• 27May 13

  I Say No.

  No.

  Just no.

  Now I haven't posted much lately because, frankly, I've not had much to say.  Why waste time on nonsense, right?  Well, Microsoft gave me something to say, and that something is "no."

  Now, I'm sure you all have seen the Xbox One, and I'm sure I'll get at least one or two posts defending that piece of anti-consumer garbage (especially when I put this on Giant Bomb), but I'll say it anyway since it's my blog and I can do whatever I like.

  It doesn't matter what games are on it.  It doesn't matter how many wonderful features they add.  The deal was broken when they announced it would be Kinect mandatory, online mandatory, and encumbered by DRM, I made my decision.  Obviously, this is all about breaking the used games market, and that's obviously the game industry's right.  However, smart consumers have the right to say "naw, I'm good.  I'll sit this one out."

  The problem is that this is all a move to force people onto a peripheral that no one liked in the Kinect, and in kowtowing to the misguided tactics of EA.

  Now, let me expouse one important truth.  The reason gaming is a bottomless pit of money is not because of used games.  It's not because of piracy, at least not on the consoles.  The reason for gaming's status as a nigh-impossible industry to make steady profits in is that, once you get past Call of Duty, you basically have an industry that spends like Hollywood to serve a market the size of the comic book industry's.  With the exception of Nintendo and a few other small 3rd parties, the game industry has reached the point where a company can stare in the face of three and a half million copies of a game and call it a failure.  And with costs ballooning and the market narrowing due to DRM that many can't even use, that three and a half million is going to get harder to reach.

  You know, it's funny.  Some time back, I asked you all to ponder what we should sacrifice for higher quality graphics.  Well, Microsoft has provided a potential future.  We are now being asked to sacrifice all consumer rights in exchange for a modest improvement in graphical quality, and now we're at a crossroads in gaming.  This is where we, as a whole, decide whether we're going to take a stand, turn our backs on this nonsense, or bend over and prove that we'll buy anything, no matter how hard we're screwed.  Thankfully, at least the UK is showing early signs of standing on the side of common sense,

  Also hilarious is how Sony's facebook obsession and Microsoft's anti-consumer agenda have driven me to the Wii U, a system that I wasn't too hot on just months ago.  Guys, your system announcements aren't supposed to be driving me to the competition.  That's not how it's supposed to work.

  That said, I understand that, barring Sony saying "we're not doing any of that MS crap" with clarity and force, that I'm not going to be doing a lot of gaming - or at least next-gen gaming - for the forseeable future.  Nintendo's not going to get a ton of 3rd party support, and even if Nintendo seriously ramps up first-party output, I don't expect to buy nearly as many games as I used to.  It's sad, but sometimes it's just time to move on.  I guess we'll always have Paris, eh?  And at least I'll have more money.  Maybe I can get back into anime or something.  Or maybe start reading some comics.

  Or maybe not...

  • Posted May 27, 2013 12:30 pm GMT
  • Category: Editorial
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 26Jan 13

  On the Importance of Not Kissing Up.

  It's interesting, the reaction to Tom McShea's recent Gamespot article about Nintendo's Wii U woes. It's interesting, because it highlights the opposing wills that grip this hallowed hobby of ours.

  On the one hand, people always complain about an unwillingness by the media to ever speak negatively about a game or game company, regardless of what they may or may not have done.

  On the other hand, whenever someone dares criticize an industry figure, especially one of the industry's sacred cows, the feedback received in response is almost always a solid block of blind defense by those incensed by the mere idea that their idols might be imperfect.

  It's an interesting spot for games journalists to be in. The audience has made its desires clear, but the desire itself is confusing: Be critical, but only of things that we have already decided to hate. Now, I don't know about anyone else, but that just sounds bloody boring. I always wanted people to challenge my preconcieved notion, not out of a desire for controversy at all cost, and certainly not out of a blind allegance to ideology. I believe that looking at facts in an objective manner and coming to a point of view, even debating it (in a polite and constructive manner) is critical to creating interesting, entertaining and thought-provoking content.

  Now I'm not going to deny that gaming media is sometimes shady as all hell (notice I said sometimes). We all have witnessed the worst of it, even if the details would only emerge years later. However, I have to wonder, does the gaming public help? Do we send mixed signals?

  I honestly think we do. Any time someone says something that gamers may not agree with, they're almost certain to be overrun with enraged replies, no matter how well-thought and tempered the commentary may be. At the same time, accusations of favoritism run rampant, with many convinced beyond the shadow of a doubt that the industry is bought out.

  However, what if it's not the game companies that the media is afraid of, but the fans? Games journalists need an audience as bad as they need games access, and it's just easier to be positive than negative.

  Personally, I welcome Tom McShea's content and his insight, and not just because I agree with him in this case. The man has things to say, and he's not a snarky tool like Alex Navarro about it. There's NOTHING wrong with having an editorial opinion, as long as it's clearly marked and doesn't insult the user. I hope more people learn to tolerate opposing viewpoints that are presented in a constructive manner. Lord knows debate is lost.

  • Posted Jan 26, 2013 12:37 pm GMT
  • Category: Editorial
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 25Jan 13

  Dead Island Statues, Sexism and Gamers.

  Well,women in gaming talked to Klepekabout that stupid Dead Island Riptide statue, and the response in the comments section were mostly as expected.

  It's disheartening that so many gamers have such a vitriolic, hateful view of anyone who speaks out against disgusting shows of blatant sexism in this industry.

  It shows three undeniable truths about the industry.

  1) No matter what the ESA wants to tell us, it seems pretty obvious that the overwhelming majority of gamers, once you get outside the mobile space, are male. If it was anywhere near parity, you wouldn't see this tribal reaction by gamers.

  2) Most gamers, at least those who go on websites like this, would rather push us women out of "their man-cave" than have a serious discussion. It's rather like the sports fandom, really.

  3) Men working in the gaming industry mostly don't care about this issue until the non-gaming media uses it to make the industry look bad and the government comes knocking.

  With this in mind, it shouldn't shock anyone that there are scads of gamers trying to downplay or even defend the shameful display by Deep Silver and Techland here. However, while the mostly male gaming audience's reaction surprises me not one iota, the lack of industry men standing up and saying "WTF are we doing?"

  Not to say there aren't male gaming voices out standing up against this nonsense, otherwise we wouldn't have Klepek writing the article in the first place. However, it seems that when sexism-related articles featuring gaming personalities' views are published, 99% of the time it's from women, and at least one of them in every other article has one woman staying anonymous because she fears backlash.

  Is it really that difficult to find men in this industry who give enough of a crap to say that maybe it's not okay for sexism to run rampant in this industry? Is it so one-dimensional?

  This whole blog post might seem strange coming from a Valis fangirl, but that series was never as condescending as most games seem to women today, at least the few that deign to have female characters at all.It is possible to be sexy without resorting to tired objectification,it is possible to make women that are both empowering and alluring in this medium, indeed, this medium is capable of so much more, even within its established genre, if the gaming industry made even the slightest efforts to appeal beyond the base.

  Now, let's not get it twisted here. I'm no advocate for making women in games sexless,lest the setting calls for it. To strip a woman completely of her sexuality solely in the name of inoffensiveness is a form of sexism in and of itself. And no one will ever convince me thatthere aren't sexualized male charactersin gaming as well. However, male characters aren't anywhere near as pigeonholed as women intostereotypicalarchetypes. The reasonThe Bosswas such an amazing character was that, despite her being clearly female was that she was never reduced to being a "game woman." She was devious, conniving, motherly, introspective and ruthless in equal measure. However, if MGS3 were helmed by anyone other than Hideo Kojima, The Boss would have almost certainly been made a guy at some point in development, because 90% of decision makers in this blighted industry can't wrap their minds around the idea that a woman can be something other than T&A fanservice.

  I'm probably going to get ripped a new one by anyone who sees this, but you know what? I don't care at this point. I just felt angry and needed a place to vent. I'll get back out of your man-cave now.

  • Posted Jan 25, 2013 7:39 pm GMT
  • Category: Editorial
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg

See Previous Blog Posts »