, that lovely germanic feel that made it's dark-medieval setting so unique and charming.
A few years later, it spawned three PC games, known by RPG fans for being most definitely challenging (some would say "hardcore"): Realms of Arkania: Blade of Destiny, Realms of Arkania: Star Trail and Realms of Arkania: Shadows over Riva.
While not as popular as Ultima, The Elder Scrolls or other sagas, the Realm of Arkania series earned a loyal fanbase, expecially due to it's involved storylines (you know I have a weak spot for those) and the peculiar setting.
But after this long introduction, it's time to come back to the modern day. In 2008 the German developer Radon Labs revived the series with Drakensang: The Dark Eye. Unfortunately, due to the low publishing budget, the game was released only in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Luckily digital distribution (Which I normally hate, but I do appreciate the fact that it helps low-budget developers to release their games to a wider audience) opened a new way, and Radon Labs managed (in february 2009) to release Drakensang on Steam.
Initially the game passed way under my radar, but then, thanks to the hint of a friend (Thanks Asuryan :D) I found out about it and immediately downloaded it.
The first impact, I have to admit, has been quite harsh. One of the game's worst flaws glaringly jumped to my eye almost inatantly. There's no visual character customization. Zero. Once you chose your class and gender, you're done, your character's looks are completely standarized and cannot be changed (unless you use a mod, there are a few available, but that doesn't really alleviate the problem). If you're still reading and didn't simply go look for another article on Dragon Age: Origins (can't wait for that one...), I have to say that, after that bump on the road, things got immediately better.
As soon as I selected the "expert mode" in the character creation, i was able to enjoy a very deep skill customization system, importent directly from the pen and paper rules, that literally made me giggle with glee.
Everything can be finely tuned to create the best (or the most appropriate RPG-wise, depending on what one is looking for) character possible. One of the most interesting features, for instance, is that you don't have just to decide how many points to assign to a certain weapon. You also have to "plan" how to train in such weapon. If to concentrate more on attack or parry. You can even spec a weapon as defensive and another as offensive, increasing your versatility. I have to admit that such little details are a delight for an old RPG veteran like me.
The game itself is surprisingly well made. The graphics are lovely, expecially due to a wise use of HDR and lighting, and the wide variety of environments. Unfortunately, due to the limited budget, you can't expect the freedom of action and movement of Oblivion, but if you liked games like Baldur's Gate you'll feel right at home. The structure is the same. A main story that involves the investigation on an old friend's murder and will expand as your character progresses, spotted by many sub-quests that range from solving complex puzzles to more "social" or investigative ones, making for a variety that probably won't leave you wanting.
Combat is actually where the old Baldur's Gate fans will feel right at home. While you can face every enemy in real time, the pause function works exactly like in BG and it's successors, allowing you to take your time and evaluate the situation before assigning a queue of actions to every character. The tactical depth created by this solution makes every fight unteresting, as one can experiment with different combinations. Add to this the character customization and a quite smart wounding system (a character or monster can be killed not only by depleting his hit points, but also by inflicting five critical strikes that will gradually cripple his performance) and you can understand that Drakensang is quite a lot more than what initially meets the eye.
The NPC companions that will acompany you during your adventure are actually quite interesting themselves, each one with his or her personal story and involvement in the main plot, enriched by a voice-acting work that's quite good, expecially if compared to the usual quality of non-english productions.
So, Is Drakensang a perfect game? Of course no. In addition to the lack of visual character customization, you'll notice a few other flaws, mostly due to the low development budget. The crafring system could have been more varied, and the involvement and interaction with the companions could have been a little more complex. There's no romance whatsoever, and you know that, at least for me, this is a quite serious flaw.
Even considering the downsides i just mentioned, Drakensang remains a breath of fresh air in the field of computer RPGs; a partial return to a glorious past that many were hoping for.
It's not as "big" as Dragon Age will be (hopefully), but it's definitely worth trying while we wait. For sure i can say that it occupied 56 hours of my time in a very entertaining way.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
The new Gundam PS3 game looks promising
I am, probably, one of the few that actually liked the generally hated Gundam: Target in Sight (Gundam: Crossfire in the US) game. It wasn't a top notch title, but it shown a degree of promise for the future. A testament to the fact that a simulation game on a current generation console based on the Gundam universe was doable.
The game had several flaws. The battles were small and extremely streamlined, and very little story was shown. No characters, no plot twysts. A gundam game without a comparably awesome story was doomed not to be well received.
Building a real life Gundam in Tokyo wasn't enough, and a new Game was to be expected to follow suit, so here we are.
On September the 3rd a new Gundam game will be released by Namco Bandai, exclusively on the PS3 (just in Japan for now, a western release date hasn't been announced yet, but most of the latest Gundam games have been exported to the west, so there are good chances that we'll be soon able to play it at least in English): Mobile Suit Gundam: Battlefield Record U.C.0081
The game, set after the end of the One Year War (yes, thankfully it's set in the original Universal Century timeline), seems to concentrate on the aftermath of the struggle between the Earth Federation and the Principality of Zeon. The Zeon forces are trying to reorganize and strike back, while the Federation is trying to stabilyze their fragyle supremacy.
In detail, the player will be able to play on both sides of the conflict, that features two opposing mobile suit squadrons: Phantom Sweek on the Federation side, and the Invisible Knights on the Zeon side.
Both squadrons have a full cast of characters (including a few female ones), which promises a full fledged story. The best thing is that such story will be narrated thanks to quite spectacular animated scenes (That often will merge with the gameplay itself) and that definitely reminds of the beautiful style of the best Gundam series (08 MS team comes to mind, the setting seems similar as well). Looks like Namco Bandai decided, this time, to go for an approach similar to what Sega used for Valkyria Chronicles, which definately adds to how promising the game looks.
While the game is being developed by a different team as opposed to the one that developed Target in Sight (the team involved is the same that developed the Gundam games for the Dreamcast and Saturn, and those were beautiful), the "simulator" approach hasn't been abandoned, though the mobile suits seem to be moving more fluidly, compared to the previous game. The graphics look, overally, simply amazing.
A very interesting detail is that the player will not only control his own mobile suit, but a whole squad of three. Each of the "wingmen" will be a full fledged character with his personality and role in the story, allowing not only for a quite tactical approach to battle but also for a better involvement in the story and with the characters.
The setting in which the battles will happen seems to be the surface of Earth, but a wide variety of environments will be available. Several pictures show the presence of underwater stages as well, while no space battles have been shown yet.
I have to admit that I'm trilled. What has been shown so far seems to be extremely promising. One of my personal gaming dreams has always been a game like Wing Commander set on the Gundam universe, and this one seems to be exactly that. All we can do is to keep an eye on the official site and cross our fingers for a timely release on the western markets.
Gundam Ikimasu!
The game had several flaws. The battles were small and extremely streamlined, and very little story was shown. No characters, no plot twysts. A gundam game without a comparably awesome story was doomed not to be well received.
Building a real life Gundam in Tokyo wasn't enough, and a new Game was to be expected to follow suit, so here we are.
On September the 3rd a new Gundam game will be released by Namco Bandai, exclusively on the PS3 (just in Japan for now, a western release date hasn't been announced yet, but most of the latest Gundam games have been exported to the west, so there are good chances that we'll be soon able to play it at least in English): Mobile Suit Gundam: Battlefield Record U.C.0081
The game, set after the end of the One Year War (yes, thankfully it's set in the original Universal Century timeline), seems to concentrate on the aftermath of the struggle between the Earth Federation and the Principality of Zeon. The Zeon forces are trying to reorganize and strike back, while the Federation is trying to stabilyze their fragyle supremacy.
In detail, the player will be able to play on both sides of the conflict, that features two opposing mobile suit squadrons: Phantom Sweek on the Federation side, and the Invisible Knights on the Zeon side.
Both squadrons have a full cast of characters (including a few female ones), which promises a full fledged story. The best thing is that such story will be narrated thanks to quite spectacular animated scenes (That often will merge with the gameplay itself) and that definitely reminds of the beautiful style of the best Gundam series (08 MS team comes to mind, the setting seems similar as well). Looks like Namco Bandai decided, this time, to go for an approach similar to what Sega used for Valkyria Chronicles, which definately adds to how promising the game looks.
While the game is being developed by a different team as opposed to the one that developed Target in Sight (the team involved is the same that developed the Gundam games for the Dreamcast and Saturn, and those were beautiful), the "simulator" approach hasn't been abandoned, though the mobile suits seem to be moving more fluidly, compared to the previous game. The graphics look, overally, simply amazing.
A very interesting detail is that the player will not only control his own mobile suit, but a whole squad of three. Each of the "wingmen" will be a full fledged character with his personality and role in the story, allowing not only for a quite tactical approach to battle but also for a better involvement in the story and with the characters.
The setting in which the battles will happen seems to be the surface of Earth, but a wide variety of environments will be available. Several pictures show the presence of underwater stages as well, while no space battles have been shown yet.
I have to admit that I'm trilled. What has been shown so far seems to be extremely promising. One of my personal gaming dreams has always been a game like Wing Commander set on the Gundam universe, and this one seems to be exactly that. All we can do is to keep an eye on the official site and cross our fingers for a timely release on the western markets.
Gundam Ikimasu!
Valkyria Chronicles 2 announced for PSP
Via the last issue of Famitsu, Sega announced the sequel of my personal favourite, Valkyria Chronicles. A quite peculiar detail is that this second chapter of the saga will be on PSP. Given the absolutely beautiful anime based on the series, it was pretty much a given that a sequel was to come.
The story of Valkyria Chronicles 2: The Gallia Royal Military Academy seems to be set two years after the war fought in the first game, and while it's probable that some of the old characters will come back none of them actually appeared between the ones pictured on the magazine. A completely new cast seem to have been created for the new game, including a younger hero, that seems to be more in line with the usual JRPG stereotypes (spiky hair, brash attitude...). More pictures can be found here, here and here.
Looks like the plot will be based on some kind of involvement of the Empire in a rebellion across the southern Gallian Border. On one of the pages of the article we can see a descendant of the Valkyrie dressed in a (skimpy) imperial uniform. Will she be able to match the absolute charm of Selvaria? Let's hope so.
By the way, I finally got around tweaking the graphics layout of this blog. Hope you like it :D
The story of Valkyria Chronicles 2: The Gallia Royal Military Academy seems to be set two years after the war fought in the first game, and while it's probable that some of the old characters will come back none of them actually appeared between the ones pictured on the magazine. A completely new cast seem to have been created for the new game, including a younger hero, that seems to be more in line with the usual JRPG stereotypes (spiky hair, brash attitude...). More pictures can be found here, here and here.
Looks like the plot will be based on some kind of involvement of the Empire in a rebellion across the southern Gallian Border. On one of the pages of the article we can see a descendant of the Valkyrie dressed in a (skimpy) imperial uniform. Will she be able to match the absolute charm of Selvaria? Let's hope so.
By the way, I finally got around tweaking the graphics layout of this blog. Hope you like it :D
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
