This is for all those who see the gaming industry circling the bowl, clockwise.

• 5Nov 07

  Wow, Just Wow.

  I make it no secret that im a huge Need For Speed fan. Need For Speed 2 was the first racing game that really caught my attention, and Ive been hooked since. After enduring 3 NFS Underground clones, it seems like theyre bringing it back to its roots, and real arcade racing. My biggest dillema, it seemed, was which system to buy it for. I was happy to find that there was demos on both the PSN and XBL, so i downloaded both. Heres what I found.

  Quite simply, the PS3 demo was the ugliest racing game ive played on this generation of consoles. Running in 720p, there are jaggies like you wouldnt believe. Looking down a straight road hurts the eyes, as everything on screen seems to mesh together to form a horrible Jackson Pollock painting. The 360 version looks so much better. The lines are smooth, the textures are sharp, and most importantly, the framerate is twice as solid as its PS3 counterpart. There were points in the PS3 demo Where I felt like I was playing an animated slideshow, rather than a game.

  How could 2 versions of the exact same game be so different? Is it that the PS3 has inferior shading capabilities (in technical terms, it actually has less shading power than the 360)? Is it that deveolpers have it out for Sony, and want to sabotage them? Is it just that it takes so much longer to write game code for the PS3 that devs choose to cut corners and release the games on time, rather than spend money polishing a game for a system that has half the userbase of its competetor? I choose to believe the latter.

  I realise its just a demo, but this seems to be a bit of a trend. It always seems like the PS3 versions of multiplatform games have horrible framerates, and less appealing graphics. I urge anyone with both systems to download both of these demos, because the difference is truly staggering.

  • Posted Nov 5, 2007 11:31 am PT
  • 1 Comment
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 2Nov 07

  Combating Gaming Ignorance: Lose The Numbers

  As the gaming community devolves, its hard to say what one factor has contributed to this devolution the most. Fact is, there's probably hundreds of factors that I'm not even aware of, but for now, I'll choose to focus on the few that I do recognize. My favorite among these being this: why does the gaming public feel the need to place a numeric value on something they consider art?

  For as long as i can remember, I have looked to various review sources for advice on which games to play. I believe im relatively smart (If i were an ape, I'd probably be the smartest ape in town), so I know not to look at the score of a particular game as any measure of its worth. I read the article, and see which pros and cons I can relate to, and go from there. It dawns on me, though, that the score matters more to this generation of gamers than the articles themselves. My solution:

  LOSE THE SCORES

  If the articled portion of the review is really all that should matter, then there should be no need for the number system. This would actually force gamers to read more about the game to make any kind of informed opinion. The ignorant gamers would no longer be able to equip their opinion cannons with score bombs, instead, they would have to compare ideas and concepts. It would open up a more intelligent flow of discussion, other than the "Halo 3 got a better score than Bioshock, but you guys say Bioshock is the better game. That doesnt make sense, you guys are idiots" brand we have grown accustomed to.

  I dont think this would be a radical change in the way games are reviewed. Sure, it would be a rough transition at first, but it could only lead to a better community. If games are to be considered art, maybe we should start treating it more so. Games, like any painting, movie, or piece of music, deserve to be experienced before a judgement is made. We have enabled the ignorant to become so by removing the experience of art from the judging process, and the community has suffered for it. The more educated gamers are on the subject of the games they talk about, the more we may be able to apreciate games as a whole.

  Gamers have grown up. We've spent the better part of our lives enjoying video games to the fullest. Do we really need to put a black and white figure on our games to know what they're worth anmymore? Have we not grown past the need for numeric value system? I think so........

  • Posted Nov 2, 2007 4:47 pm PT
  • Category: Editorial
  • 2 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 31Oct 07

  Gamers Are Idiots

  Everyone with a PS3 is a Sony expert. Everyone with a 360 is a Microsoft expert. Eveeryone with a console is a gaming expert.

  Im sorry, every time I make the mistake of reading news article comments, I come to the same conclusion : the whole of gamers are morons. Plain and simple. Every 16 year old kid with a subscription to Game Informer is now under the impression that his opinion is the only one that matters. Do Rolling Stone subscribers all feel they are music experts? Does everyone with a T.V Guide think themselves television experts? Nope, but at the same time, theres no CBS vs. NBC fanboy war, is there?

  Lets face it, ignorant gamers outnumber real gamers by a wide margin. The sad thing is, in a business as large as the gaming industry, the majority will always win. The novelty of standing on the sidelines of this pre-fabricated "war", one where both sides claim "victory" (with their hands over their ears, yelling "LALALALALALALALALALA"), is beginning to wear thin, as the reality of what its doing to the industry becomes clearer and clearer every day.

  Now, to spend the next few days wondering what radical moves could bring about real change, if any...........................

  • Posted Oct 31, 2007 7:49 am PT
  • 5 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg

See Previous Blog Posts »