The trailer for Fallout 4, the Steam Summer Sale, the announcement of a fourth installment in the venerable Doom series. Lessons from the past like The Elder Scrolls Online, Sim City 5, Duke Nukem Forever... All overseen by a hype-filled industry that is fueled and supported by an uncritical following eager to accept anything resembling a game as long as there's something new around each corner. It's almost like the industry has grown too big, too cynical – too content to simply make money and purely technical advances.
There will never be another 'Alpha Centauri Moment' in gaming. There will never again be a genuinely intelligent, original, and compelling game from a major studio. If it happens it will be purely by chance. Formula-tweaking will not allow it to happen. Meantime you get to enjoy your bloated, lifeless, stagnant franchises. Billion dollar abortions litter the new scene.
Fallout 4 looks like Fallout 3 with 'next-gen' wankery like modular building, a deeper crafting system, a voiced protagonist, and all the other embellishments that make a person excited for a Bethesda game until they remember the previous four Bethesda games and also that distractions are great for padding a game that may include: a terrible story, a pissy and clunky engine, dialogue from hell's anus, formulaic combat, a big world full of the mostly identical things, annoyance.
I can't believe they're going for the interactive introduction again, after it pissed off just about everyone who played Fo3 more than once. Spending months programming a cool way to customize the PC's face is kind of a hint about the pathology of modern game design. There's a weird kind of narcissism where the way your character looks becomes more important than doing cool things, a fatal passivity for a pastime that used to promise ridiculous, cool, and/or interesting situations of greater and greater complexity over time.
Doom 4. Oh cool, another lame shotgun. Demons drop bullets? Where's the zombie troopers? Looks like it could be more or less mediocre than Doom 3 but I will gladly bet one conciliatory blog post that Doom 4 will miss the point just as badly. Larger teams and more money only diluted everything and added dozens of useless features, but at least Doom 4 won't have crafting bolted onto it, so the team isn't completely incompetent. The idea of context sensitive executions is kind of cool but it's So Not What Doom Was Ever About and Reduces Player Agency so I'm not excited and in fact disappointed already.
You can't exploit nostalgia forever. Let some of these franchises die. They deserve rest.
Remakes and re-releases of old games are big news, but they're only important because they reveal an industry that's nearly flatlined in terms of creativity. Every new piece of shit game is celebrated and overhyped by a toothless, uncritical, and quite frankly spoiled consumer base. You get a new installment in your franchise every year and some people have been patiently waiting for something interesting to play for a decade, while secretly understanding that it'll never happen, that there will only be hollow and pretty experiences from now on, that getting interested in a game and playing it for years is something of the past. Player agency is in decline. Everything's a mile wide and an inch deep. At this point I'd pay more for a closed-world, non-emergent, non-feature-cluttered game with tight gameplay and focused mechanics. I've seen two decades of failed promises and I don't get the culture anymore, I really don't like its self-regarding nature or its identity crises, and I'm extremely skeptical of its offerings.
The Steam Summer Sale. No prominent, relatively recent
game under $5. I saw System Shock 2 for a dollar. I first finished that
game over 10 years ago, and I'm ready to let go, even though my suspicions
about nostalgia are repeatedly proven wrong when I return to a clunky,
ugly, kind of pain-in-the-ass game and it's immediately more compelling
than Borderlands 2. Currently I don't know if I'll ever need to upgrade
since apparently the majority of good games already exist and were made
what seems like eons ago.
At least let me try a modern game for
cheap, Steam. That's what the deal used to be, remember? Let it be an
indie game, I don't care, but one really good deal a day would be great.
I guess now that steam money is basically free you will never allow a
great deal to happen again, which is a pity because I've been saving
card money for months in hopes I can spend it on something cool, but I
just play an old game and complain to my small handful of friends who still game.
I got Just Cause 2 for something like $1.75 three
years ago and there hasn't been an equivalent deal since – the game is
probably more expensive right now. I realize the business model Steam
adopted doesn't work like I think it should, but even non-perishable
products should get cheaper after they've been on sale a dozen times –
even if it's only the sale price. Steam has realized that savvy gamers
are becoming hardened towards hype and ready to wait months if not years
to buy new games, because the price will drop so much more than when we
traveled to physical locations to buy our interactive videogaming
products. We are extremely spoiled, but if the general quality and inventiveness of these products doesn't increase we will probably stop caring about them entirely, and it will spare us a lot of disappointment.
On the plus side: I'm saving money and spending it in more interesting and dynamic ways and I have a lot of freed-up time to spend on actual life. Turns out life is actually very interactive, with: numerous challenges, emergent situations, and high stakes. Still I'd like a cool game, please. Doesn't have to be super complex, doesn't need the best A.I. in the business, it just needs to be fun to play. Gameplay first; dorky kid shit like graphics and hype last.
Showing posts with label comeback. Show all posts
Showing posts with label comeback. Show all posts
6/26/13
Existential Crisis Zone: I Used to be a Better Blogger
A couple of years ago I was in top form. Everything I wrote was going to get ignored by pretty much the whole internet and I still made it count. I look at myself recently and, dear reader, it is painfully apparent that I've lost the patience to craft outstanding prose and to keep a non-partisan balance. Yes, I've committed the cardinal sin of becoming political. I might've been the same a few years ago, but what is important is that I was doing it with grace, if at all. That's not everything I've been doing wrong, but it's a good portion.
So I apologize. I'm not going to put up another piece about Edward Snowden, how Bradley Manning is still ignored (and his connection to the repealing of Don't Ask/Don't Tell - a very interesting hypothesis), or how the two men are very similar even though Edward Snowden is a civilian. I won't post about the odds of Snowden getting nabbed, disappeared, or simply imprisoned for the rest of his life. I won't opine about what would be fair, or if what he did was right. Though I will say that it speaks volumes about society that even 'the good life' wasn't enough to silence him, and that he is being denounced as rotten traitor, and that a decade+ ago the things he recently brought to light would have be mocked as patently paranoid. And I will also say he is lucky that McCarthyism has worn off somewhat in the 'States, even though it lives on in spirit, as so many things do.
I really wanted to, of course. Why else have a blog if not to write about issues that one considers important? Well, the world doesn't seem to care very much what Snowden did. I haven't met a single person since the story broke out who gave a shit. I don't know if they're unsurprised at the totalitarian security state slowly caging them in, or if they are just anesthetized to it. Maybe the oversharing internet attention junkies have won, the concept of identity is permanently deformed and bureaucracized, and the privileged are smirking, and anyone who thinks differently is already a fool in the eyes of the world. Yes: the state looking inward is nothing new, but the implications have never been this clinical or far-reaching.
You can tell how tempted I am to write about it. I would continue to approach the topic as if it mystified me. I would slowly bring in the revelations that this, ironically, takes the modern world another step towards the supposedly obsolete and abandoned precepts of Stalinism. I would use the word totalitarian a bunch of times and I would put in a few choice burns at facebook's expense. I would not mention Orwell, because I'm not an idiot, but I could. I would point out that collusion between government and industry is never a good sign. Damn, it could've been a fine piece for the world to ignore. Another feather in my cap, but I don't want feathers in my cap and I don't want to say too much. Suffice it to say that the modern world has been making me more and more uncomfortable and uneasy.
[Oh, and I could go on...]
So I apologize. I'm not going to put up another piece about Edward Snowden, how Bradley Manning is still ignored (and his connection to the repealing of Don't Ask/Don't Tell - a very interesting hypothesis), or how the two men are very similar even though Edward Snowden is a civilian. I won't post about the odds of Snowden getting nabbed, disappeared, or simply imprisoned for the rest of his life. I won't opine about what would be fair, or if what he did was right. Though I will say that it speaks volumes about society that even 'the good life' wasn't enough to silence him, and that he is being denounced as rotten traitor, and that a decade+ ago the things he recently brought to light would have be mocked as patently paranoid. And I will also say he is lucky that McCarthyism has worn off somewhat in the 'States, even though it lives on in spirit, as so many things do.
I really wanted to, of course. Why else have a blog if not to write about issues that one considers important? Well, the world doesn't seem to care very much what Snowden did. I haven't met a single person since the story broke out who gave a shit. I don't know if they're unsurprised at the totalitarian security state slowly caging them in, or if they are just anesthetized to it. Maybe the oversharing internet attention junkies have won, the concept of identity is permanently deformed and bureaucracized, and the privileged are smirking, and anyone who thinks differently is already a fool in the eyes of the world. Yes: the state looking inward is nothing new, but the implications have never been this clinical or far-reaching.
You can tell how tempted I am to write about it. I would continue to approach the topic as if it mystified me. I would slowly bring in the revelations that this, ironically, takes the modern world another step towards the supposedly obsolete and abandoned precepts of Stalinism. I would use the word totalitarian a bunch of times and I would put in a few choice burns at facebook's expense. I would not mention Orwell, because I'm not an idiot, but I could. I would point out that collusion between government and industry is never a good sign. Damn, it could've been a fine piece for the world to ignore. Another feather in my cap, but I don't want feathers in my cap and I don't want to say too much. Suffice it to say that the modern world has been making me more and more uncomfortable and uneasy.
[Oh, and I could go on...]
3/20/13
Hype Level Critical: Age of Wonders 3
Age of Wonders is the holy grail of fantasy turn based strategy/RPG mashups. Age of Wonders I is a highpoint beyond even the Heroes of Might and Magic series, the Disciples series, or arguably even the slightly unrelated Civilization series. However, the (for a long time) final game in the series was released in 2003, which left possibly the longest shadow in gaming. Age of Wonders is a non-AAA series, in part because it never developed Warcraft's following and also because originated in (the final years of) an era when there were more publishers and less-AAA series. Multi-million dollar advertising budgets were also extremely rare in those days, but notable exceptions exist (PS1 and other consoles, Daikatana).
When the first game was released in 1999, it already looked outdated. In the modern era it would hardly pass (graphically, among the subnormals, children, and hacks who review games) for a half-assed indie title - even in 1999 (a time when, arguably, nearly all graphics were primitive and 'ugly') it was often remarked upon negatively for its graphical shortcomings. Nevertheless, since the game was a product of pure craft, what graphics it did possess were A) infinitely presentable, and B) charmingly executed. Honest reviewers acknowledged that if the presentation wasn't cutting-edge, it was passable, and in any case it was paired with deep, engaging and challenging gameplay. It also had a magic system that was deliciously broken, and crafty players could discover all sorts of hi-jinks to turn themselves into demigods.
The series might not have ever developed Warcraft's following, but among the hardcore Age of Wonders I is generally acknowledged as a masterpiece. I hate using the word 'hardcore', but that's what it comes down to: the game is unforgiving and if you cannot handle strategy, tactics or adversary, it is best to avoid it. It is one of those games which requires tact and some trial-and-error. There is no hand-holding, and losses are inevitable. The sequel (and its standalone expansion) carried on the tradition with varying degrees of success. The first missions alone can prove, on easy, more difficult than entire campaigns in other games, levels can take long and get brutally difficult even against basic AI. I would not go so far as to call the game masochistic, myself, but others might – odds are they're softies, though, with no real appreciation for challenge and glory.
With the modern explosion of game sequels, it is ultimately unsurprising to see the return of a great series backed with significant nostalgia. Yet the story is probably the best of the year (which is already a good one), even better than the Age of Empires II HD release. One of the best parts is that the success of Minecraft is partially responsible, which means that, whatever you think about Minecraft, it finally gave back to the community. I say all this before Age of Wonders III is even released: good news is good news, and I am happy about this.
After the Nerd Bubble article it may seem that I am a cynical outsider to nerd culture or even an elitist myself, but I am simply a lapsed gamer who used to care too much. I continue to play AoW1 because it is that good, and GOG.com sells it at a fair price (and sometimes a steal price), so anyone can play it even on the most modern hardware. This is truly the best era of gaming: even the ghosts of yesteryear are coming back to life. However, I would like to caution myself and others who are getting hyped already. Let's keep our expectations realistic.
The more I read about the AoWIII project, the more I like it. Michiel can den Bos, who composed music for AoW1 (not to mention Deus Ex and Unreal, two other dear favorites of mine) is apparently on board. Truly good news, because he never did a bad job of scoring a game. Evidently the old crew is, for a large part, assembled on the project. Triumph Studios are no loafers and I don't expect they will release a garbage bag, but it's been a decade since they've tangled with the AoW series. The main question, quite possibly the most pertinent and exciting question, is whether or not Age of Wonders III will recapture the magic of the first game. To do so will be a challenge - the first game had something like 12 races and unit exposition for each and every of the 48+ units. Just to execute this small part (which had much to do with the 'sense of magic' in the wondrous debut) can be difficult, and to ignore it would annoy at least some fans.
When the first game was released in 1999, it already looked outdated. In the modern era it would hardly pass (graphically, among the subnormals, children, and hacks who review games) for a half-assed indie title - even in 1999 (a time when, arguably, nearly all graphics were primitive and 'ugly') it was often remarked upon negatively for its graphical shortcomings. Nevertheless, since the game was a product of pure craft, what graphics it did possess were A) infinitely presentable, and B) charmingly executed. Honest reviewers acknowledged that if the presentation wasn't cutting-edge, it was passable, and in any case it was paired with deep, engaging and challenging gameplay. It also had a magic system that was deliciously broken, and crafty players could discover all sorts of hi-jinks to turn themselves into demigods.
The series might not have ever developed Warcraft's following, but among the hardcore Age of Wonders I is generally acknowledged as a masterpiece. I hate using the word 'hardcore', but that's what it comes down to: the game is unforgiving and if you cannot handle strategy, tactics or adversary, it is best to avoid it. It is one of those games which requires tact and some trial-and-error. There is no hand-holding, and losses are inevitable. The sequel (and its standalone expansion) carried on the tradition with varying degrees of success. The first missions alone can prove, on easy, more difficult than entire campaigns in other games, levels can take long and get brutally difficult even against basic AI. I would not go so far as to call the game masochistic, myself, but others might – odds are they're softies, though, with no real appreciation for challenge and glory.
With the modern explosion of game sequels, it is ultimately unsurprising to see the return of a great series backed with significant nostalgia. Yet the story is probably the best of the year (which is already a good one), even better than the Age of Empires II HD release. One of the best parts is that the success of Minecraft is partially responsible, which means that, whatever you think about Minecraft, it finally gave back to the community. I say all this before Age of Wonders III is even released: good news is good news, and I am happy about this.
After the Nerd Bubble article it may seem that I am a cynical outsider to nerd culture or even an elitist myself, but I am simply a lapsed gamer who used to care too much. I continue to play AoW1 because it is that good, and GOG.com sells it at a fair price (and sometimes a steal price), so anyone can play it even on the most modern hardware. This is truly the best era of gaming: even the ghosts of yesteryear are coming back to life. However, I would like to caution myself and others who are getting hyped already. Let's keep our expectations realistic.
The more I read about the AoWIII project, the more I like it. Michiel can den Bos, who composed music for AoW1 (not to mention Deus Ex and Unreal, two other dear favorites of mine) is apparently on board. Truly good news, because he never did a bad job of scoring a game. Evidently the old crew is, for a large part, assembled on the project. Triumph Studios are no loafers and I don't expect they will release a garbage bag, but it's been a decade since they've tangled with the AoW series. The main question, quite possibly the most pertinent and exciting question, is whether or not Age of Wonders III will recapture the magic of the first game. To do so will be a challenge - the first game had something like 12 races and unit exposition for each and every of the 48+ units. Just to execute this small part (which had much to do with the 'sense of magic' in the wondrous debut) can be difficult, and to ignore it would annoy at least some fans.
1/13/11
Late Night Talkshows: Conan's Inevitable Comeback
Last night's (Wednesday, 12 January) episode of Conan was a reminder that no matter how bad the opening jokes are, Conan O'Brien will make the first ten minutes worth it. The monologue jokes were weak, so weak in fact that I suspect they were purposeful stinkers, but I still laughed a lot, because Conan can salvage failed jokes almost as well as he capitalizes on good jokes. The snow joke was outstandingly bad, which made it good for a laugh.
Andy Richter's reaction to the story about masturbation was priceless, and then he mocked the opening jokes as well. The final joke, about the 'Nintendo Wii Wii" was so awful that I think my theory is entirely correct. La Bamba's snowstorm was classic, though, "All trombone music has been suspended for the rest of the show". When James Lipton showed up and was denied work the show had redeemed itself. And nobody even made a height-related joke, which is a mark of maturity.
When Denis Leary brought up typewriters and Conan derailed him in the 20's style was awesome, if you go in for that kind of humor. It's late-night comedy at its finest when Conan O'Brien pretends to telegram a Twitter posting while Denis Leary wipes away a tear of laughter. Plus, Leary said his mother was on Facebook, but said so in a Twitteresque way, which means that at least one of my predictions has already come true, even earlier than I thought. So keep an eye on local bears. The show ended well, with Ice Cube (who is not on Late Night shows that often) and a comic (Tim Minchin) on a piano (which sounds trite but he made it work). But the opening was really surprisingly funny.
This brings me to 2010 Retrospective Pt. 4 (or 5): State of the Late-Night Talk Show in 2010
Jimmy Fallon had a great year, and his show is definitely getting better, but I think his best years are still ahead. Leno and Letterman are doing as well as ever, and Letterman even crashed into a Christmas tree on stage a few weeks ago, so you know those shows are doing fine. Ferguson's show is still excellent and irreverent. They've all been stable and working in much the same manner as ever.
So there is a fair bit of competition, but Conan O'Brien had the comeback. And I read TV critics saying Conan was "uncomfortable" and "awkward" and that his show wasn't funny. Those TV critics are the same who ignored Community, so they obviously live in a time before 2009 and don't qualify to make judgments on contemporary TV. Conan wins because his show had only a month in 2010 to prove itself, and it was damn funny in that time. It's a comeback, and that is the kind of story you can't invent and have to watch while it happens. And I want to know how it plays out, so I know if I was right in my completely unimportant internet judgment.
Andy Richter's reaction to the story about masturbation was priceless, and then he mocked the opening jokes as well. The final joke, about the 'Nintendo Wii Wii" was so awful that I think my theory is entirely correct. La Bamba's snowstorm was classic, though, "All trombone music has been suspended for the rest of the show". When James Lipton showed up and was denied work the show had redeemed itself. And nobody even made a height-related joke, which is a mark of maturity.
When Denis Leary brought up typewriters and Conan derailed him in the 20's style was awesome, if you go in for that kind of humor. It's late-night comedy at its finest when Conan O'Brien pretends to telegram a Twitter posting while Denis Leary wipes away a tear of laughter. Plus, Leary said his mother was on Facebook, but said so in a Twitteresque way, which means that at least one of my predictions has already come true, even earlier than I thought. So keep an eye on local bears. The show ended well, with Ice Cube (who is not on Late Night shows that often) and a comic (Tim Minchin) on a piano (which sounds trite but he made it work). But the opening was really surprisingly funny.
This brings me to 2010 Retrospective Pt. 4 (or 5): State of the Late-Night Talk Show in 2010
Jimmy Fallon had a great year, and his show is definitely getting better, but I think his best years are still ahead. Leno and Letterman are doing as well as ever, and Letterman even crashed into a Christmas tree on stage a few weeks ago, so you know those shows are doing fine. Ferguson's show is still excellent and irreverent. They've all been stable and working in much the same manner as ever.
So there is a fair bit of competition, but Conan O'Brien had the comeback. And I read TV critics saying Conan was "uncomfortable" and "awkward" and that his show wasn't funny. Those TV critics are the same who ignored Community, so they obviously live in a time before 2009 and don't qualify to make judgments on contemporary TV. Conan wins because his show had only a month in 2010 to prove itself, and it was damn funny in that time. It's a comeback, and that is the kind of story you can't invent and have to watch while it happens. And I want to know how it plays out, so I know if I was right in my completely unimportant internet judgment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)