Tag Archives: ps3

Twisted Metal Preview: More than Simple Nostalgia

Posted on by
380

It's true: gamers are going to be pleasantly surprised by just how powerful the feelings of nostalgia are when they pick up a controller and play the new Twisted Metal for the first time.

However, while the characters, vehicles, environments, power-ups, and weapons will assuredly bring back fond memories of many long nights playing split-screen with friends on the original PlayStation, these ingredients have been updated by the current technology and feature new elements that go far beyond simply bringing back good memories- this Twisted Metal stands to be a title that works to reinvent the series and put vehicular combat back on the mainstream gaming map.

This newest installment's recipe of elements is a sure fire tactic to not only draw in new clientele to the title, but also give long-time fans of the series a reason to stay with the franchise.

Iconic characters like Sweet Tooth, Warthog, Darkside, Dollface, Mr. Grimm, and Preacher are all making a return in this newest installment. And, as to be expected, the game’s campaign follows a similar plot from the previous titles: each character is fighting in a gruesome, vehicular-based destruction derby where the infamous Calypso grants the last contestant standing one wish. Nothing, however, is unique without a sense of individualism-- and all of the dark, morbid, yet somehow weirdly heroic characters in Twisted Metal’s world entertain their own psychotic desires they wish to be fulfilled.

At the risk of sounding obvious, the TM series has always been a multiplayer game at its core. However, even within a few hours of playtime on the demo, it’s quite obvious that the technology used in developing the game has come a long way since Twisted Metal: Black was released a decade ago. Furthermore, it's no secret that the newest installment’s focus is on expanding the scope of the series to meet the expectations of an online audience who have become accustomed to deep and engaging multiplayer experiences.

What exactly will this new developer bring to the table?

This time around, Twisted Metal online multiplayer allows for as many as 16 players to enter the combat zone through the PS network where they can choose from a variety of fan-favorite and newly introduced game modes, gain XP, track their Global Rank, and earn a variety of rewards. Of these playable game types include:

  • Deathmatch - Players must fight each other in the level (Think Free-For-All)
  • Team Deathmatch - Players must destroy as many players on the opposing team as possible before time runs out.
  • Endurance - Players must destroy enemies which respawn upon until he/she is dead.
  • Race - Players must race through a series of checkpoints- (hmm, Mario-cart with missles?)
  • Team Hunted - One player on each team is the "Hunted" which means that he/she will be targeted by everyone on the opposing team. (Think Infected from CoD)
  • Last Man Standing - Each player has a specific number of lives and the last remaining player wins.

There are some new twists in this metal for sure -- the PS3 hardware allows for more variety in the arena, and the exponential growth of online multiplayer since the last game should draw a new crop of curious players looking for a different kind of "shooter." But so far, the most powerful effect of the new Twisted Metal game might be bringing back all those great memories you have of the old one.

Twisted Metal is set to release on February 14, 2012 in North America, and March 1, 2012 in Europe (buyers should know though that the European date is possibly being pushed back for censorship concerns). Buyers of new copies will receive a voucher to download Twisted Metal: Black for free. This free version of Black, however, will not be a high-definition remake- but simply a port of the original PlayStation 2 version (which will lack the online function that was added in a later re-release of the original game). In addition, every copy of Twisted Metal is set include a voucher to download the “Sweet Tooth Outcast” multiplayer skin for Starhawk.

As always, thanks for reading! Remember, we're a community and you're an essential part of that! Join in by commenting on the articles, leaving your opinion in the forums, listening to the podcast, and following us on Twitter!

Cheers!
JohnnyWayne_
Twitter: @JohnnyWayne_

Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning Hands-on Preview

Posted on by
456

There’s no doubt that the past year of RPG gaming has been an interesting mix. Notable releases include the obvious: The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim, Witcher 2, Star Wars: The Old Republic, and FF XIII. It seems that the RPG market is suddenly overflowing with quality and a sense of rejuvenation. Enter debut developer 38 Studios and their bold plans with Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning.

In case you were unaware, 38 Studios was founded by former professional baseball pitcher Curt Schilling, who has, on his staff, Todd McFarlane- the man who brought us Spawn- and they are planning on using their first title to break a few of the RPG genre’s oldest rules.

After a few hours of hands-on time with the game’s demo (available now) it is clear that the world of Amalur and the characterization of its people have been carved out in painstaking historical detail. As a result of this work, Amalur is not just epic in scale- it contains five massive areas including Forest, Coastal and Desert regions, along with more than 150 hand-crafted dungeons) - but ambition too.

As par for the course, the game begins in conventional RPG fashion- choosing your character from four playable races. In Reckoning players can choose from the Human (Almain), Elvish (both the Dark Dokkalfar and Light Ljosalfar), and the nomadic Varani – all of which having specialties with certain attributes (combat, magic, etc.).

After choosing your hero the avatar can then be customized for appearance, before embarking into the game's mammoth single-player challenge, which is estimated to last more than 40 hours- and that’s excluding the hundreds of optional side-quests.

All this brings us to the combat elements of the game. Combat in Reckoning is, by no means, the game's most distinctive feature- but it just may be the feature that gamers will be talking about the most.

Reckoning uses a combination of simple hack and slash combat (controller buttons mapped to weapons such as swords, bows or magic staffs) with quick-time events for boss battles and finishing moves. The result of this combination is a hybrid combat system that will have many players describing it as very “God of War” esque.

Granted, this system of combat may not please hardcore fans of RPG gaming, but it's a system capable of some impressive combos. Of particular note is the use of this combat within the game’s "Reckoning Mode" - time slows down, moves can be chained together, and players can expect some serious in-game eye candy.

However, while a lot of game time will inevitably be spent in combat and questing, Reckoning's most innovative feature is its creative mythology- specifically the inclusion of concepts such as “Fates” & “Destinies” which allow the player more choice in the game’s environment, but carry the potential to have a profound effect on the gameplay depending on how they are approached.

With elements such as these, Reckoning takes a different approach from most RPG character progression models. Players start the game able to take three main paths – Might, Finesse, or Sorcery. Each of these paths contain around twenty upgradeable abilities. However, at any leveling-up point players can choose to specialize areas other than their main focus- allowing for the creation of hybrid characters that may combine abilities from all of the three paths.

Now, it remains to be seen whether such a dynamic form of character development will empower or over-complicate gameplay, but the developers believe it enforces a kind of open world realism and flexibility which has so-far been unseen in main-stream RPG’s.

This flexibility even extends to other areas of the gameplay. There are, for example, also nine non-combat skills – some which have unexpected affects on the gameplay., For instance, improving a character's stealth abilities does introduce some incredible stealth kills, but it also opens up career paths like pick-pocketing, which are more corrupt in nature.

So, how pleased are gamers of the “immediate gratification” generation going to be with a game that so easily thwarts simple summaries?

I don’t want to prophesize that Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning will “raise the bar” or completely “innovate” the RPG, but the game does bring something different to the genre. It’s a world of beauty and horror – it presents gamers with a frightening situation that is worth fighting against and gives players the tools needed to stand in the fight.

To me, Reckoning sounds like just the kind of game to get 2012 off to a good start- at least in the realm of RPG.

As always, thanks for reading! Remember, we're a community and you're an essential part of that! Join in by commenting on the articles, leaving your opinion in the forums, listening to the podcast, and following us on Twitter!

Cheers!
JohnnyWayne_
Twitter: @JohnnyWayne_

Resident Evil 6: Details Beyond the Trailer…

Posted on by
214

For fans of the series, it’s been way too long since Resident Evil 5 was released, and Capcom just whetted our appetites with their release of the first RE6 trailer. This footage reveals three minutes of cut scenes and gameplay- and shows off a few new characters from within the upcoming game.

However, much more information exists about this game than what lies within the trailer...

Executive producer Hiroyuki Kobayashi, producer Yoshiaki Hirabayashi and director Eiichiro Sasaki, recently revealed a nice amount of additional information about the game- and it is enough to get anyone excited about this upcoming installment of Resident Evil- a series that some consider to be the epitome of survival horror gaming.

Capcom admits that Resident Evil 6 has been in development in secrecy for a number of years and has the largest development team since the series’ start. The staff currently sits at approximately 150 people, but if the contributing parties were to be included, the number of people involved could be as high as 600... that’s a lot of creative input- and it has many long-time fans of the series wondering about the direction RE6 will be taking.

This time around Leon S. Kennedy and Chris Redfield will fill the role of protagonists- and while RE6’s story is split between two main characters, Chris and Leon’s plot lines will progress simultaneously. However, Capcom has released information regarding an additional main character- an unnamed man who they describe as "the man who's told to save the world"... it’s safe to assume that gamers’ interest is piqued.

Zombies are returning for the sixth game, but there are, in classic Resident Evil fashion, new monsters being introduced into the series as well. One of these enemies is the regenerating “Javo” which is receiving a lot of buzz surrounding this game at the moment. However, it seems that the monsters will be a focus of later teaser trailers due to the lack of information on them at this point.

Kobayashi also promised that Resident Evil 6 would focus more on fear this time, as many players have been begging the return of this element in the series. This is however quite contrasting what another Capcom exec said recently about wanting to attract the “Call of Duty” crowd with a more action oriented approach. Nevertheless, the developers have released comments which dictate that they are producing the game with a sense of fluidity in its action, but a focus on the horror which created the series’ success. And, while many have their own personal doubts about whether or not “horror” will actually be the game’s focus, it does have fans hopeful that the game will return to its roots- instead of continuing to be “action oriented” as the series has been in recent titles (namely, RE5).

So, in short, here’s what we know so far:

  • Leon and Chris will work together as protagonists. They are both playable, and for the first time in the series' history, these two characters will be in a same game.
  • The game is action/horror oriented. Capcom is calling it ‘dramatic horror’. The game will have diverse shooting, more than just the traditional Resident Evil over-the-shoulder gameplay style. 
  • The game is set 10 years after the Racoon city incident.
  • There will be other playable characters who have yet to be named (one of them "the man who's told to save the world").
  • Co-op mode has been confirmed.
  • The game is being presented, at this time, as a globe-traversing adventure.
  • There will be a drastically improved, and much more fluid melee combat system

Resident Evil 6 is set to be released on November 20th of 2012 for the PS3 and Xbox 360 (with the PC version to follow at a later date). You can view the 3+ minute trailer mentioned in the article by clicking here: RE6 Trailer.

As always, thanks for reading and following our site; feel free to leave your thoughts! You can always chat with me on twitter at @JohnnyWayne_ and our Podcast at @GRPodcast.

Cheers! 

JohnnyWayne_

Dust 514: FPS Innovation & Its Connection to EVE Online

Posted on by
281

Crowd Control Productions' Dust 514 is still one of the greatest mysteries in gaming, but nonetheless this PS3 exclusive is already being dubbed as a “game changer” amongst console FPS gaming.

The title was announced this past year at E3 2011 and further explained at Gamescom. From the details we have so far, Dust 514 is a PlayStation 3 exclusive shooter tethered to the PC-centric MMO EVE Online.

So why all the hype? The game developers are attempting to do something that's never been done before: tie together an existing game with an entirely different game on an alternate platform, and have the events of one become consequential to the other.... quite a mouthful.

Brandon Laurino, the game's Executive Producer, has been the main source of information surrounding this rather ambitious title. Laurino explained the game to the PS Blog with this comment:

"We're breaking so much ground with Dust 514. We're not only building a full console MMO; we're bringing one that feeds into another MMO on a completely different platform. We're breaking more ground by bringing the microtransaction business model to a console shooter for the first time... We accept that there is a barrier to entry with something as deep as EVE Online and we wanted to make it more accessible, providing another portal and dimension into the EVE universe... What's more accessible to a gamer in this day and age than a shooter?"*

Unlike it’s “parent game” EVE Online, Dust 514 isn't a space-borne ship-to-ship MMO. The game will take place instead on the surface of the planets within the EVE universe and will be a vehicular combat game on an extremely large scale. However, when players move into installations and outposts, it becomes an infantry based First-Person Shooter.

Many in the gaming community are speculating that the gameplay will follow a similar setup to popular titles like MAG, yet with the incorporation of its unique features. For example, to mesh with EVE Online, it’s looking as though players will have plenty of customization through the “Fitting System” that long-time fans of the series are already familiar with. In Dust 514 players take on the role of an armed mercenary- a bit different from EVE Online’s role as a "Capsuleer"- the pilot of a spaceship. These mercenaries are freelance fighters, available for hire- receiving their assignments from EVE players. However, although the Dust players will be mercenaries, they can also seize territory from planets within the EVE universe for their own alliance and corporation (which will likely take place in the form of “Corporation vs. Corporation” matches). The current limit for online matches is said to be set at 64 (32 vs. 32). However, CCP has stated that the limit may increase by release or afterward.

What about maps and locations you may ask-- No “map packs” here, Laurino has made mention instead to “thousands of separate planets”* to which players will have access.

While there are obviously a lot of unknowns here, what we do know is that this title won't be hitting store shelves until well into 2012. The question is: what kind of opinion can we formulate about Dust 514 based on the information we have?

Well, its scope and scale seem to be the most important focus at this point. It seems obvious that in terms of depth and content this title will easily become the biggest multiplayer FPS on the market. However, by virtue of it also being an MMO, this title could be the deepest and richest FPS ever conceived. Most importantly though, and this might make things a bit controversial to some, by bringing microtransactions into the picture Dust 514 could very well be changing the dynamics of FPS console gaming forever.

See the Official Dust 514 Preview Trailer by clicking here!

As always, thanks for reading and following our site; feel free to leave your thoughts! You can always chat with me on twitter at @JohnnyWayne_ and our Podcast at @GRPodcast.

Cheers!

*http://blog.us.playstation.com/2011/10/10/dust-514-interview-changing-console-shooters-forever/

Bioshock Infinite- Can “Fragmenting Reality” Innovate the Series?

Posted on by
242

Let’s get something out of the way- the original Bioshock game was incredible.

The game released at a time when FPS games were becoming run of the mill “go here and blow this up” shooters. Bioshock set itself apart by taking the most exciting elements of FPS gameplay and refocusing the format into an immense, masterfully created universe- while simultaneously creating what has been argued to be one of the best story lines in modern video-gaming history.

Irrational Games has an uncanny ability to produce their Bioshock series with a fluid connection between art, gameplay, and character creation. Because of this, many gamers are incredibly excited about the upcoming third installment in the series- Bioshock Infinite. Even more, however, are questioning whether or not the innovations of the gameplay, specifically the ability to “fragment reality” will be an improvement to the game, or its downfall.

First, a bit of background for newcomers (feel free to skip a few paragraphs if you've played previous titles):

Moving away from the confines of Rapture's dystopia, Infinite takes place in the expansive city of Columbia; a city built in the sky. The city started as a place of wealth and prosperity, but has become one of anarchy after an attack by the citizens on a group of bystanders down below. After this attack the city was exiled, leaving the citizens (and the city itself) isolated, floating around the upper reaches of the atmosphere. This, of course, leads to civil unrest and a city at war.

Infinite's story begins with your character being tasked by mysterious individuals to infiltrate this lost city and rescue a girl named Elizabeth. This girl, in particular her abilities, have become the source of much attention by the two opposing forces in Columbia (those who have become engaged in this civil war).

Elizabeth has the ability to control fragments of an alternate reality- she can use those fragments to fabricate materials and conjure various entities which are incredibly helpful to both herself and your in-game character. She can for instance, create makeshift cover in front of your character, saving you from a barrage of bullets or conjure a storm of electricity to dispose of enemies blocking your path.

According to what has been released about the game so far, Elizabeth is not directly controlled, but rather reacts naturally to the environment and provides gamers with the choice to use her abilities in times of need. However, as with all things Irrational Games related, there is a twist- using these powers come at a cost.

Fragmenting reality will hurt and damage Elizabeth when you choose to use her abilities.

Thus, utilizing Elizabeth’s abilities becomes a matter of morality- do you make your journey through the game easier at her expense, or trudge through without her help, albeit with a feeling of heroism and good-will?

Bioshock Infinite is a very interesting concept. The game will obviously retain a lot of the natural Bioshock charm, but at this stage of pre-release does cause long-time fans to pause and speculate as to whether or not this “fragmenting of reality” will be a benefit or hindrance to the series. In a game that has proven itself to be solid on all previous occasions, some are calling this mechanic an unnecessary element of change, while others praise Irrational Games for their creativity.

Hopefully the option to use this ability will be just that- an option. I sincerely expect Irrational Games to put the choice in the hands of the gamer; and, if this is the case it shouldn’t change any of the elements which have made the series such a success. If, however, there are moments in the gameplay where using this ability is not optional, but rather forced, I can see this being a very large problem for long-time fans of the game.

As always, thanks for reading and feel free to comment with your own thoughts and opinions.

Cheers!

JohnnyWayne_

Chat with me on Twitter via @JohnnyWayne_ and our podcast via @GRPodcast

Battlefield 3 vs. Modern Warfare 3? Let’s Drop the “Versus”

Posted on by
346

As a guy who sincerely enjoys his FPS games, I am incredibly disheartened by the raging fanboy attitude of gamers towards these two upcoming titles. Why does every opinion have to include the word “versus”? These two titles are both going to be huge sellers... and honestly, if you are so jaded in your opinion that you are taking sides with one or the other, the only thing being sold short is yourself.

So, in lieu of this “versus” attitude, let’s get honest for a moment, lay the cards out on the table, step back and approach the topic with a sense of reality.

First, why all the fan-rivalry? Don’t get me wrong here, rivalry is a great thing: it makes the developers work harder to create a better product. But why only pick one game or the other? Honestly, if two blockbuster movies were to release simultaneously, you might see one before the other, but would you never watch the other film? Of course not; so why retain this attitude about your gaming experience?

I have always found this side of the video game industry to be both confusing and amusing. Here we have two games with incredible potential. They contain similar, yet individualized gameplay features, campaigns based around modern military conflict, and incredibly socialized online environments... yet extremist gaming fanboys from both sides seemingly take a vow of exclusion never to “lower themselves” to play the other.

Here’s a “Call of Duty" to playing games on a “Battlefield” – drop the attitude folks. Both games are going to be great. Both games are going to be fun. Both games will innovate and update the genre in their own fashion. This cult-like attitude of picking a camp and never traversing to the other is a plague to our community of gaming. Rivalry is fine, but this narrow-minded brand devotion and gamer-trashing seems to be a bit over the top when you consider what you are arguing about.

The way I see it, in reality, the only real rivalry for these two games is in their competitive marketing campaigns. Battlefield and Call of Duty occupy the same general niche’ in the gaming market. Thus, these two titles are explicitly competing for your money to purchase their respectful product. Nevertheless, do you honestly believe that either Activision or Electronic Arts (EA) would be offended if all of us went out and bought both of these games? I think it’d be safe to argue no here. However, what this does translate into is a competition for “staying power.” Since both EA and Activision know we are looking to buy their games, a competition to see who can make their game resonate with players in continued usage. Therefore, I reiterate that this competition is a wonderful thing- at the end of the day we should all be appreciative that these companies are competing to create games which hold our attention through their social nature and replay value.

Maintaining an affable sense of rivalry and competition is healthy- always has been and always will be. As these companies and developers compete they push each other to create better products.

Yes, Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3 will obviously contain differences which are individual to their series. However, the competition between the two titles should remain within the companies themselves. Let these two powerhouse publishers push each other. Let their rivalry spawn creativity and gameplay innovations. But let the rivalry end within the companies themselves. We should be growing our community stronger by enjoying these games, not chastising those who choose to play something different than what we choose ourselves. So, if you’re a gamer who likes his or her FPS titles, you have a choice to make in late October and early November. But remember two things: buying both is actually a choice (in case you hadn’t realized that yet), and others gamers aren’t your enemy.

As always, thanks or reading. Remember, we're a community and you're an essential part of that! Join in on the RioT by commenting on the articles, leaving your opinion in the forums, listening to the podcast, and following us on Twitter!

Cheers!

JohnnyWayne_

Sony’s “PSN Pass” Rumors Coming True

Posted on by
360

The rumors seem to be coming true: Later this year, Sony is slate to bring single-use registration codes to the Playstation Network which allow users to access online modes within games. Also as rumored, this trend is set to be rolled out with the release of Resistance 3 (Insomniac Games). What this means is that new games, which include an online multiplayer/co-op component will be released with what is currently being dubbed and “PSN Pass” that is a one-time use code specific to one user. Therefore, if you were to buy the game used, you would also need to purchase an online pass code (rumored to be $10-15) to play the game online.

According to the German website Konsolentreff.net, SCEA released to following statement about the progam: "We are always evaluating new programs for our online offering, and starting with Resistance 3 this September, we will be instituting a network pass program for PS3 games with online capabilities. This program will be game-specific. Games that are a part of this program will include a single-use registration code that grants the account holder redeeming the code full online access for that title...This is an important initiative as it allows us to accelerate our commitment to enhancing premium online services across our first party game portfolio."

Now, this is not the first time Sony has insisted upon the purchase of single-use codes for playing online game modes. Obviously we have EA’s “Online Pass” which was introduced last year. But, there are other examples predating this decision as well (examples including pay-to-play vouchers for the PSP games like ModNation Racers and Socom Fireteam Bravo 3). However, it is the first time this idea is being discussed as a platform-wide program, instead of one which is specific to the publishers of a certain game.

Looks like you're going to have to add "Sony" to that list Cole...

Granted, there is a strong sense of business savvy in Sony’s making a decision designed to combat used game sales; it’s obvious that publishers and developers, and thus Sony themselves, are not making money on video games when people are buying them used. Therefore, requiring the purchase of online passes to play multiplayer games will generate revenue from online multiplayer components. But, is this a show of ill-will from Sony? Does this decision simply make the company, one which is just now recovering from the largest hacking event of recent memory, look even more like a money-hungry business?

I personally buy games new, so I don’t really know how much this will affect my own gaming experience. However, let’s be honest, gaming is an expensive pastime and I do see the argument for those who want to buy games used. From what I have seen, those against the “PSN Pass” argue the following points:

  •  it would defeat the point of paying less for a used game
  •  it would dissolve the ability to let a friend borrow and play a game or even take a game to a friend’s house to play
  •  it feels eerily similar to DLC nickel and dime tactics
  • it could possibly rule out the option of renting games with an online focus (although I imagine that rentals would probably come with a two-day pass, much akin to GameFly’s program)
  • it will rule out the ability to trade in games for any kind of incentive whatsoever (if companies aren’t making money from people buying used games, they aren’t going to be paying gamers to trade them in either)

In a perfect world publishers and developers would somehow get a cut of used games sales so that they are receiving money for the work that they put into developing their games. Presently however, it is looking more and more like online pass codes and the following logo are the reality of our PS3 gaming future.

Still, there are obviously a lot of things that remain “up in the air” about his program and Sony is saying the usual: that they “will release more details at a later date.” Nevertheless, even though we don’t know what that specific date is, we now know for certain, that come September, if you want to play Resistance 3 online with your friends you are going to be buying the game new.

Cheers!

JohnnyWayne_

Twitter:@JohnnyWayne_

Join in on the conversation! Visit the GamersRiot.com forums and let us know your opinions.  

Sexism in FPS Gaming: A Trend Worth Stopping

Posted on by
398

For the most part, guy gamers are a welcoming lot. Most of the time when I find myself in a lobby with “GIJane,” “Mocha_Mandy,” “annies_gotta_gun,” and the rest of the [G!RL] clan the guys in the lobby are very hospitable and things end up being a lot of fun. In fact, if I’m being honest some of the best times I ever have in FPS games have been, hands down, when female gamers come into the lobbies. This environment creates a much more universally fun aspect to the experience of gaming by bringing in an “unexpected” social environment.

Nevertheless, why is it that so many male gamers are disrespectful towards girls in online video game lobbies, especially FPS games, before and after a match? Is it because some guys think that first-person shooter games are gender specific, and that girls should stick with playing stereotypical “girly games”? Or, is it because there is an allure of invisibility to the world of gaming; one which provides hecklers with an opportunity to say whatever they want without the repercussions?

These Moms will top the boards in Black Ops.

In my experience, negativity typically begins in the FPS realm as certain guys feel the need to give condescending “gameplay tips” or make Duke Nukem-esque comments (and we all know how things worked out for that guy's career...). This is especially true when there is a female gamer at the top of the scoreboard. Male gamers HATE to lose to female gamers.

I don’t get it... getting outplayed should bother us, but it should bother us in a way that makes us want to get better, not hate our competition. This is especially true when the hate is simple based on differences of gender. Just because video games hold a “male dominated” stigma doesn’t mean male gamers should get infuriated to being bested by female gamers. Look, my wife has never once thrown a spatula across the kitchen in a fit of rage because I made a great tasting dinner... she just says “damn, good job!” and enjoys the spoils of my success at the grill. Correspondingly, I have never once thrown a controller across my man-cave when she scored higher in a free-for-all than I did...I just say “damn, good job!” and sit back to listen to all the trolls with lower KDR’s when we get back into the lobby.

Now, it’d be easy to say that sexism in gaming is “just teenage boys making stupid comments”, but I believe that to be a misguided and oversimplified notion. You see, gaming isn’t just for teenagers anymore. Gone are the days of video games being reserved for middle school children who are good at math and computer science and are forced to sit at the “nobody” table. Gaming has evolved and with that evolution has created its own niche and become popular amongst a much wider age bracket than the video games of yesteryear. Correspondingly, the typical “average age” of the modern gamer is now between 15-28. Now, let’s don’t get all Chris Hansen "To Catch a Predator" here. These observations are not to say that all 28 year old men in a Call of Duty lobby are putting down, degrading, and hitting on 16 year old girls... but if you're a gamer who has a sense of maturity about you (no matter what your age) and you are tolerating those who disparage girl gamers, what does this say about you? And what kind of precedent does this set?

All in all, nobody likes to be patronized, nobody likes masochism, and it is inarguable that the world of gaming would be a much better place if these two mindsets were non-existent. But, alas, negative attitudes do exist, and the only way to stop stupidity is by taking action: kick out of the lobbies those to choose to show off their lack of knowledge, or simply press the handy “mute” button so that the only person they can talk to is their ignorant selves. Obviously, the only thing these types of comments do is make it even more difficult for girls to recognize themselves as gamers...is this really what we want as the future of gaming?? I mean think about it, without female gamers, we would never have situations like this…

 

httpv://youtu.be/_eJmYKN_1QE

Extra geek cred for appearances by a rapping Seth Green,
Battlestar Galactica's Katee Sackhoff and Stan Lee.

 

At the end of the day, we all have the same goal: to have fun playing our favorite games while striving to possibly find ourselves at the top of a scoreboard every once in a while. So, I leave with this: as a guy, it has always been my personal observation that things work out much better in the long-run when you leave a lady remembering you as the provider of a good experience... why should this rule be any different in the world of gaming?

 

Cheers,

JohnnyWayne_

Twitter: @JohnnyWayne_


 

DLC: Damn (gamers) Love (to give publishers) Cash

Posted on by
423

Obviously, the title of this article is not what the acronym DLC truly defines. These three letters create an abbreviation for the phrase “Downloadable Content,” which is most commonly used when referring to DLC for PC games or current gen consoles (the 360, Wii, and PS3). But, is this title very far from the truth of what a DLC is?

As gamers, what is it about downloadable content that makes our mouths water and eyes widen? DLC packages provide gamers with a proverbial teat from which we can milk out every ounce of entertainment within a game we have come to know and love. By downloading new content into seasoned games we make our games new again...effectively creating a novel experience within a comfortable environment. However, does that want of content and unbridled love of gaming give developers the right to milk our wallets for every ounce of greenery as well?

From a marketing perspective DLC’s are genius. Instead of asking gamers to pay $100+ for an “all inclusive” game on release day, developers have created a mantra of smaller transactions (typically $10-$15) for smaller “packs” of downloadable content spread out along the lifespan of a game. This, according to proponents of the strategy, keeps material fresh and creates a “new” experience for gamers throughout a longer time frame than the core game would be able to accomplish alone.

However, from an opposing point of view, that of a hardcore gamer who is going to pay for this type of content on a continual and loyal basis, the DLC mantra feels eerily akin to nickel and dime tactics employed by big business. When engaging in the pros and cons of this debate, many gamers point to the fact that this “new” content is routinely complete and ready to play when the core game is released. For example, and you knew this was coming, the Call of Duty series reportedly has many, if not all, of their multiplayer maps created before the core games are released.

Hmm, does this mean that we are paying for “new” content, which by definition isn’t new at all? That is absolutely what it means. However, is this wrong, or just good marketing?

I argue both. You see, at the end of the day video games are a business, and a VERY large one at that. In fact, the video game industry typically generates an income of $2.6 billion annually (Baylor University), enough to fund the annually salary for the President of the United States about 6,500 times (based on a reported $400,000 per year for the President; feel free to check my math if need be). So, as a business, the gaming industry and those who run companies within it have an interest in making money, you won’t find me having any problem with that.

What you will find me having a problem with are the misperceived principals of honesty that front as a Wizard of Oz curtain covering DLC releases. Major developers allure gamers into thinking that this content is always new; a freshly developed packaging of content for which the developers used feedback from the audience in creating new and improved content for us to utilize. However, as mentioned before, there is nothing new or improved about the content. Generally speaking, DLC is simply old content that hasn’t been taken out of the packaging yet.

What becomes even more infuriating yet, is the direction in which major gamesakes are taking their DLC mantra. Take, for example, two of the most well know upcoming titles on the market: Modern Warfare 3 from Activision/Infinity Ward and Battlefield 3 from EA and the Dice development studio. If you have somehow missed that these two titles have laid the framework for some very direct and heated competition, you might want to create yourself a YouTube account and start watching a few videos.  

Activision and IW struck first with their highly controversial release of information about Modern Warfare 3's use of the COD Elite program: a subscription based service which will entitle members to perks such as improved map and weapon analytics, weapon stat tracking, player career tracking, and dedicated website access (just to name a few). Correspondingly, Dice struck back with a few extras of its own, namely pre-order bonuses and day one DLC that could add aspects to the gaming experience within BF3 without having a subscription based price scale. Obviously, these two are at each other's throats to win over the market. In fact, this competition has become so inflamed that the CEO from Ea released a statement saying that he wants “Call of Duty to rot from the core…” I don’t know about anyone reading this, but where I’m from, them’s fightin’ words...

httpv://youtu.be/ppz3JZ0xA6k

However, the competitive nature of gaming is not problematic for me. What is problematic is the way EA and Dice are handling the DLC for Battlefield 3.

(*Note: please refrain from "you're just a MW3 fanboy" comments here. Remember, this is an artilce on DLC, not subscription based content and, therefore, I will be discussing BF3's controversial DLC decision, not MW3's Elite program. Subscription based services are a totally different issue deserving its own write-up and conversation)

Now, I’m not going to go into all the meticulous details of the controversy here, it would take too much time to cover everything and if you’re reading this you have probably already familiarized yourself with the issue anyway. Nonetheless, the controversy in a nutshell is this: Battlefield 3 will be released with a “preorder claus” of sorts, one which offers extra weapons for the game and a DLC which is purchasable on day one of release.

This is a prime example of how DLC can become just another way to gain money, rather than a way to provide content for gamers who love the art of gaming.

Why? One, there should NEVER be an in-game advantage purchasable for players on day one which allows people to buy themselves a better kill-to-death ratio. Skill should always be the one variable which sets players apart, not bank accounts. Two, if these things are available at the beginning of a games release, why not add them to the original game for us to enjoy? Are we, as customers, not paying for a game and the development that has gone into that game as it is when it hits the shelves on release day?

My rule for DLC is this, if it has been created and can be made available when the games goes live, then it should be free. Why? Because as gamers we are paying for the development of a game up until the release date, the actual point of sale. However, if something is made that adds a new enjoyable element of the game, which developers had to come up with and create after a game’s release, then sure, by all means offer it to us at a reasonable cost so we can then expand that game’s experience.

Think about how many good relationships this would generate between video game corporations and gamers. If Ea/Dice were to simply release BF3 with the content readily available up to the date of release at no "extra" charge to gamers, would that not win over MANY people who already feel that Activision is a company only interested in their customers wallets? Could that show of good will and good faith not help to tip the proverbial odds in Battlefield's favor in a big way?

At the end of the day, this is what i know: I know that I am a brand-loyal kind of guy. If a brand treats me well, I will return with my wallet in hand to continue purchasing products from that brand until the relationship is tarnished. For me, the way in which a developer, publisher, and/or company handles the DLC for their release is the variable which proves whether or not they have as much respect for the gamers buying their product as we have for the games they are making. Correspondingly, video game publishers are not going to stop doing something that makes them money until we, as the ones giving them those funds, cease to hand over cash until they provide us with content worth spending it on.

Cheers!

JohnnyWayne_

Twitter:@JohnnyWayne_

[In the latest episode of our podcast we discuss EA and DICE's decision on DLC: http://www.gamersriot.com/archives/2743]

Dead Island, Welcome to Paradise

Posted on by
391

Dead Island is a game being developed by Techland, and it has a lot of people excited includng me. Especially after the games announcement trailer which consisted of zero game-play, but was so well done and entertaining that it started quite a buzz around the internet. It was a short video playing mostly in reverse of a family that was trying to survive the sudden outbreak of zombies on the island. Its a must see, so here it is.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Old41bsSXU

Now after that trailer I was thinking to myself WOW this is gonna be great. I can't wait to see some real game-play for this game. Fortunately we got another trailer just the other day that including some game-play.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZKvp-13j-E

Who knew that you could make killing zombies look so pretty.

Now lets get onto the features of Dead Island. It's got the always fun first person melee combat. Which is a big part of the game. Theres lots of hacking and slashing to level up your character. Because at the start your a zombie slaying noob who can get winded after just a few swings of your weapon so you want to choose your attacks wisely. Until you grind out enough XP where you can just unleash fury at your disgression. Dead Island also has four player co-op in which friends can join and drop at any point online. It also has weapon customization in which you can upgrade and enhance weapons throughout the game by taking them to workbenches and tweaking them. The weapons also have durability and will require constant repair. One of the coolest features of Dead Island is its set in an open world that's free to be explored. Sweet!!!

Check out the latest interview featuring about 10 minutes of open world gameplay.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DwWp_HN5fM

We'll be able to get our hands on Dead Island on August 1st on PC, Xbox 360, and PS3. Hopefully I'll see you all in Banoi.