farmersdigest-blog

[farmersdigest-blog]

Life is Strange: Review 4/5 – Stars (Story Badge: for excellent character work)

Life is Strange is the exact kind of new-aged adventure game that I didn’t know I wanted.  Its design and writing is top notch making it one of the best new adventure games I’ve played in recent years.  While not being without flaws, Life is Strange overcomes some of its more striking deficiencies with excellent character development and character construction.  The games basic mechanics and interactions are nothing other games in its genera haven’t done before, aside from one thing, the central concept the game is based upon, time travel.  The game leaves the player the ability to make a decision, witness the immediate outcome and change that decision, if desired, by the use of the “Rewind” power the games main protagonist, Max suddenly finds herself possessing.

 Life is Strange made me lose sleep, it’s narration conflicted with itself to such an extent that I found myself unable to focus on anything else for a short time.  It possesses what I call narrative dissonance, NOT, ludonarrative dissonance. What I mean by this is the games central location is visually and narratively in directly conflict with the actual words and descriptors assigned to them.  For example the main character Max, is supposed to be 18 but; her character model, actions and general attitude all represent someone more around 16. Max’s school ‘Blackwall Academy’ is visually similar to a High school (a boarding school but still very much secondary) it is however described as a college.  A final large swath of the story’s dissonance is in the general theme of a coming of age tale, one that is almost always used with a high school background. To be honest the whole background and design of the games environments, seem to be built off a misconception of the classic style of tale the developers were trying to write.  It genuinely feels as if the developers made a mistake in making Max 18 and corrected for that only halfway through by simple rolling into the mistake, which I don’t blame them for it’s just an odd feeling to be playing as a character who is described to be much older than she acts or how other NPC’s act towards her.        

 The overall story is, despite the extremely high level of narrative dissonance, quite good.  The beat for beat is well told, I liked how Max had an opinion on almost everything going on in the world and expressed that in full glorious voice work. It felt like I was at times having a first person perspective novel read to me.  The game tackles two main narrative frameworks (time travel and mystery) and handles them with a high degree of grace.  The mystery involved doesn’t’ really show it’s heard until a couple of chapters in, which is nice as it gives the characters time to develop and express themselves, outside of duress.  Once the full mystery plot jumps in it focused itself in such a natural way as to make me believe that these characters genuinely wanted to catch the criminal and considering Max’s ability it made sense why she felt she was best suited for the task.  The other aspect of the story, the time travel aspect was also surprisingly well done. While touching on the paradox aspect and other odd conflicts a time travel story usually has, Life is Strange didn’t focus on it.  Instead using the time travel mechanic as a way to better convey the classic gameplay tropes involved in modern adventure games.  The game also didn’t stray away from the general consequences of time travel and boldly had an entire chapter take place in an alternate reality based off a choice Max made.  I struggle to say the story as a whole was among the best but I believe it was handled aptly and if you’re the type of player that likes to explore game narration then do yourself a favor and don’t avoid this one.    

 What I think Life is Strange does best is in how it handles characters, character development and character creation.  Each individual involved either in minor or major roles feels like a complex human being.  The game takes great pains in drawing out the character dimensions, even characters that are usually defined as one dimensional, showing the player the complexity of who each character is.  The game does not excuse the characters attitudes nor does it require the player to overly focus on their complexity rather the characters varying dimensions are expressed in a natural flow.   The bitchy popular girl is a loyal friend who acts out against Max out of jealousy.   The scary drug dealer who will flip out if you insult him cares genuinely for others, epically animals and contrary to his actions has little desire to hurt the other characters.  The abusive step-father with anger issues isn’t so simple especially when you take into account the probably undiagnosed PTSD. Everyone is complex and with Max’s time travel abilities the player can explore how each decision can either set them off or focus their attention in more positive ways.  It may feel like a cheat but regardless of the decision the player has very little context on how their actions will affect the grander story and each decision must eventually reach a point of no return.  The characters are not set in stone by any means, max’s decisions and attitude throughout the week the game is supposed to take place in can have dramatic effects on how the characters develop.  The relationship progression feels natural and each character acts in accordance with the events happening around them, they change and grow just as the main character does.  It’s not always dramatic but it does work.  

Life is Strange has only one major blemish on its otherwise attractive presence still its narrative dissonance is drowned out by the excellent character work alone.  With that the rest of the game is enjoyable enough to cover the sometimes rather obnoxious texture pop-in and other graphical blemishes.   The game won’t be winning any awards on the graphical front but it does a good enough job to keep the eye pleased.  I liked the pseudo high school setting and the narrative drama put in motion more than I thought I would.  Overall it’s a well accomplished piece of game design well worth any gamer’s time epically if one is a fan of the recent Telltale games.  

4/5 – Stars (Story Badge: for excellent character work)                  

[farmersdigest-blog]

Uncharted 4 A Thiefs End: Review 4/5 Stars (Graphics Badge)

Uncharted 4 is unequivocally the best looking video game I’ve ever played, bar none.  Its visual art direction and technical achievement left me breath taken on multiple occasions.  It is an achievement of technical proficiency and represents the high watermark for visual fidelity, not just for the PlayStation 4 but for the entire industry as well.  As for the rest of the game, the story, parkour, shooting, level design and other mechanics rarely ever falter. Despite this, it is my opinion, that while the game is fantastic it does not achieve that seductive outcome of a masterpiece.

Nothing is really wrong with the game per say, its controls are fun to use, the stealth was passable, the story intriguing, the constant climbing seldom wearing.  It’s just that it’s not the best 3rd person shooter I’ve ever, definitely didn’t have the best stealth mechanics I’ve experienced, it’s story is far below what I’ve enjoyed in the past and frankly there were times when my suspension of disbelief was tested beyond its breaking point at the level design and Drake's extraordinary dumb luck.  I hesitate to be too negative, aside from some odd moment here or there I found myself enjoying Uncharted 4 more than the series previous titles.  That’s not to say I believe it’s the best entry, just the most inoffensive.

The game, to the uninitiated is quite simple; you run around areas, climb up sheer cliff faces with easy to use/understand controls, and enjoy the ride.  That’s really what Uncharted as a series amounts to, a fun pulp adventure that escalates up and down the excitement scale like a rollercoaster at a theme park.  It’s not a RPG, it has no upgrades and it doesn’t bother with choice, which was quite refreshing in a day and age where all those things are basically required for a modern video game.  If you are new to the series I would recommend playing through the other games first, you’ll development a greater attachment to the characters and have a better understanding of what this game is asking you to do.  With the way Uncharted is structured it’s not impossible to jump in on this late title but it’ll be harder to stay involved, still you’ll find yourself enjoying the ride regardless.

One of my favorite moment in the game mirrors one of the most frustrating moments I had with Uncharted 2 which either has something to say about 4’s improved mechanics or my previous experience with the series as a whole.  The moment involves a car chase which a large heavily armored truck is chasing the player though various twist and turns.  If you come across a truck like this on foot, well it’s basically unstoppable, but in this particular instance all the player has to do is shoot the engine and you'll eventually win.  It’s simple enough but it’s definitely what I consider an example of alleviating frustration in a sequel because that frustration had already happened in the previous game.   The truck battle comes right at the end of the game’s best action sequence, a car chase involving shooting from moving vehicles, jumping from vehicle to vehicle and driving jeeps though a beautifully rendered environment.  

Moments like the chase sequence are what make Uncharted, Uncharted.  The grand spectacle, the painstaking detail put into a moment that passes by in a second of gameplay.  It’s exciting and sometimes, unfortunately quite frustrating.  The series depends on these events to carry the player though but it’s starting to wear.  While I don't think Uncharted 4 overstays its welcome I’m almost entirely sure I would very much like to see the series end on this high note, less the exhaustion set it.

Exhaustion is frankly the correct word to put to my main frustration with the series.  The chapters flow together so smoothly that it’s impossible to find a proper endpoint for a play session.  Many games design themselves to have moments of rest where they think an average player's session would end, Uncharted doesn't’ do this and for that I found myself glued to the T.V almost expecting the next rest point arrive.  The fact that I continued to play while my back pain grew worse and worse, my once quiet headache began to roar and my exhausted body rebelled against my waking state is equally a testament to the game's fantastic design but also an indicator of what I believe amounts to a pacing problem.  The game almost always starts a new chapter with Drake already in movement; it is constantly nudging the player to keep moving forward.  While Uncharted 4’s use of this is not nearly as bad as its predecessors I still found myself annoyed.  I want to enjoy the game at its greatest potential but felt oddly pressured to stay connected even when I clearly wasn't’ enjoying myself.  Games are a unique beast when it comes to required time commitment.  They take by far the longest amount of time, longer than movies, T.V. shows, even books, depending on the reader.  A movie ends after an hour or two, a T.V. show less than an hour, a song maybe 4 minutes max, but a short game amounts to usually 10 hours or more. They also require a greater level of concentration and are anything but passive.  So pacing and breaks in the game play are essential.

Aside from the design I can’t really say much against the shooting, it’s a marginal improvement over Uncharted 3’s shooting.  The stealth while being better worked out than the previous titles in the series was nonetheless rather unremarkable.  The environmental puzzles and parkour climbing on the other hand were equally the best in the series while being the biggest offenders in breaking my suspension of disbelief.  There were simple too many times when Drake found himself dangling by the tips of his fingers off a cliff face tackling the environment alone or with a partner that would have been impossible if the situations were reversed.  What I mean by that is that if Drake found himself alone, than the dangerous path he’s on would only be passable by one person, but if he's with a partner than in order to get through the area requires that specific person to be there.  There is acknowledgment at the end of the game where Drake makes a particularly impossible sequence of jumps trying to chase down someone, after he lands safely he ruminates that the person he’s chasing couldn't possible have done the same thing even though he was almost certainly directly following their chosen path.  

Being a pulp adventure I find it hard to fault the game's story, but I also find it equally difficult to praise it.  I did, often feel as if the game was somewhat lighter on storytelling than the series previous titles though the overall message seemed better developed.  I find that Uncharted as a series story is hinges on moments, individual events in character interaction that focus and develop the narrative of the game.  My favorite moment came from my favorite character Sully, who appears out of nowhere in a place rather unexpected, throws Drake a gun and says “how ya doin kid?” while shooting up the people chasing Drake.  It’s a perfect example of the types of character interactions that Uncharted excels at.   Simple dialogue of character to character development combined with action set pieces and expertly positioned blocking.  The cheeky banter between the main characters always put a smile on my face and I looked forward each new interaction.

Uncharted 4: A Thief's End puts a beautiful cap on the series; it’s a fantastic game worth anyone's time.  If you like 3rd person shooters, if you enjoy grand explosive set piece moments, and are in anyway a fan of Indian Jones than do yourself a favor and pick up the game, trust me its well worth the price.   

4/5 - Stars (Graphics badge for outstanding technical achievement and overall visual art design)  

[farmersdigest-blog]

Broforce: Review 4/5 Stars

Broforce is, good clean action movie homage fun in a fantastic 2D style harkening back to the era of side scrolling videogames, over muscled hero action movies and radical guitar riffs.  Its one hit death mechanic combined with a varied lives system adds for tense moment to moment gameplay that’s rarely ever unfair.  If you enjoy movies like the terminator, Rambo, Die Hard or The Matrix and want to play a game in the style of an overpowered NES Contra title than you’ll like this fast paced action romp.  

Every character’s a bro in Broforce; there’s Brommando, Elle Ripbro, Bro in Black, Bro Hard and many, many more.   Each Bro in the game has their own unique move set, a different main attack, melee attack and grenade brotack and each move set is thematically consistent with whatever fiction the bro is inspired by.  This combined with the lives system (which has a random character respawn at a check point every time the player dies) adds variety to each situation.  If an area is giving you trouble with your current broset then there’s no need to worry, because if you run out of lives you’ll just restart the level (either at the beginning or at a midway point) and in that new run you’ll have at your disposal a whole new bro who might be better equipped to handle the job.   It’s incredibly fun going at these difficult situation from different angles.  For example if I was playing with Rambro I would typically use his long range to run and gun my way through the level where MacBrover’s endless supply of bombs made for a more tactical approach.  This mechanic is a double edge sword as I found myself almost useless with several different bros and certain situations I found myself just dying over and over again thinking “if I only had Mr. Anderbro I would be though this area already”. By the end of the game I definitely had a set of favorite characters and I was wishing for an option to limit the pool of characters available or simply choose which Bro I wanted to play as next. It’s an interesting design decision and it most certainly doesn��t ruin the game but I do wish I had more options when going into these situations.

The levels in Broforce while nothing to write home about are nonetheless interesting in their destructibility.  Simple and straight forward the levels rarely evolve beyond flat paths, packed bases, wall climbs and the occasional death trap but what makes them unique is how destructible they are.  Almost every item/terrine in the level can be shot apart, so any given situation can drastically change depending on whether or not you want to start blowing up the terrain to gain an advantage.  It’s a neat concept that offers up different play styles but the game doesn’t capitalize on this enough.  Sure there are defiantly situations where it was nearly required to start tunneling though terrain but those situations are few and far between, in essence the destruction is a bonus and not much more.  

By biggest grip with them game (which is also my favorite part) is the story. Not much debt to the overall plot but no one was expecting much from this one so my problem isn’t there.  No my problem goes into the game skirting along the edges of biting commentary, it seems to have a decent understanding over the nature of the cultural context the films it’s inspiration comes from but it simply drops the ball in the end.  Each level set is located on a cartoonized part of the world, and before each mission there is a small bit of flavor text.   These ‘missions descriptors’ (we’ll call them) seem to have something greater to say about the situation than immediately noticeable. For example the mission set in Africa has a mission descriptor along the lines of ‘this mysterious land’ and other areas say off hand things like ‘Americanize them’, one area early on has a descriptor along the lines of ‘apparently this is a country, liberate them!’.   It’s all very Meta and seems to be, in a way calling out the over macho, ethnocentric nature of the films the game is based on.  How many times have we seen some American action hero get away with mass murder simply because the movie told us they were in a country whose name we’ve never heard of?  How about the nature of terrorism in today’s climate, how it’s treated by popular media, the game seems to almost want to say something about these topics but as I said, it simply drops the ball.  If at the end, the game told us that because of all the murder and rampant destruction caused by the Broforce, because of that, that is why the Devil was able to attack America, maybe that would have been a good pay off but sadly all we get is a high five from the President (seriously, it’s funny, that sentence is ridiculous).  Its fine from a genre perspective and it keeps the humor up but I can’t help but feel lead on.  If the creators didn’t want to actually have a message then they should have left out the hyper aware flavor text before each mission.  Perhaps I’m wrong and the mission’s descriptors weren’t meant to be a commentary on the nature of these films but rather an honest attempt by the creators to mimic them, if that’s the case then I feel sorry for the complete lack of understand on their part, but I don’t think that’s the case.   I think it’s a position of understanding the base nature of a situation while at the same time not wanting to over politicize what is, honestly a rather simply minded game.  Regardless I think the game would have been better if there was more follow through on this idea.

The inconsistent story aside the game is a fun, mindless, action packed piece of entertainment which un-ironically mirrors the Action film genera perfectly.  If any of that sounds fun to you than go out and get it, it’s funny and fun, trust me.

[farmersdigest-blog]

The Witness Review: 5/5 Stars(Gameplay badge, Graphics badge)

You only ever do one thing in the Witness and it’s utterly brilliant.  Its sense of discovery is so palpable that knowing anything more than that, would completely ruin certain aspects of the experience.  So I’ll begin with this; if you like complex, difficult puzzle games that are simple and extraordinarily fair then go ahead and purchase the Witness.  It’s well worth that $40 price tag.

Aside from being a visually stunning game the Witness controls are buttery smooth and work perfectly with everything the game asks the player to do.  I don’t think the movement is too slow, I don’t think you need a jump button nor do I believe the game requires anything more than what it has already provided.  The game is a prime example of a near perfect experience, provided you desire its specific game type.  While I struggle to find flaws with the Witness from a critical perspective I’ll say that it doesn’t crack my favorites list, even with all the praise I’ll throw upon it.  That is not to say I didn’t enjoy it, in fact I found myself sufficiently challenged by the game and excited to find and defeat the next level of complexity in the puzzles provided.  I did however eventually find myself burnt out on the sheer number of puzzles provided and while I technically beat the game, I did not find every secret nor uncover every crevice.

The only deficiency I would say The Witness has would be on the story front.  The game takes place on a classic mysterious island but I was holistically un-intrigued by the mystery.  Perhaps this was because on a grand scale there really is no mystery or maybe because every bit of story provided to the player is disconnected from the island and are thus more like ruminations on thought itself. The story seems to be centered around helping the player solve the plethora of puzzles on the island, not by providing clues but rather by suggesting subtly different ways of thinking and thereby hinting at new approaches in thought one might possibly take.  It’s not an all-around bad concept it’s just one I found somewhat irritating.  I don’t know if a proper story would help the game or possibly hurt the game but I do know that if you play games for story and story alone than stir clear of this one.

The Witness has one mechanic, in essence all the player ever does is; push a button, a dot appears, the player pushes that same button again on a circle and draws a line out from that to a slightly rounded end point thus solving a puzzle.  Aside from traversing from puzzle to puzzle in a 3D environment, that’s it, and that’s what makes The Witness so brilliant.  In essence a player can solve every puzzle in the game from square one; there are no power ups, no locked door whose keys are located somewhere hidden on the island and no cut off area waiting for the proper story beat to unveil itself.  While all the tools are available to the player on the games side a typical new player does not yet have the tools unlocked in their head to solve these puzzles.  What I mean by that is on the panels and elsewhere are varying degrees of complex symbols that change the solution to the puzzles.  Every puzzle requires the player to understand these symbols and new rulesets in order to solve them and move on.  On the base level these rules are established neatly to the player and subsequently embellished upon in interesting and often unexpected ways.  From a broader perspective these rules are not holistically confined to the panels themselves and it’s in the Witness’s connections from environment to puzzle that truly makes the game stand above its contemporaries.  

The island itself acts and an alleviation device to the stresses of puzzle solving.  The striking visual nature of the varying environments the island has to offer allow the player to take a break on multiple sensory levels.  It’s this combined with the open nature of the game that makes for a brilliant combination.  If ever a player is stuck on a puzzle type, all they have to do is walk away and head over to another area of the island to entirely different environments where other types of puzzles await them.  This style allows for longer play times and encourages the player to partake in one of the most important aspects of the genera, which is to say it encourages the player to ‘take and break’ and ‘walk away’ for a while.

What I find most interesting about my play time with The Witness is how it’s philosophy begun to ingrain itself into my psyche.  The idea of coming at a problem from a completely different angle and approaching a solution by trying to avoid the thoughts that had brought me to that incorrect solution beforehand.  The way The Witness plays with perspective had me looking at angles I had not yet looked from in every puzzle I had difficulty with.  If ever I was stuck on a particular panel all I had to do was step back and ask myself “what about this ruleset am I fundamentally misunderstanding?” and it was only after going though that motion that I was able to solve those puzzles and move on in the game.  All these thoughts and ideas on solving puzzles in The Witness have direct real world allegories, and every thought process the game forces the player though can easily be used in the real-world, if only the player would change the fundamentals of their perspective.

The Witness is a visually stunning game with challenging puzzles that make you think on multiple levels.  It’s a game well worth anyone's time and money.  If you have the necessary amount of money and are even mildly interested in the game then I definitely recommend laying down some cash on this masterpiece.

5/5 - Stars (Gameplay badge for outstanding design) (Graphics Badge for outstanding visual achievement)

[farmersdigest-blog]

The Talos Principle: Review 4/5 (Gameplay Badge)

On the whole I liked the Talos principle; it’s a fun tactilely satisfying puzzle game with a very well written story.  While graphically unimpressive the game makes it up by focusing the players mind on solving its myriad of different puzzles types while at the same time its story challenges the player to think about complex topics (mostly revolving around philosophical hypotheticals).  It’s not perfect, throughout my play time the story pissed me off more than once and the puzzles chambers are haphazardly cluttered with elements that have nothing to do with the gameplay or immersion.  I’d give it my full recommendation if the game didn’t cost $40 (not that puzzle games can’t cost that much) I just feel like the game is a tad overpriced for what you get.   To be honest I’ve got some mixed feelings about The Talos Principle, and immediately jumping into Johnathan Blows: The Witness after completing the Talos Principle didn’t help the game.

I like the speed and feeling the game provides you when finally solving a particularly difficult puzzle.  The sounds and music all play together really well in satisfying clicks that make the process of solving the puzzles extremely fun  but the environments of alot of the puzzles arenas were simply too large. It was exhausting running from point to point trying to get the best angle on a light beam challenge.  That combined with some useless corridors and rooms inside each puzzle chamber made for a frustrating jog each time I would make a mistake.  I especially didn’t like that each element to the puzzle I was about to solve was haphazardly placed in odd locations, I never gleamed insight from the units placement so it simply became tedium.  To put this into perspective I (for some reason) have the DLC and I started it up expecting to play a little bit more of the game but the first arena I walked into was a large open field.   It took me 10 minutes to find the first piece of the puzzle, upon finding that piece I immediately shut the game down and declared myself done with the Talos principle, perhaps forever.

The puzzle design itself is exceptionally cleaver and I found the hardest puzzles were ones that I was overthinking.  The game operates on a few basic principles then proceeds to combine those principles to their fullest potential.  At first all the player has is the jammer, a device that shuts down shields mines and turrets (don’t worry most puzzles don’t have these things, except shields).  Soon after the game starts you are introduced to more puzzle elements including; blocks, beam staffs and a few other elements.   The way the game combines these elements is exceptionally cleaver and I found it extremely fun to run the gambit of these combinations.  If you want a fun challenging puzzle game that sometimes makes you literally think outside the box then you should enjoy this game.

               The story is a different matter entirely. While on the whole I enjoyed the gameplay I honestly didn’t like the story, which is not to say it’s poorly written by any standard.  The story is in fact, by my estimation one of the best written story’s I’ve ever played, but I just couldn’t agree with its message and its delivery.   The story for one is completely disconnected from the game play, yes the story give the player a motivation to solve the puzzles but that’s about it.  There’s seemingly nothing that connects the A.I. driven narrative to solving puzzles to obtain a Tetris piece that you place in a panel to solve more puzzles. It’s more than a disconnect though, there’s a problem with a story that’s trying to challenge a player on their personal belief if it locks the player into logical fallacy’s. Throughout the game you talk to an A.I. the narrator (of sorts) calls “The Serpent” this is the story.  It likes subverting expectations in what basically amounts to an existential text adventure.  The Serpent asks a question and the player can choose to answer from a set number of responses.  The problem is the thing works in absolutes for example, it asked me who should go on Noah’s ark if the world should end, I said “useful people” it responded by stating that I was contradicting my previous self because I said “all people should matter in a society”.  That’s not a contradiction it’s a logical fallacy (strawman) to think otherwise, one situation does not equate to another even if they have some similarities.  In this situation I felt like I was being drawn into a corner by the writer of the game, not by the characters within the game.   When dealing with topics on these levels and these intensities it’s important as a writer not to let your own personal biases get in the way of explain an argument you disagree with.

               The only other gripe I have with the game is in its ending combined with its save structure.  I chose a bad ending just for fun and didn’t know until too late that the only way to load a previous save was by reloading the last checkpoint.  In order to see the proper ending (without looking on You Tube) I’d have to replay the entire game, that’s a shitty thing to do to a player.   I don’t see how the developer thought this was ok especially on a console port of a game that came out over a year ago.  Add a save feature, know your endings are meant to be replayed, don’t dick around with a player just because you have some idiotic philosophy about save states in games.      

               Whether or not you should buy The Talos Principle is honestly a tough question.  The puzzles are fun, the story well told, the voice acting excellent and the length of the game is quite satisfying.  But it’s expensive, at a $40 price tag it’s a bit of an ask and it frankly looks like early Xbox 360 game.  I think I got it on sale or from PS+ so I can’t really tell you if I was satisfied, for $40 I might not be holistically on board but if it’s a little bit on sale I’d defiantly recommend it.  

[farmersdigest-blog]

The deep beautiful flaws of The Witcher 3

I’ve now played The Witcher 3 from start to finish twice and its expansion Hearts of Stone once through; it places in my mind and remains in my mind as one of my favorite games of all time.  That being said The Witcher 3 is without a doubt a deeply flawed game; it’s holistically unbalanced, far too large and controls awkwardly.  To be clear I don’t just like the game, in fact at times playing certain parts of The Witcher I found my self thinking that I was in fact ‘In Love’ with the game.  That doesn’t mean I didn’t observer it’s many flaws in action, nor does it mean that I wish to make excuses for these flaws; it simply means that everything I will talk about in this article did not overcome my enjoyment and create an overall negative experience surrounding the game.

The Problems with Roach

I want to start with what I consider to be the most annoying aspect about The Witcher  and that is of course Roach’s controls; by far the most obviously egregious problem with the game but also a rather uninteresting topic to break down.  Roach does provide a useful and invaluable utility for the player, it’s ability to cover quickly the vast distances involved in playing The Witcher is only matcher by the fast travel system but the way in which Roach provides this utility can only be described as frustrating.  The developer’s insistence on adding in horse races simply adds to that annoyance.  My two main gripes with Roach’s controls are its spawning utility, and auto travel path, I’ll leave out the fact that Roach insist on stopping for no good reason at random intervals.   As far as the Spawning goes I’d rather the horse just pop into existence right in front of the player rather than behind at a distance from the player.  I don’t care about the immersion of the game epically when Roach insist on spawning behind fences and on entirely different levels of the topography then me.  The Auto path problems are baffling, I like the concept and its implementation did in fact ease the pain of traveling but why does Roach not travel on the center of the path? Why does Roach always gravitate to the left path at a crossroad? The Developers had to have known that if Roach ran only along the side of the path that it would get caught up in the dense geometry of the world, so why program it that way? Roach is mind boggling, frustrating and only mildly useful for the journey.

The Size Issue

The world of The Witcher 3 is far too large. Probably not a popular opinion but I do not stand alone on this, in fact Kinda Funny’s Colin Moriarty has been saying it from the get-go and it was only though his continued insistence on talking about the issue that I began to ruminate on the vastness of the Witcher’s world as well. The excess size of the world was a definite draw of the game for me, and upon watching the reviews and hearing about how the game not only had a huge landmass to discover but also how it wasted no space in providing the player this, I was hooked.  The density and the overall area only became a problem for me on my second play though, not exactly a normal use-case but when I thought about how I approached the game the first time around I realized just how negatively the Witcher’s size was affecting my enjoyment.   There’s simply too much to do, too many quest strewn about the world and too many little distractions scattered around.  As a player I was immediately overwhelmed, not just by all the question marks on my map but also by all the quests.  This subject directly feeds into the idea that the Witcher is unbalanced but the balance problems aren’t all that’s wrong this the density.  It’s a volume issue that overwhelms and players, though each side quest is exceptionally well done and I’ve not found a section of the map that didn’t feel exquisitely well produced I still felt its excess was underserved.  There’s not enough diversity in gameplay to warrant this and there’s not enough time in a modern player’s day to explore it all. I honestly feel that my overall opinion of the game would increase if it was two thirds of the size it currently is and I’d say the game could lose nearly half its content without harming the its overall quality.  

Unbalanced: Quest

Balance in games can often be a very difficult concept to pin down, many different games are accused of being imbalanced and while some are in minute ways others have balance issues that are glaringly obvious.   The Witcher straddles the line between both concepts and in two entirely different ways. One of the primary ways the game is unbalanced is in its quest structure, and by that I mean specifically how the quest are dulled out to the player and how many quest exist in each recommend level area.   It is almost always the case in the game that the player will equally have access to many quest of a much greater and lower level then the plays actually is.  Accompanied to that the player has access to appropriate level quest of a far greater quantity then the players level will allow.  By that I mean that if the player chooses to accomplish all the quests available to them at their current level, by the time they start the last quest in that particular string they will be vastly over leveled for that quest.  In essence it is impossible to accomplish all quests (side quest, treasurer hunts, monster contracts, main quest) in their appropriate level ranges, meaning many of the quests a player chooses to partake in, will grant them nearly no challenge and almost no experience points.  Aside from having access to high level quest that I couldn’t even hope to finish I found many quest dangling on my quest log because they required me to travel to an area I had not yet unlocked; following the thread, black pear, to name a couple.

Unbalanced: Leveling

Quest availability however is not the only balance issue that game has.  The rewards for leveling and the access to new powers is another way The Witcher 3 stumbles.  I’m going to forgo explaining the leveling process in favor of defining its flaws.  Primarily speaking there is simply not enough variety to Geralt’s new abilities and that variety is lessened even more by the fact that a player is severely limited as to how many ability’s they can actually equip. This combined with the process of unlocking higher level skills ultimately creates a severely limited and restrictive leveling up process.  In-fact because of the odd way the ability points are dulled out and spent they almost have no real barring on the gameplay, the player instead must mostly relay on base stats and equipment to get them though the game.  This issue could easily be resolved if the developers did two things. One, they could lock access to higher-level abilities not behind how many points were spent on the lower tier of that ability string but rather behind the players current level, this would allow the player a better more free range of choice when it comes to what abilities they want slotted. Two, they could either increase the amount of abilities allowed slotted or have all abilities the player has spent points on be active, this would allow for a greater range of play styles then currently exist in the game. I think of how Diablo 3 did its ability system, allowing a free range of choice for the player while not punishing them for deciding to try out skills they haven’t yet messed around with.

 I’m not trying to be overly negative but this article isn’t about all the things The Witcher did right.   I’m not trying to examine how the game’s story marks a new high in storytelling in video games.  I’m not analyzing the amazing graphics and art style the game employs.  I’m not here to describe how fantastic the games world building is nor how respectful the game is around the ideas of personal choice.  While I find some of these flaws to be baffling and others a minor annoyance I do still think that The Witcher 3 is one of the best games I’ve ever played and am truly thankful to the Developers at CD Projekt Red for producing this truly fantastic game.

[farmersdigest-blog]

Xenoblade X - 8 hours to drop

     So I’m watching a Nintendo centric stream (can’t remember witch one) and a teaser for Xenoblade X comes on screen.  My eye’s widened; I leaned in forward and stared longingly at the screen thinking “I can’t wait to play that”.  Then after the announcement, months go by and everything I hear about the game makes me more and more excited to dig in to this over 100 hour JRPG.  The game gets released in December and unfortunately I don’t have the time to play it but I watch the reviews and the Giant Bomb Quick Look and am still excited to start playing this game.  The only even slightly negative thing I hear about the game is from Austin Walker in the GOTY podcast when he doesn’t even attempt to nominate it for discussion to be on the top 10 games of the year list, even though others had argued for Life is Strange (a game they didn’t complete) to be placed on the list.  Now I have the Wii U controller in my hands and Xenoblade X loaded up ready to play. 8 hours later I come to the sudden realization that I, in fact, do not want to play this game anymore.  So I press the eject button, and put the game back in its case with the intention of never playing it again.  Why?  

     My experience with the game parallels a lot of different  games with of similar structures; Final Fantasy X for it’s slow open and JRPG style, Fallout 4 or it’s long introduction period, and of course Xenoblade Chronicles for its combat system.  

     Firstly the game has a slow open, which is good because the systems in the game are extremely vast and require a bit of “over explanation” to get used to.   So the game slowly and studiously dolls out each new mechanic as if it were talking to a child, and while the deliberate nature of this pace annoyed me I was reminded of how long it took Final Fantasy X to start opening up and therefor I ignored my feelings of discontent.  There is also the aspect of overwhelming the player that the game seems to do a good job of avoiding, and which I was particularly worried about.  

     Secondly it seems as if the game is designed to start getting fun after a certain point and considering everyone (including myself) says that you shouldn’t give up on Fallout 4 until you at least reach Diamond City, I waited until I felt the game had a proper opening up.  

     Thirdly the somewhat disconnected combat system of choosing attacks and then waiting for a cool down timer had me somewhat uninterested in the game but then I remembered how much time I spent with Xenoblade Chronicles and how I never felt the combat was negatively affected by this mechanic.   So I waited again for my understanding to catch up with the game play.  

     Finally the game opened up, I had near full access to all the aspects of the game, I was at the beginning stages of fully understanding the many and varied mechanics the game had to offer and I felt like I had good control over the combat systems, yet still I hesitated.  X’s world is extensive and beautiful, it’s depth is extreme and it carries it’s JRPG status like a flagbearer in a battle field, all things I liked about the game.   Yet I didn’t engage with the combat in the same way I did with Chronicles, in fact I disliked the combat to such an extent that I found myself wondering if I liked Chronicles as much as I did simply because of it being the only good RPG on the Wii and me not owning anything else to compare it to. In the same way Fallout 4 annoyed me X’s systems had icons representing certain aspects of the game which were couple with no in-game description.  Dealing with the menu system was overall better than Fallout but only slightly, X’s menus are still clunky and somewhat intrusive to playing the game.   Finally, while in theory it’s interesting having high level monsters share the same space as low level monsters this ultimately just caused annoyance and aggravation.  The monsters were too dense, the character moves to fast to see the monsters pop in and too many high level monsters are ‘attack on sight’, which led to getting caught up in battles (on story missions) where I’d die almost immediate even when trying to run away.  

     I Just couldn’t take it anymore, and I’m not saying the game is bad or that my annoyance’s with the game are what everyone would be annoyed about I’m just saying I couldn’t take it.  After figuring out (through trial and error) how to activate the next story mission I begin my trek to the glowy forest (or whatever) and immediately found myself facing a wall of, kill on sight monsters, at levels 45 or higher and I just didn’t want to do it.  

     This, above anything else saddens me, I was really looking forward to X and being disappointed like this sucks.  It took me 50 hours in Fallout 4 to get to this point and I wish I had the same here, but that just didn’t happen.  So Xenoblade X is going back to my shelf to ‘probably’ never be played again, not every game is a perfect match for every player, but I truly thought I would like this game.  Though on paper the stars lined up, when I started tracing from point to point I found everything to be slightly left of center.

[farmersdigest-blog]

Top Ten Games of 2015

I’ve played a lot of games this year and still I feel like I missed out on some of the big tent-poll releases as well as smaller indie darlings of the year. This could be because nearly half of the games I played this year came out in previous years, or because I spent several months not even touching a video game trying to publish my book.   Regardless 2015 has been a great year in video games and a fantastic year to be a player of said games.   So without further ado here are My Top Ten/? Games of the Year.

1.       The Witcher 3 5/5 (Story Badge, Graphics Badge)

-          The Witcher 3 is one of two games I played this year that not only made it on this list but also my list of top 20 games of all time ( I know it’s strange to keep an all-time favorite list so whatever).  Immediately after syncing over 100 hours into the game and finished the final sequence, put down my controller, loaded up my Favorites of all-time list and placed this game at #6.   I could talk for hours about this game but I’ll save you from that boredom instead I’ll simply add that Gwent is now my favorite card game and I hope CD Projekt Red makes a proper Mobil version of it soon.  

 2.       Mario Maker 5/5 (Gameplay Badge, Graphics Badge for a seamless user interface)

-          It shouldn’t be a surprise that a Mario games is fun, it shouldn’t be a surprise that Nintendo made polished user friendly experience, it shouldn’t be a surprise that making a Mario LvL is both fun and easy but all of these thing are surprising in Mario Maker.   I didn’t expect to like this game as much as I did, and I didn’t expect to get wrapped up in making levels more than playing them.   The best I can say is this, if you own a Wii U and don’t own Mario Maker then you’ve failed in life…. J.K. But seriously BUY THIS GAME!

 3.       Rise of The Tomb Raider 5/5 (Gameplay Badge, Graphics Badge)

-          I think I bought an X-Box One for this game, sometimes the human mind can be tricky but upon reflection I was really excited to play this game, to such an extent that I purchased (with some trade in’s at the right time) a $400 console and a $60 game on top of that.   To be short I was not disappointed, I loved playing though this game and the only reason I haven’t attempted all the achievements is because I would like to invest that time in the upcoming PS4 version of the game (rather have a platinum).  I know, that doesn’t make sense either but what I’m I to do, I’m just a passenger trapped inside this crazy fucked up brain of mine.

 4.       Ori and The Blind forest 4/5 (Gameplay badge, Graphics badge)

-          I’m Starting to think I like Metroidvania games, or Igavania games (Whichever you prefer). I’ve never actually played a Metriod or Castlevania game but I absolutely fell in love with Ori and in a previous year Guacamelee.   Most people describe this game as “hard”, but I don’t think of it that way.  The game is forgiving but doesn’t pull its punches, if you managed to get though an area then you did that on skill alone so it’s “hard” but the penalty for death is rather low and you even have control over that penalty so if you die and have to replay 30min of the game it’s entirely your fault. Since the reload time is practically non-existent that game becomes something other than “hard” or maybe I’m thinking of “hard” as frustrating.

 5.       Assassins Creed Syndicate 4/5 (Graphics Badge)

-          This is the only game on the list that I’ve written a proper review of, so I’ll leave most of the comments I have for this game in that review.   I will however reiterate how much I loved the Dreadful Crimes side quest.   I loved those Sherlock Holms type mysteries so much that I’m starting to think I like murder mysteries.  I’m going to have to pick up some of Sir. Arthur Conan Doyle’s work to figure this out.

 6.       Massive Chalice 4/5 (Gameplay Badge)

-          X-COM Enemy Unknown is one of my favorite games of all time and this Game is basically that but with slightly less depth.  There’s just something about that type of turn based tactical battle system that gets me. I especially liked the generational system this game employed it added an interesting dynamic to the game that created an additive to the genera.

 7.       Undertale 4/5 (Story Badge)

-          It’s lower on my list that some would want but I’m not gonna let that get to me and you shouldn’t either! Undertale has something interesting to say about the genera it’s in; it has something profound to say in general and comments on the very nature of video games as a whole.  It’s also rather funny and I can’t get the cooking scene out of my head, just loved that intensity!   I wasn’t a supper fan of the bullet hell combat system and some of the encounters I had to use the internet to figure out how to get past.  Overall I thoroughly enjoyed my time with Undertale.

 8.       Batman Arkham Knight 4/5 (Graphics Badge)

-          This game just looks so God Damn Batman! (opps I mean good).  It’s easily the best looking game I’ve played this year and I can’t get over that.   While I absolutely hated parts of this game, other parts I loved.  It’s easily the most frustrating game on this list but what it does right makes up for what it down wrong.

 9.       Until Dawn 4/5

-          I don’t like Horror but I really liked this game.  I guess my opinion just isn’t all that extreme as I’m not really coming up with anything to say about this game, overall it’s a really good game worthy of attention.   I will say that I would like to play this game again with someone else making all the decisions.  

 10.   Mad Max 3/5 (Graphics Badge)

-          Mad Max is a beautiful game, it’s absolutely stunning, and the wasteland is breathtaking in its barren plains and its sparse remnants of civilization.  The developers should be commended for their ability to take what should just be a boring desert and turn it into a piece of art from every angle.  Now if they could just make it run at a steady framerate and make a better “game” within that wasteland…

Honorable Mentions

               Nearly half the games I played this year were made in previous years; needless to say (if you’ve seen the list above) some of these games would replace some of the games in this year’s top ten.  Instead of bending time and space I just decided to give them a shout out.

-          South Park The Stick of Truth 4/5 (Story Badge)

I hate to be negative but something about this game is rubbing me the wrong way, I don’t know what it is but the very idea of playing it again is a huge turn off.  What’s strange is I really enjoyed playing the game; the story was hilarious and extremely well written.  Maybe I’m just crazy.

 -          Sunset overdrive 4/5 (Gameplay Badge)

Boy am I happy I picked up an X-Box One this year.

 -          Captain Toad Treasure tracker 4/5

Captain Toad is really cute, I am tempted to buy his amiibo, but I don’t do drugs.  

 -          Wolf Among us 4/5

Ran better than The Walking Dead did, but then again I played The Walking Dead on my Vita so I think I’m to blame or that one.

 -          Shovel Knight 4/5

I’m not really all about “Old School” games and I don’t think the NES era of games is the best ever, but Shovel Knight was still extremely fun and I’m really happy I picked up this game.

P.S. it’s SNES that’s the best era of games (Pass it on)

 -          Dead Rising 3 3/5

I was enjoying the crap out of this game until the last third when zombies just filled the streets and it was impossible to get anywhere in any sort of reasonable speed.  Other than that this was a great X-Box launch title and frankly just seals the sad reality that PS4 had a rather weak launch lineup.  

[farmersdigest-blog]

Assassins Creed Syndicate Review

     My first Assassins Creed game was Black Flag, I purchased it solely on the promise that I could be a pirate and was subsequently not disappointed.  Since that game I have played three now four other Assassins Creed (AC) Games; AC 3 I stopped halfway through out of sheer annoyance, Unity I played three hours of before succumbing to its flaws and Rouge which felt more like DLC for Black Flag rather than its own game.   None of these games convinced me of their formula, I was at a loss and after putting down the controller for Unity I honestly believed that I didn’t like AC games; that Black Flag was, in fact an outlier and I that only liked that game for its pirate ship.  I believed this until now, AC Syndicate has turned me around of the franchise and is, in my opinion a truly magnificent game.  

     AC Syndicate tells a fantastic story revolving around the Frye twins; two characters who’s well developed personalities play off each other in such a complimentary way that the game feels like it would be considerably the lesser with only one protagonist.  Evie who was of course my favorite played the role of the more responsible, line toting sibling focused on achieving the goal the two originally set out to accomplish, her brother Jacob acted as a more immature “fly by night” character who gets immediately distracted by the concept of creating a gang to rival that of their enemies.   Each Characters unique and contrasting personalities due well to play off each other and in another respect, each character offers up different types of gameplay options for the player to mess around with, though not to the extent that I would have liked.

     The side characters offer up a more diverse and developed cast then previous AC games I have played and the historical characters allow for some interesting side quest to get involved in, outside of taking over boroughs.  Charles Darwin’s quest in particular offer up an interesting self-aware commentary on the games now well know tropes.  One mission in particular had me fetching a newspaper for the aging Darwin only to be led on an action packed run though London filed with explosives and a last minute train dodge, thereby spoofing all the tackle target quest the AC games typically give to players.  The game is not completely self-aware as the same concept that Darwin missions are making fun of is regularly employed by the game.  

     My favorite part of the game was the side quest called Dreadful Crimes, which had the player investigating Sherlock Holms like crime scenes, tracking down clues, interviewing suspects and finally making accusations.  The systems surrounding these missions was nowhere near as well built as something like Sherlock Holms Crimes and Punishments and there’s a considerable dissonance when in the open world of the game.  I killed ten people on the way to the mission only to spend the next thirty minutes solving one murder.  But if you can look past all that the Dreadful Crimes missions act as a welcome distraction to the overall game.  

     The open world of AC Syndicate is utterly fantastic; it’s beautiful in both scope and execution.  While Unity had its pretty moments running along the roof tops in that game was just playing ugly, in AC Syndicate I hardly found a side of a wall that wasn’t in some way beautiful.  The size of the world brings it all in as syncing from a high vantage point shows the extreme draw distance of the game and the ongoing movements of the crowd below as they walk along the streets or ride inside their carriages. As far as the carriages go they seemed holistically unnecessary in previews but while playing the game they became a life and time saver as the city is simply too huge to reasonable move about along the roof tops, even with the much talked about grappling hook. The grappling hook itself is an extremely useful tool which seems to take a note out of Shadow of Mordor’s Book. Moving  around the world with speed and mostly working accuracy is extremely fun, the Hook along with the parkour the series is famous for makes tackling each scenario a joy to not only play but also to look forward to.

     The game is not without its faults however and it fell victim, in mission mostly but also outside of missions to the notoriously unreliable state of the automatic parkour mechanic the games have employed. While significantly less then AC3 and Unity the game did have me running up walls I didn’t want to run up, it completely misjudged severely times where I was intending to go and more than once I found myself failing a mission due to the unreliable state of this mechanic.  I will say that most of the missions do a fantastic job of avoiding frustration and unlike Unity or AC3 I never found myself caught on some piece of open world geometry.    

     As far as the mission design goes, it starts with a bang.  The first couple of missions are seamless, they flow into each other and each one is expertly designed, their secondary objective both perfectly achievable and fun to try and accomplish.  The latter half of the game however suffers from sloppy mission design, un-fun secondary objectives and several unforgivable single mistake mission failures.   The missions where one mistake would cause a mission failure where particularly aggravating as I would have to suffer though the rather long loading screen the game presents, one can only run aimless though the matrix for so long before getting board.

     I will say that I played on the PS4 and while the loading times where borderline rage quite inducing I was never upset at them while simply warping to fast travel points.  I only ever encountered one crash while playing the game and it wasn’t in a mission, the open world streams in seamlessly and I only saw framerate dips and texture pop in once, which could have been cause from loading in the game from the PS4 suspend feature.   Technically the game is overall impressive and the developers should be commended for their hard work in that respect.  

     Being an open world game AC Syndicate has many more features I could talk about, I’ll try to briefly surmise some of them and probably completely forget others.  The dodge bullet feature is annoying as it’s the same timing and button for a counter throw or counter shoot, which has me killing enemies I didn’t want to kill to dodge a bullet I didn’t dodge because of the former.   The gameplay loop is lopsided; I was max level well before the game ended taking some of the fun out of the progression. There is not enough gameplay difference between the two characters.  

     Overall AC Syndicate is a fantastic game and a masterstroke of gameplay design. Its story is above par and its progression and systems blend extraordinary well into its open world.  While not without flaws the flaws the game presents are minor in comparison to the overall good the game has to offer.

Score: 4/5 - Graphics Badge (For Exemplary Achievement in Art and Technical Design.)

 P.S. I hate the 100% story sync trophy, it’s preventing me form even attempting the platinum.  It’s preventing me from attempting the platinum in Black Flag as well.  I wish AC games would stop doing this.

Score System – I will employ a Five Star system, no half points will be given. I will also employ what I’m calling “Badges”.  For games that do well in a particular area. As of now the Badges will be; Gameplay Badge, Story Badge, Graphics Badge.  

[farmersdigest-blog]

The Problem with Star Wars: The Force Awakens (Spoilers)

Something has been bothering me ever since I saw the new Star Wars movie, this something has scratched at my mind from the moment the credits rolled and I left the theater.  It reminded me of the feeling I had when leaving the theater after watching J.J Abrams rendition of Star Trek in 2009.  Don’t get me wrong I liked the movie, and it did a better job at continuing the spirit of the original trilogy then the prequels best moments, could ever hope to achieve.  But, there is still the scratch, the rumbling feeling that something was wrong, something about the movie was just plain bad, and that same something was done in Star Trek 2009.

 I’m going to talk about the movie; I’m going to write spoilers.  

The moment that bothered me in Star Trek 2009 was the destruction of Vulcan, the seemingly pointless shock valued destruction of a staple in the Star trek cannon.  The Destruction of Vulcan, I think nearly perfectly parallels the destruction of the Galactic Republic in The Force Awakens.   It’s a Shocking moment, horrific in distance and if thought about for a moment it’s an incredible sad scene in the films.  It is, also, very poor writing.  I don’t think The Force Awakens is going to go down as one of the best written films; it simply contains too many flaws, too many awkward moments and a poor pace.  Still the film holds its own, and if you subtract the fall of the Republic then you can even call it good.  

In order to properly explain why I think this moment was a miss step I need to preface a few things. Firstly if this had taken place in the first film (A New Hope) then the destruction of the Galactic Republic would not be so bad, it would actually benefit the film greatly, it did not, however take place in the first of the cannon.   Now you might call that fanboyism, and while I’m a fan of both Star Trek and Star Wars I’m even more of a fan of good storytelling, so if a creator has to destroy something about their product that I love for the benefit of a good story, then I’m happy to continue watching, and I welcome the change.  Both the destruction of the Republic and of Vulcan are not done for the benefit of good storytelling, their done for shock value and while shocking the audience is fine, it should be done with a tempered sword.

The original trilogy’s whole storyline revolved around overthrowing the Empire and establishing a new Republic.  That’s the background of the movies; it’s the driving force of the Rebellion and ultimately what Luke, Han, and Leia are fighting to achieve.  The movies (smartly) focus on the smaller aspects of that, the personal stories of the characters but at the end of Return of the Jedi the characters and the Rebellion achieve in overthrowing the Empire making room for a new Galactic Republic.  In destroying that Republic The Force Awaken nullifies the success of the original trilogy.      

A Story exists where you should destroy the Republic, a story exists where this makes thematic sense, where the destruction of such a potent force is a built up, and is a satisfying plot point.  That story is not The Force Awakens.  The Force Awakens makes a point of keeping the audience in the dark about what has happened in the intervening time, it makes a point of ignoring the Republics destruction after said destruction.  A moment like that should be taken with care, it should be giving its due, not because we all like the Republic but because the original Trilogy exist.  The simple existence of previous cannon means that taking out aspects of that previous cannon Must be given its proper Gravitas.  The Force Awakes does this with Han Solo, but fails in its handling of the Republic.  Perhaps this is because writers fail to see the importance of world building in Sci-Fi. Perhaps because J.J Abrams is a better single story teller then a grand story teller.  Destroying Vulcan in order to get Captain Kirk in his Captains chair is a terrible reason.  Destroying Vulcan to make 1 single character cry when that character isn’t supposed to cry is a terrible idea.  The benefit Star Trek had over The Force Awakens is that the that Star Trek 2009 was rewriting the fiction from the beginning.  The Force Awakens builds off previously established fiction.  

This is the same aspect of Comic Books, super heroes written to extend over long periods of time, if you want to kill off a character then it can’t just make situational sense, it has to make thematic sense and it has to be given its due.  There’s history in every character and if a cross over event wants to kill Batman, then the writers sure as hell better give that moment more than a passing glance.  While it makes sense that these heroes shouldn’t always be surviving these preposterous scenarios by the skin of their teeth, it also doesn’t hold that a character with history and meaning beyond the current event should be callously killed by a haphazard writer.  I think the same philosophy applies to all non-fiction, and that items beyond characters hold the same value, The Empire holds value, Alderaan even held value and so does the Republic.

By not qualifying its destruction, by having the movie not surround its destruction, by not even having a main character show, beforehand, a meaningful connection to the Republic or attempt to stop the action, The Force Awakens fails in its execution.  Even in A New Hope, Leia shows a personal connection to Alderaan, she attempts to stop it; she even goes as far as betraying the Rebellion.  The moment is built up, the Death Stars capabilities are announced before it fires and when it destroys the planet there are consequences.   Obi-wan Feels its destruction, its destruction allows the Millennium Falcon to be captured, and it creates tension for the final assault by the Rebellion in the last act of the film.  All that, for a planet never mentioned before, for a story never told, The Force Awakens never even comes close to tying the Republics destruction that deeply into the story.

The Force Awakens isn’t Bad, it’s a fun action movie, I want’ to see it again, I liked it.  I liked the 2009 Star Trek, I saw it a couple of times in theaters but that didn’t excuse its flaws.  Ultimately The Force Awakes has several oddities, not enough slow moments, weird science that breaks the suspension of disbelief even in the Star Wars universe. The movie does a lot right, it has excellently well-developed characters, it handles the fandom with care, it mixed just the right amount of the old movies with it’s now shiny self and it had some truly spectacular action scenes.  I Don’t think any of this excuses the movies handling with the Republic, and The Force Awakens will forever be the lesser for that moment.  I hope the next two movies will not make the same mistake, I want better, and while I won’t be disappointed if the next film is more of the same, I wish it strives for a greater story.  

[farmersdigest-blog]

Cost and Process of Self-Publishing a book.

I’m going to try and make this succinct.

Please keep in Mind I used Ingramspark to self publish this book.

Cost

$500 for cover:

To create my front and back cover I paid a professional artist and I have to say I’m glad I did, the results speak for themselves. You can just mess around with photoshop and eventually make something passable but if you’re unknown or like me and have zero talent then an artist is the best way to go.  

$300 for ISBN number 10 in total.

While an ISBN number isn’t necessary for Ingramspark it IS necessary for a professional product.  You need 1 per version so that’s 1 for physical and 1 for eBook.  So I used 2 out of the 10 but if i had purchased them separately they wouldn’t have cost all that much less as 1 cost $125 so that would have been $250 total.  I’ve got 8 more numbers to use, so spending an extra $50 is well worth it.

$130 for eBook conversion.

I did find a free program that could convert the book to an EPUB file but I had neither the knowledge nor skill to do this in a professional manner.  The program is called “calibre”.  I used Bowker to convert the file, they said it would take them 10 business days but I got the file back a little sooner than that.  Ingramspark has a program to do this but it takes them longer and I ran into some funny business when requesting a quote so I recommend Bowker unless you have the knowhow.  

$70 - $140 for editing.

Make no mistake this was done exceptionally cheaply.  All the resources I found on this subject suggest that this step could cost several hundred if not several thousand dollars. A friend of my cover artist did this for me, it was his first job, he charged me $70 so I “tipped” and extra $70 just so I didn’t feel like I was ripping him off.

$50 title set up fee.

Basic charge from Ingramspark, it would have cost double if I had done the eBook and physical copy separately.

$ 15/mo Adobe Pro

You NEED a program to embed fonts, the only one I found to do this properly was Adobe Pro.

$15/mo photoshop

Adobe Pro just didn’t cut it when trying to put together my cover.  Photoshop is a robust tool and perfect for the job, if you know what you’re doing.  Trust me on this one, you want the level of control Photoshop gives you for this job.

$60 marketing fee

I originally wasn’t going to do this but everytime I tried to enable the physical without the marketing fee Ingramspark would cancel my action.  I suspect a glitch as I ran into several while putting the book together.  Not sure it holds any value but I was frustrated and extremely close to my goal.

Total $1,210 not to mention coffee and other supplies also marketing

Cost not included

3 years of coffee

gas to get to the coffee shop

notebooks and pens

computer

Microsoft Office

Friends/Family to give feedback all along the way.

Process

Next I’m going to explain the process of taking a completed work and transforming it into a professional product.  This is from my experience alone and i’m sure I ran into things others wouldn’t and others ran into things I didn’t.

I used Ingramspark to self publish this book.  There are other ways to do this and i’m not sure how similar this process is to those ways.

Keep reading

[farmersdigest-blog]

Despicable MZ: The inside 'Game of War' story

There's no beating around the bush on this one, Game of War (GOW) is a terrible game, but just how terrible is the true question.  In pure game-play terms it’s one of the worst games I've ever had the displeasure of interacting with, however it’s game-play is most certainly not the worst part of GOW.  Given the game is free to play or “free to start” as the late Satoru Iwata would say, it possess a certain type of pricing structure that allows players to funnel money towards the developer.  This pricing structure is by far the worst, most despicable, underhanded, anti-consumer, psychologically mind bending structure I've ever seen or heard of in any game to date.  

(All pictures taken from my second acct as i gave away my main)

(Above: natural prices)

To put this into perspective most free to start games have an upfront presentation of their packages, usually a small $5 options followed by $20, $50, and finally $100 which usually but not always provides the user with the games full systems and enough resources to successfully finish or in many cases compete on a high level.  GOW on the other hand shows the user false options up front and “sales” on a sliding scale depending on what the user has already spent.  It’s important to note that the “sales” while offering fluctuating deals do in fact represent the true pricing structure of the game and are not a ‘sale’ as the developer Machine Zone (MZ) would have you believe.  

(Above: “sale” price)

This may be a difficult concept to understand and speaking as someone who had devoted a significant amount of time towards the game i’ll say I didn’t completely understand what was going on until after I had bought my first package.  The presented “normal”  $5 package offers a few items, 1 bronze gift, and a few thousand resources which in the games does not in anyway shape or form represent a large amount of resources.  The $5 “sale” offers something in the tune of tens of millions of resources, gold gifts and other things including speed ups and hero gear (something of actual value).  The disparity between these two kinds of products is insane, the fact that a player can pay $5 for something that in game is essentially worthless is deceptive.  So why do it then? I’d imaging (and this is pure speculation) that offering a false deal makes the user feel as if they are getting more for their money than they actually are and considering other games offer a greater value add for their $5 options i’d say this is a calculated play on MZ’s part to trick players into spending larger sums of money on an inferior product.  

Finally in terms of pricing structure the game operates on a sliding scale with lower priced deals disappearing when purchased, which is not immediately apparent until the player buys their first package.  Again a confusing description, even within game it’s near impossible to properly describe, I didn’t understand (though other players had described it to me) exactly what this meant until I bought my second package.  If you buy the $5 option then you can no longer buy that $5 tier, instead you are presented with only the $20 tier, which if you purchase a $20 option that disappears and you are only presented with the $50 tier, so on and so forth.  The game also hides the higher priced options behind the paywall of the lower priced options so if you want to purchase the full game and not be duped by their false “normal” prices then you have to at least spend $25 - $70 before the $100 option is presented to you.

Let me put this in a more personal perspective, I played this game for a good 6 months or so and in that time I spent $80.  One $5 sale available to everyone regardless of other options bought (the only one of it’s kind and a one time use thing), an option in the proper $5 tier, a $20 and a $50.  So by the end I was only presented with the $100 tier and no way to spend less on the game.  Even with having spent $80 on the game I didn’t come close to completing the upgrade tack’s in the game.  I was significantly under-powered with no real way to defend myself yet I still wanted to buy a package, but a rich man I am not, and nothing other than $100 was available to purchase so I was left in the dust, which turned out to be a good thing as it meant I was no longer a slave to their psychological manipulations.  

It’s hard to imagine with this pricing structure someone putting together this game and feeling good about themselves.  A low blow to go after the developers personally but I fell and i’m sure many other players of the game feel personally deceived and robbed by this games terrible prices, that combined with the addictive mind manipulating game-play (watching timers count down) creates an atmosphere around the game that funnels blame directly to the guys in suits approving these beyond deceptive business practices.  A typically Player that manages to last longer than a month in this game spends upwards of $1,000 to $10,000 on the game one player has reportedly spent over a million.  I can grantee the game does not provide equal value in game-play back to the consumer.  I wanted to bring this to light, I want to use this game as a marquee of what represents bad business practices within the industry.  This game, more than any other convinces me that certain regulations need to be placed to prevent these kinds of deceptive business practice.  If they are not already illegal, they should be.      

Beyond Pricing

The main purpose of writing this article was to represent the incredibly deceptive nature of developers MZ’s pricing structure.  The next aspect of the article will be to describe the good elements of the game to give you perspective as to why I played this terrible game for so long.   After that i’ll dip into the game itself and describe just how bad this poorly made game truly is.  The purpose of this paragraph is to let you (the reader) know that you have successfully completed the primary mission, everything beyond this point is a side quest so thank you for reading and feel free to continue.   

The Positivity of Communication

The primary reason I played the game as long as I did was due to the incredibly robust chat system.  Secondarily because of the completely connected world map which connects every player in the game on one surface dividing them into square blocks knows as kingdoms.  Finally the competitive and cooperative nature of the rather shallow game-play.  

(Above: world map, alliance “Hive”)

Firstly the game’s primary hook are alliances, which once joined give the player a private chat room shared with the rest of their alliance, so once joined all members in that alliance typically warp together in one section of the map and chat using the alliance chat.  This allows everyone to get to know each other and to coordinate attacks on other players or on the stationary randomly spawning monsters.  The chat system allows the player to have something around 50 private contacts which will allow the player to determine if their friends are online or not and the chat system allows the player to join 5 other chat rooms.  Given the nature of the game, especially the money involved the top players in the kingdom I was in banded together using the chat system and created a cross kingdom rule systems complete with a mediation chat room.  If it weren't for the incredible soap opera drama represented in the mediation chat room I would have quite long before 6 months.  It’s also equally fastening as the game’s proper structure doesn't allow for anything other than one alliance helping their own players so seeing people use the communication tools presented as a means of subverting the rules of the proper game was incredible fastening and as an anthropology student I was engrossed by the fastening social structures developing there.    

(Above: Kingdom chat)

Make no mistake the developers were acutely aware of this aspect of the game and have long since structured their game to make the best use of these features.  In fact i’d say if it weren't for the chat system the competitive nature of the game would wear down on the player and MZ would definitely not be able to squeeze thousands of dollars out of their players.  Still subverted or not by the developers the chat system was a useful and fascinating aspect of the game.

 Wait, wait, cool-down timer

GOW is an role playing game (RPG) as most of these mobile games are, it has a city the player can upgrade, research options the player can investigate and a hero the player can level up and equip items to, it does all of these things poorly.

The primary problem with these RPG elements within the game revolves around the cluttered nature of the game, too many items, too many things to research, in fact the only thing that seems properly structured is the player's city which has a tangible finite amount to do.  Still this doesn’t preclude the city's elements from being poorly conceived and implemented.  Aside from the obvious extreme time commitment higher level upgrades cost the resource cost preclude most high level upgrades to paying players only.

(Above: Hero profile page) (Note: I had to re-down-lode the app and wasn’t able to depict the hero attacking as my hero was captured at the time)

The “Hero” mostly a walking cool-down timer has two main features, it can attack monsters and it can boost players armies states.  Secondarily it’s upgrade tree allows for reduced research times and increased resources production.  It’s the most useful tool in a player's arsenal but also completely boring, attacking monsters consists of clicking on a monster, clicking on attack then waiting for your hero to slowly walk over to the monster, do a canned animation and slowly walk back.  The feature is so poorly done that it doesn’t even display the battle report directly to the player instead opting to send a notification the player has to sift through two loading times just to lay eyes on it.  

Attacking another player is much the same as attacking monsters, the primary difference is if you lose an attack on a player you also loose extremely valuable troops.  In another much better mobile game Clash of Clans, attacking players makes you lose your troops as-well, the difference is that individual troop are not nearly as difficult, resource consuming and time intensive to create.  To put this into perspective it took me nearly 1 month to produce nearly 200 thousand tier 2 troops, in one attack against a much higher level player I lost all of my troops, 1 month of time and subsequently lost the ability to defend myself from oncoming attacks.  There are no tactics in GOW its all click and see what happens. A player with 200k tier 2 troops doesn’t stand a ghost of a chance against a player with 200k tier 3 troops and there's nothing either party can do about it.  Another rather aggravating aspect of attacks is defending, the game allows the players to purchase items called peace shields which prevent attacks but those can be prohibitively expensive and don’t last very long, so getting attacked is inevitable.  If you are attacked and have no hospitals, your army is completely destroyed, if you have hospitals then your troops technically still exist but the resources necessary to put them back into attack position can be extreme.   

It’s all a balancing act with RPG’s and GOW is certainly not balanced under any reasonable view.  The reason I say reasonable is because the game is perfectly balanced to force the player to either spend copious amounts of money or stop playing.  It’s an arm’s race to the top and in the end the only people left standing are the wales.  So in that respect it's a player base is primarily represented by those individuals with the capability and willingness to spend thousands of dollars to out do their fellow players.

No free to start mobile game would be complete without the ability to speed up time and use purchasable material to get to the next cool-down timer.  “Gold” is this material, you can use gold to buy just about anything in the game, but that's not all, “loyalty” is also a material that can be used to purchase a smaller array of items.  Primarily the real money packages contain speed ups, pure and simple a speed up does what it’s namesake implies, though a 3day speed up can be used on a 1 hour timer if you’re not looking at what you’re doing, another of many inconsistencies that can royally screw over the player.  To the games credit simply playing the game allows for the player to collect a decent amount of these consumable resources though that still doesn't come close to what can be bought naturally.

(Above: Event’s page)

The rub with all this speed up talk lies in the games “events” which are always taking place, these events are solo, alliance, kingdom and Inferno (More bullshit).  these events provided “prizes” if the player meets certain criteria I.E ‘train x amount of troops within the time-frame’ the trouble with this is the “prizes” are always less than the necessary resources and speed ups it cost to achieve them making the whole process a net negative gain.  One of these events was in fact the straw that ‘broke the camel's back’ in terms of me playing the game.  The event asked the player not to research, not to kill monsters or train troops no the developers broke down the paper thin walls and had the event say “use speed ups”.  That was it, despicable as the other method was I felt sickened by the developers bold tear down, “use a speed up” “use an item” was exactly what the other events were it’s just the developer didn’t explicitly say so.  

I can’t stand this game, it’s existence is an affront of everything I love about gaming, it's business is a representation of everything wrong with the industry.  MZ should be ashamed of themselves for producing this inferior, money grubbing, deceptive piece of shit of a game.  I didn’t even mention the absolutely worthless “alliance city” and it’s pure money drain economy, which just goes to show how much deeper this rabbit hole goes.  This article isn’t trying to tell you not to download this game, it’s not a review of the game as a product, it's an illustration of how bad this type of practice can get.  It’s a call to action against MZ, against companies who feel it’s OK to screw over their consumers this way.  It’s a warning to consumers, not simply about GOW but also about similar games, and about similar business practices.  This behavior is not exclusive to mobile game developers, it’s not exclusionary of pay to start games, so beware consumer and head these words, but most of all, have fun.  

Thank you for your time

C.A Frank

[farmersdigest-blog]

Mass Effect 3's Ending: asking the tough questions

So I was recently faced with an interesting yet inconsequential dilemma.  Whether or not to download Mass Effect 3’s DLC.  I’ve long since played though both renegade and paragon options of the Mass Effect Trilogy so this would mark my 3rd playthrough of this game but I never had the option to spend such a ridiculous amount of money in addition to the game which I already purchased.  You see I’m not a fan of DLC but I figured that Mass Effect 2 was a good enough game that it was worth the extra investment.  After all, buying the DLC will prompt me to replay the game giving me nearly 40 hours of entertainment so it seemed worth the investment.  But Mass effect 3 was a different story. It’s harder to justify the purchase and I can’t help but ask myself why?  Ultimately after much debate with my imaginary self I came to the conclusion that the reason why I didn’t want to spend $50 dollars on the extra content was because regardless of the experiences provided by the story everything ends up in the same unsavory place.  The first time I played through Mass effect 3 I debated forsaking the second play through because the ending left such a bad stain on my emotions and feelings for the game, but I downloaded the free ending+ clip show and progressed on believing that the rest of the game was well worth suffering through the ending one more time.   It was worth the time spent of course and I’ll say this in addition, Mass Effect 3 is a fantastic game well worth anyone’s time, but.   There is always a, ‘but’ when it comes to Mass Effect 3 and that ‘but’ is always followed by ‘the ending’ and so on and so forth.  But why is the ending such a center point of conversation revolving around this game, and I don’t just mean player choice, I want to know what exactly about Mass Effect 3’s ending makes it so bad, what makes it color mine and half the internet’s views of this otherwise amazing game?

            I want to answer these questions in questions, which might make sense after I explain.  I believe that science fiction, good science fiction, is primarily designed to make the reader or in this case the player ask questions.  A story for the story’s sake is bad Sci-Fi writing in my opinion, and in that regard a story simply designed to tell a character's perspective is equally bad.  Sci-Fi should be inquisitive, it should make statements on matters that affect humans today and then question the validity of those statements, a good Sci-Fi story should have us asking what it means to be human, what it means to make choices and how the choices that we as a society have already made will affect the future.  Good Sci-Fi should never offer up a story that is black and white, it should never offer up a conclusion that truly concludes, and in that respect the Mass Effect series is in a perfect position to represent a truly brilliant and impactful Science fiction story, but the ending simply doesn’t feel like it concludes that story.  

            So why? I’m going to try and examine the three different endings involved in the final segment of the game to try and divine the questions being asked by those endings and in that represent whether or not those endings actually work.  I am, and I hate that I have to add this, aware that there is a fourth ending to the game, one which allows shepherd to sit and watch the destruction unfold in front of them.  This action to me feels like a false prophet setup to further aggravate the people demanding for some form of satisfaction from the ending, it doesn’t beg any questions it doesn’t represent the series and it’s addition is an affront to the main driver of the trilogies RPG elements.  Given the choice, Shepard will act, and in front of whichever shepard your character is are three different viable actions ready to be employed, to do nothing makes no sense whatsoever, and only asks the question, should we forsake everything, for nothing?

            The Star Child

            The Star Child poses an interesting if terrible proposition, life is inherently destructive.   Intelligent life cannot exist without untimely destroying itself, and the tool to that destruction is the creation of synthetic life.  The Star Child informs the player that it is responsible for the creation of the reapers and then the plot slips.  Up to this point the reapers were described as “each a nation, independent, free of all weakness” but being allowed to converse with the Star Child the player learns that this cannot be further from the truth.   The reapers are tools, solutions to a never-ending problem created by an insane AI with a directive that even its own advance software could not comprehend.  I think what makes this so hard to take is that up to this point the player has had a certain vision of what the reapers were but the ending flips that vision and gives the player an alternative story.  Up to this point the reapers have been these incredibly advance A.I that even the Geth worship as Gods, the reapers have been so hell bent on their plans that thousands of generations of unique organic life could not hope to match up to their might.  Up to this Point the player has believed that the reapers were independent beings working together towards some incomprehensible end but the ending and the conversations with the Star Child tells the player that they have been wrong this entire time.  The ending suggest that the reapers had the same perspective of the universe as the player has had; the only difference is that the reapers have arrived at a different conclusion.  There is no drastic revelation about the universe that humans could not even hope to comprehend, there is only a child and its toys.

Synthesis

Shepard - “and there will be peace?”

Star Child - “The cycle will end, synthesis is the final evolution of life but we need each other to    make it happen”

Part of what makes the ending so hard to take is how the Star Child speaks, and it’s analysis of the choices before shepard.  it’s not the child like voice but rather the confidence of the words, and the finality of the tone that upsets.  the Star Child presents itself as the master of the most powerful force in the galaxy an intelligence far older and smarter than anything ever confronted; yet it’s analysis of the situation before shepard seems fundamentally wrong.   theres also the problem with the central A.I charged with destroying galactic civilization over and over again just letting shepard walk about because of the awkward reasoning that because Shapard made it to the center of the citadel it’s idiot solution won’t work anymore.  but perhaps that’s the point of the crucible, to directly change the core programing of the reaper A.I.  Each ending can be surmised of a different main opinion of how to deal with the reapers that shepard was confronted with thought the game.  Synthesis is the final conclusion to the reapers solution.  the reapers themselves are described as a mix of mechanical and organic life, they require massive amounts of genetic data to be created and each one represents a conquered civilization.  so the idea of synthesizing all life with mechanical and organic components as a solution, the Star Child describes it as the ‘Final evolution of life’ but this is the opinion of an insane A.I trying desperately to figure out an equation which inherently is unsolvable.  let me explain,  the universe in infinite, the possibilities for life are infinite and this A.I is charged with protecting one form of life over the other and told that it must find a solution to the problem of synthetic life utterly destroying organic life, the A.I itself seems so incapable of solving this problem that it can’t even figure out a way of properly creating a solution for the galaxy let alone the universe.  

So what does the choice of synthesis have the player Ask?  Shepard Ask’s if there will be peace, synthesis seems the easiest solution, impose a massive change on all parties forming everyone into the same type of being the same type of culture, it’s essentially brainwashing and totalitarian in design.  synthesis is asking, is life in it’s current form capable of peace without significant change? are we as humans capable of reaching beyond our genetic predisposition without altering the very nature of what we are?  it’s a good question, one which we may have to face in the coming century with the advancement of cybernetics and the growing reliance on computer technology.  

Control

Shepard - “but the reapers will obey me?”

Starchild - “Releasing the energy of the crucible will end the cycle”

The Illusive man is the secondary antagonist of ME 3 and basically the final step to ending the war.  the Illusive man also largely represents the renegade options of Mass Effect 3.  though over the course of ME 3 you learn that he simply becomes just another pawn of the Reapers still theres more to it than that.  in Mass Effect 2 the Illusive man is an ally, an uncomfortable ally but still he is largely on the up and up providing shepard with all the necessary tools to take down the collector base and to stop the attacks on the human colonies.  his methods on the other hand are largely suspect, there is always an element of ‘ruthless Calculus’ involved in his decisions.  Mass Effect 3 begins with a marked difference in the Illusive mans attitude and decision making abilities.  he is obviously an enemy but the fundamentals of his attitude still exist in the control option.  It seems the best option, provided you're able to look past all the horrors and atrocities committed over the past couple of million years by the reapers. there’s also the added risk of the reaper technology corrupting shepard, the risk of giving one man control of an army and a star fleet capable of toppling an entire galaxy.  still that's just part of the nature of the renegade choices, shepard makes these choices that adversely affect certain people and groups in order to ease along the process of accomplishing the task assigned to him/her.  

The extended cut of the ending shows shepard controlling the reapers to repair the Mass Relays and helping with the rebuilding process, but after that shepard leaves the galaxy supposedly never to be seen again.  it’s a strange idea, being confronted with an option which up to that point you as the player have been fighting against throughout the entire game.  it’s even stranger that the developers would label the option blue the color of the paragon options.  there is a message being sent here but like the synthesis options, not all is as it initially appears.  

So what about the questions being asked?  Control largely seems to be a benign option, a way to end the war, repair the mass relays without disturbing the balance of power in the society.  more so when compared to synthesis, the control option doesn’t force a massive and possibly unwanted change on the entire galaxy rather the player choose to essentially negate the reapers free will in favor of the galaxys free will.  ultimately the player is left with the question, is it ok to subjugate and entire race, like the reapers are attempting to do, for the benefit of another race?  there's also the risk of the reaper mind set controlling shapard, how long will shephard be able to control the reapers and will shepherds motives pan out for the benefit of the galaxy.  should one man have that kind of power?  after all this is the option the illusive man desired, to be the singular man controlling the most powerful force in the galaxy, what's to stop shepard form changing their mind, directing the reapers back to the galaxy and conquering it?  while the extended cut largely indicates that shepard simply leaves and never returns the options before the player at the end of the game does not.  i personally found my self asking that very question, reluctant to give shapard ultimate control and this was when i was playing as paragon shepard.    

Destruction

Shapard - “but the reapers will be destroyed?”

Star Child - “Yes but the peace won’t last; soon your children will create synthetics and then the chaos will come back”

Shapard - “Maybe”

Throughout the game the player is given choices over the ultimate question of the Mass Effect series, you’re introduced to the elements and offered to give your perspective on it.  can organic and synthetic life coexist?  depending on your choices the player could possible have largely different views on this subject.  the player can direct EDI to be less empathetic, the player can aggravate the Geth into a hostile position, or the player can do the opposite.  destruction brings this home.  In ME 2 you can activate Legion, a geth squad member which is particularly strange seeing as ME 1 had shapard almost solely fighting the Geth.  but legions different not just in perspectives and general level of hostility towards shepard but rather legion is different because the player gets to interact with legion on a personal level, legion has a personality which the player can explore and legion accompanies the player on the final mission, in this respect the player forms an attachment with legion, and attachment which makes the destruction ending that much more unbearable.  

the destruction ending gives the player the ability to perform the task that they initially set out to preform; that is the destruction ending gives the player the option to destroy the reapers.  but as with everything else in the Mass Effect games there are consequences to this decision and the consequences are severe.  not only does that decision destroy the reapers but it also destroys all synthetic life in the galaxy including EDI, the geth, and legion, not to mention the destruction of the mass relays and other forms of technology like the quarian environmental suits and the tec running every civilization.  though much of the apocalyptic doomsday scenario is alleviated by the extended cut ending showing the civilizations rebuilding; this is still a tough decision especially for a paragon shepard.  

so is it worth the coast? given everything the player has learned about the Mass Effect universe up to this point is destroying the reapers worth the coast of the collateral damage?

Solution to Chaos

the reapers are constantly describing themselves as a solution, the harvesters of organic destruction and though the raepers, the bringers of organic salvation.  but more than that the reapers say that the organics represent Chaos, a bold and strange accusation coming from a life form which supposedly has god like intelligence.  organic life is hardly Chaos, organic life is simply numerous especially in the Mass Effect universe, and with that the possibilities are endless.  the reapers simply refuse to accept the diversity of life; instead giving up on categorizes it and deciding that organic diversity is simply chaos.  the reapers go one step further than this by stating “without us to stop it, synthetics would destroy all organics, we’ve created the cycle so that never happens” a cold claim considering the massive diversity which life has to offer.  but this is the problem, for all the reapers knowledge and experience they are still not omnipotent, they are simply one more flawed form of life in a galaxy teaming with such life.  it’s the reapers speech that gives them away, because in this respect the reapers always talk in absolutes, there is hardly a conversation that Shepard has with a reapers that doesn’t involve an absolute.

I can’t think of a single moment which the mass effect series didn’t contradict the reapers or the star child.  Given everything i know about the games it seems almost blatantly obvious that there is really only one choice laid out in front of shepherd, one true choice which doesn't involve a flawed designed created by a flawed being.  the Star Child warns shapard that if destruction is chosen then the Chaos will return, but this is also the only time shapard contradicts the star child “maybe” something seemingly out of the reapers mind set, the possibility of deviation, the hope of a better future.  the reapers state that they left behind the mass relays and other forms of technology to help direct the organic races, help them form to a point technologically optimal to the reapers plans.  by destroying the Mass Relays citadel and reapers this cycle is broken, the reapers can no longer direct the technological evolution of organic races and the freedom of choice returns.  there is of course a coast, the geth civilization will be destroyed and EDI will be no more, two synthetic life forms which prove the reapers wrong, and there is a chance that those types of life forms which replace the Geth and EDI will not be a friendly but there is also every chance that they will be just as friendly, it’s shepard's answer that gives this away “maybe”.  the possibility of a future without a design, isn’t that really all the player and shepard has been fighting for?    

ultimately i’ll say this, Destruction seems like the most reasonable ending, the ending with the least amount of consequence and least amount of unknowns.  destruction offers freedom and with the freedom new and unique possibilities. as far as the ending of Mass Effect 3 goes, the aspect of the Starchild and the three choices before shepard is really not bad, it does an excellent job of forcing the player to ask questions and to figure out what the story ment.  the rest of the ending however is complete shit, the extended cut is a cheap bandage, and is something which should have shipped with the initial game.

so i bought the DLC and played the game but stopped after resolving the Quarian geth conflict, i just didn’t really see how my decisions up to that point would matter in the end, and since i already knew the ending, completing the game didn’t really seem to matter that much.  still the DLC was well worth the price and as typical with the game the writing was stellar.  Mass Effect 3 is a game about the journey not the destination and in that respect the poorly designed ending does have a negative effect on the game, which is a shame seeing as the journey, the majority of the game is so well made.  

[farmersdigest-blog]

Making the Case for Dragon Age Origins

i’m going to make a bold statement that probably fly’s in the face of popular gaming opinion but here it is anyway; Dragon Age Origins was the best game of this past generation of gaming.  not only was it the best game of this generation but i believe it represents how gaming as a form of entertainment sets itself apart from other, more traditional mediums.  

There are several elements that combine together to create this viable masterpiece of gaming goodness but it’s important to understand that these elements don’t stand out in a vacuum, the story doesn’t separate itself from the gameplay; the visuals or the music they all combine together to create a truly unique experience that no one should miss out on.

Dragon age origins is set from the third person perspective and in that respect gives the player control over a unique character with an interesting backstory while still being enough of a blank slate to have every choice the character makes throughout the game be relevant and plausible.  in fact the first few minutes of the game allow for an incredible array of choices, simply picking your characters race, class and background add unique little touches to how the player interacts with the game that few other games even come close to matching.  there are a grand total of 6 unique backgrounds to choose from which depending on your choice can influence and color your choices throughout your gaming experience, the NCP’s in the game will react to what choices you made in those first few minutes, some showing surprise if your choose a female protagonist or showing casual racism if you choose an elf character and respect of you choose a human.  all of these elements build up on each other and while these choices don’t always reflect gameplay differences; for example regardless of your race or sex you can still end up with almost any type of ending you desire, they still color your experience with the game and the world BioWare has built for you.

personally i prefer playing games like these twice; once as a good character and once as a evil character but the game was designed in a way that didn’t really reflect that type of sentimentality.  I found that playing through the game again trying to make the opposite choices i made in my first playthrough that i would run into situations and events in which i simply did not what to choose that opposite path.  for example my “evil” character was a city elf and the game eventually gives you a choice of power and money in exchange for selling your people into slavery or you can forgo that power and money and just free your people.  i honestly couldn’t bring myself to pull that trigger, as much as i wanted to experience that alternate take on the event i couldn’t walk down that path; it just didn’t make sense for my character.  and this is where the game truly shines because the people that you meet, the choices that you make and the character that you build aren't black and white, they aren't archetypes with plot purposes, even the enemies and villains of the game have dimensions, they have backstories and unique personalities that define their perspectives.  any and every choice you make throughout the game have varying impacts on the different characters, they may agree or they may disagree, you can even piss them off to such an extreme that they'll  either try and kill you or simply leave your party for the rest of the game.  

Thedes is the world of Dragon Age Origins in which these characters populate and its construction is nothing short of masterful.  World building is nothing to turn up your nose at, it establishes an environment for the character’s in the game and creates (if done well) a world which the player will be inclined to explore and learn more about.  at the very least a well built world help’s the suspension of disbelief for the player and allows for a an engaging environment for the base gameplay involved.  the world of Dragon Age Origins is not only believable but it takes that same level of writing applied to the players companion characters and give it to the sociopolitical landscape of the entire world of Dragon Age Origins.  in an RPG the world the Character is surrounded with is of paramount importance as the story and the character interactions approximates about half of the game play.  on my own playthroughs of the game skipping the character dialogue resulted in about 10h less gameplay than my first playthrough which is quite a striking number.  it’s true that certain character motivations would not have been as impactful or meaningful without the world that surrounded them.  for example the dwarf character known as Ogren  at first glance is an atypical drunk funny dwarf archetype but through the course of the dwarf underground area of the game his motivations become clearer, he is essentially a disenfranchised lechter a product of losing his love to the depths of the caves and being forced into an odd confined role of nobility without respect in a society designed around a strict caste system which won't allow him any room to breath.  ogren’s own history allows the player to see the sad tale of a man who is essentially a uncontrolled drunk confined to strict cast systems in a society that no longer accepts him.  the cast system of the Dwarfs is just one example of the games ability to take and mold different and often competing political and religious structures that exist in our society and subsequently create a believable governmental and societal structure within the game world.  the qunari are an interesting example of this type of thinking on the developers part as the qunari attitude and world view suggest such an alien perspective as oppose to our own western point of view that it’s hard to see as anything close to viable yet somehow the developers and writers managed to convince me.  , we can accept kings and queens we can accept the french inspired orlesian the spanish inspired  Antiva and the Indian inspired Orzammar but the extreme religious tenets of the Qunari and their governmental structure completely designed around the idea of faith based religious classification and order to determine each individual's role in that society is simply too alien.  the Qunari society represents every science fiction writers worst case scenario yet the writers of Dragon age origins managed to soften that blow and get the player to accepts the qunari as simply just another option.  the Qunari are also probably the one aspect of the Dragon Age universe that was actually improved upon in Dragon age 2 so that’s quite a distinction.

Dragon Age 2 was designed to make the same type of combat from Dragon Age Origins more action based and engaging for the console audience, the combat was designed to fix a problem that in my opinion never existed.  when Dragon Age Origins was ported over from the PC the developers tweaked the combat engine to allow for a controller, they already in that act made the combat more action based.  the balance in Dragon Age Origins between tactical manipulation of the characters and direct combat control of a single character was perfect.  the numerous difficulty settings involved in the game allowed for all types of players to get enjoyment out of the game.  Origins is one of the few action based strategy games that i even actually enjoyed, this is probably because i played mostly on easy mode and never concerned myself with the other characters during combat, this means that i didn’t get all the game had to offer with regards to the combat but i’m ok with that, i enjoy knowing that the game allows for multiple types of people to sit down and enjoy like my self.  it’s not perfect and i won’t pretend to know how to compare it to other similar RPGS but it is fun and the combat by no means interferes with the story aspect in fact it goes a long way to enhance the game by allowing that same level of choice that the story has.    

in terms of level of choice Developer Bioware has created multiple games that give an immense level of choice to the player, one these games is the Mass Effect series and respectively Mass Effect 3. ME3’s ending was a clusterfuck of bad writing and overreaching on the developers part.  Dragon age origins i would argue had just as many if not more major plot points it had to cover for it’s ending yet somehow managed to tackle the same type of problem that ME3 had but with grace and poise, Bioware should have paid more attention to their previous endeavor when forming the ending for ME3.  the reason for this is simple Dragon Age origins had an end point planed out from the very beginning, you as a character always knew where you were going to end up, exactly how you got there and what happened when you got their was up to player choice but the ending itself was always know.  the ending in my opinion caps off the story perfectly it brings in all the aspects the game had been hinting at and combines them under one roof.  it allowed player control over the choice’s you made throughout the game, if you decided to side with the elves than you had elves at your command in the battle, if you did something special for certain characters in your party than those characters were more likely to stick with you till the end.  one main example is alister, or morgan who depending on player choice could easily not be involved in the final battle.  also you're givin time to talk with each one of your companion and offer them words of encouragement as you leave, depending on how much they like you their responses will change.  finally you as a character are leading an army against another army and that action is reflected in the game play, you have numerous companions all of which you can't take with you on your final run at the archdemon so the developers gave you control of those you left behind.  the ending takes all the gameplay elements you've had at your disposal throughout the entire game and gives you one last go at them, a few more choices, a few more battles and if you didn’t play your cards right a few more deaths.

i'll say this, Dragon Age origins is not a good looking game, though in certain aspects the game looks better than Dragon Age 2.  Still it’s not perfect, but though the game lacks in graphical fidelity it’s still fantastic and i’ll argue that it’s graphics by no means interfere or take away from the game.  in other related faults of the game sometimes the voice acting is not up to par with the excellent writing but this doesn’t really take too much away from the game as the writing more than makes up for a limited budget for voice actors.  

it might seem an odd choice, and there were plenty of games this generation that deserve the title of best game of the generation still despite that i truly believe that Dragon Age Origins was the best game this generation.  not just because the world was well designed or the characters were well developed or that the combat was engaging and fun but for all of the above combined.  gaming as a medium is about choice, player choice and in this respect dragon Age origins soars far above the rest.  it takes this idea of choice and runs with it allowing the player to shape their own story immersing the player in a world where the character they are creating is not only believable but in almost all respects sympathetic and understandable.  no other game has brought me into it’s world so much with the character i was playing became more that a couple of choice on a conversation tree.  i won’t pretend to have played all the contenders for this title this generation but regardless of if my opinion changers if and when i play games like The Last of Us, Dragons Age Origins is still a game worthy of consideration.  

[farmersdigest-blog]

E3 Takeaways

                So E3 is over and the call of a new generation is upon us, much that was hazy has been cleared up, yet much is still left unanswered.  Over the course of this years E3 I saw some of my predictions (what few of their they were) come true, some not addressed and others fail and flop upon arrival.  So let’s boil this down to what is sure to be an extremely long article and see what I took away from this year’s showing.  

                Lets start with the elephant in the room and take a look at PS4’s press conference announcement of supporting used games and having no first party DRM restrictions.  That’s a big deal and while it shouldn’t be; Microsoft has set the stage on this one.  what’s most important to take away from that announcement is that Sony didn’t completely get rid of Used games restrictions nor did they disallow DRM on their counsel and Jack Trettons interview with Geoff Keighley made that perfectly clear.  But that’s not a bad thing and after watching all the interesting new games coming from the developers that used an always online persistent world mechanic I think this was the right choice, it allows for more flexibility when producing new games and that can only be a good thing for the consumer.  In-fact I think this whole E3 boils down to that word “Flexibility” and how it’s being treated by the HD twins.  Sony has clearly taken the stance of trying to be the most flexible counsel for their developers and for their consumers while Microsoft was more or less restricting and limiting options for consumers.  I’ll go into more detail later but for now I want to see about my predictions, did they hold up, how and why not?

E3 Predictions

                X-Box one

-          Halo 5:  looks like I was right about halo, they will never expressly say why the game is so far back in development but my prediction about it being a year or two out was right.  The game isn’t even in the launch window and all we saw of the game was a short teaser trailer. 

-          The Games:  I said I was looking forward to being turned around about the games on X-box and I was.  The games looked fantastic and for a few hours there (before the Sony press conference) I was seriously tempted.  Looks like Microsoft was telling the truth about bringing the games and I doubt they showed all their hand at E3 so I look forward to more announcements.  Also I said there would be a couple of Kinect games and in that implicated that they would be show, I was wrong about any sort of focus on the Kinect and wrong about them having a large amount of Kinect games but I was right about it still playing a big role in the future of Microsoft.

-          Fable Online: I’m still holding out hope for this one, fable wasn’t talked about at the press conference at all or E3 for that matter so this could still happen.  In-fact I think this will happen, with the huge focus on MMORPG’s this generation it’s a sure shot.

                PS4

-          So I said that Sony would have a similar set up to Microsoft but they would have more options and allow form more consumer choice and I was dead right on that.  It’s important that understand that Sony isn’t ignoring DRM or taking it out of their system, the PS4 is set up for variable games and you can be sure that developers are going to use it for that.

-          There were not a lot of First party game announcements for PS4 which I was surprised about but I suppose they felt they had enough announcements for their platform thus far.  Still I was wrong I thought there would be more exclusive announcements.

-          I’m not going to revise my predictions for their sales,  I still think it will be a slow start for the counsel.  While the Day 1 sales and possibly month 1 sales will be high the launch window will shore up.  But this is definitely the winner of this next gen by a mile unless Microsoft changes its policies. 

                Wii U

-          So I was wrong a lot on Nintendo which really shouldn’t be a surprise.  No new Zelda, Metroid or F-zero.  Very disappointing. Though Metroid was seemingly replaced with Donkey Kong tropical freeze seeing as the studio that typically makes Metroid games is now working on donkey Kong.  A safe choice and a potentially bad choice.

-          Nintendo did have a very strong show floor with tons of working titles to play and a very animated booth (at least from what I hear) still I thought it would be bigger than that with more new games playable.

-          The missing marketing push: I haven’t seen anything yet and I don’t think they will try and directly compete with Sony and Microsoft, I think starting Feb 2014 they will push a lot of money into a marketing campaign.

-          Mario Kart Universe: there is a new Mario Kart and it probably will have better online connectivity but I’m not seeing that big open ended IP that I thought would happen.  It just looks like another Mario Kart. 

-          So I was right about the lack of Third party support yet I don’t really understand it.  Nintendo has always had a different market and third parties can easily sell on that system if they would only make games specifically for the Nintendo audience.  Like Sonic, platforms and creative game designs will sell on the Wii U.  I just don’t see developers trying to understand that market or make games for it.

                Big Takeaways

                Next Gen: I was hearing a lot from developers about the versatility of the counsel, the creator of knack basically said that the idea was thrown around the office and because they kicked it to the PS4 that the games development time and drain or resources was less so because the system had more power to handle almost anything that the developers can think of.  This can only be a good thing and once developers start really getting a handle on this generations we could see a lot of new smaller games with excellent HD graphics coming more often.  This is why I think the Wii U should have more third party development, seeing as they big third parties can more easily split their focus and develop more graphically impressive games.  

                Controllers:  from what a lot of games media are saying after handling both controllers for the X-Box one and PS4 it looks like Sony might have one more leg up on its competition.  People really like the new PS4 controller, they say it’s comfortable, responsive and has added functionality that improves the game play without interfering.  On the opposite end journalist are saying that the X-box controller is uncomfortable, the triggers as awkwardly placed and that the impulse trigger is annoying to use.  Keep in mind these controllers will be coupled with the demos found at retail stores and might play a role in potential sales. 

                Next Gen: there are lots of always online open world social games, possibly too much.   The Industry might be investing too much money in these games and that’s why developments cost are going up.  The crew especially is a huge world that I doubt will have a large online following.  In fact there are so many big MMORPG’s this generation that I’m slightly worried some of them will fail simply because everyone is already playing with their competitors.  That coupled with potentially paid services within the consoles could have a huge effect on sales.  Most people only play one MMORPG because they are huge time sinks and coast way to much money to have more than one going on at once.  Perhaps this is a different situation but I’m going to hold my breath for more information and probably until final sales.  

                Price points: it’s simple X-Box = $499, PS4 = $399.  With Microsoft’s new announcement regarding a 180 on their used game policy’s I think the stage is set on user choice.  The price is still a big hurdle but if you think it’s worth the Kinect than I suppose you’ll pony up the extra $100.

                Don Mattrick Gaff:  he basically said that people should stick with the 360 for offline play.  This was right after he talked about how he didn’t know what it was like to be in a sub.  This was one of the few truly legitimate situations brought up regarding Microsoft’s DRM strategy that over see’s soldiers would not be able to play the system because of its lack of offline functionality.  They had time with this question, it wasn’t a surprise and Don Mattrick must have been prepared for it yet still ignored one of the X-boxes primary used bases.  This is a perfect example of how uninterested in giving their consumers concern in regards to this gaming console.  It’s arrogant and dismissive and this user hating policy, consumer mistrust needs to stop before people start losing their jobs at Microsoft studios.  I’m not convinced the change in policy was due to a public outcry.  I think they threw out some numbers, got a few share holder calls and with that changed their policy’s.  This was an outside force effecting change and that still makes it a problem for the company.  I suppose we will see in the coming years how they react to this sudden second place position in the console race.   

                PS4 allows DRM:  this was overlooked by a lot of people and I think it deserves focus.  The PS4 is not the consumer friendly console that everyone thinks it is.  Sony will support the industry as they drift more and more into DRM and by the end of this generation you might see Sony First party’s switch over as well.  But the systems still allows the choice and that’s a good thing.  It’s also important to note that PS+ is required for online game play unless you’re playing a Free to Play game (which makes perfect sense).  This is a situation of buying into a service and with Sony’s tract record the consumer doesn’t really have to worry about being short changed with this service. 

                3DS:  The future looks good for 3DS owners.  The systems didn’t get a lot of love from the media but Nintendo announced a lot of great games coming for the console and if you currently own a 3DS you have a lot to get excited about this coming holiday season and a lot more in 2014. 

                Wii U:  Nintendo has this thing about innovating game play and a generation later everyone copy’s Nintendo.  Well it looks like the industry is jumping into Nintendo’s latest endeavor earlier that usual.   This is simply grating because the third party’s were complaining about adding Wii u game pad functionality and now everyone of them is embracing it as if it’s a brand new concept.  I get annoyed when I hear game journalist talk about how the concept is hard to understand and yet they simply shrug their shoulders at ‘the Division’ or ‘Battlefield 4’.  The Wii U has always had proof of concept and it’s always been a good idea, I’ve no idea how people missed it other than the Wii U having a really horrible name.

                Wii U:  Games coming slower than anticipated and this is surprising.  Nintendo has one of the largest first party studio line up in the industry and have had nearly two years to develop for the Wii U.  yet we are seeing the games come out at a snail’s pace with several anticipated titles completely missing.  Donkey Kong Tropical freeze couldn’t have taken that long to make and Nintendo can’t think that their audience is simply going to buy every single title. 

                Wii U:  the 3DS is limiting the Wii U version of Smash bros.  There will be less characters and almost no functionality between the Wii U and the 3DS.  This is annoying; Nintendo had to have the Wii U in the works when they made the 3DS and to not add increased functionality between the two system was a dumb idea.  The Vita has remote play, where’s the 3DS remote play?  Where’s the cross platform functionality?

                Indi:  PS4 is going to have a huge indi focus, self-publishing and free updates (I think).  they showcased the indi games at their press conference and it appears this is the console to have if you want to play indi games. 

Hopes

                Mario open world integrated plat former would be a perfect addition to the Mario franchise and a creative new type of plat former for this next generation.  I would love a more sand box feel to Mario, something more akin to Mario 64.

Pokémon MMORPG, I’m still holding out hope. 

                  Dem Games

                The Division – incredible graphics, amazing gameplay and a game type that I’m not really                              interested

                Smash Bros 3DS/Wii U – happy about everything, except 3DS seemingly holding the game back

                Destiny – looks interesting and might be a fun game to play.

                Infamous Second son – looks amazing and really excited

                Mario 3Dworld – looks fun but nothing interesting.

                Watch Dogs – looks amazing and fun, can’t wait to play it.

                LOZ: Wind Waker U – every time I see this game I get more hyped.

                Dragon Age: inquisition – gonna hold my breath on this one

                X – want’ to see more

                Metal Gear Solid V – seriously impressive looking game.

                  Of course there are more but I’ll just end this here. 

[farmersdigest-blog]

Predictions for E3

                So E3 is right around the corner and the next generation of gaming is about to be put into full gear, so the question on everybody’s minds is what will the new future look like?.   The trouble is with all the negative rumors flying around sounding the nextboxone, will this next generation be truly better or will it in-fact be worse for gamers?  There is also my added prediction about how these next generation of gaming boxes will be displayed, how will they be marketed and who will they be marketed to?  I’m going to try and make some predictions about this coming generation and the councils that will bring it about. 

X-Box one

                Aside from the obvious marketing snafu that is the name of this behemoth the ‘X-box One’ looks like it will be rather easy to sell to unassuming consumers.  As far as my opinion so far on this device, I think it’s safe to assume that I won’t be even remotely tempted to buy it any time soon.  That being said why is it that I think this thing will sell and how will it overcome gamers like myself in the market. Let me try and explain.

                Direction: The Green Ocean

-          The X-box one is clearly marked towards the 13 year old gamer and his/hers mom.  That’s really what this thing boils down do, Microsoft knew who was buying the 360 and why.  So it’s no small leap to see why they’ve seemingly ignored the so called ‘Core gamer’.  Many of us assume the Kinect was a failure but as I watch my sister hold her newborn in one hand and direct the X-box with her voice to play the newest episode of her favorite show on Netflix I can easily see how this system will appeal to her and others like her.  What if her kid was a little bit older and wanted to play COD, what system will she buy?  The answer is obvious, with the Kinect the X-box is much easier to sell and bundling it in the package and giving it better controls will only help Microsoft in the long run.  That being said Microsoft seems to be treating it’s consumers more like thief’s than loyal customers and this direction will most certainly not help their chances with the rest of the gaming public that just so happens to not be kids or have kid’s. 

                Used Games and the terror they bring

-          It’s hard to imagine an industry that was basically built on the ease of use that consoles bring, completely turning against that idea.  The way any gamer can simply pop in a cartridge or disk into any related device and start playing that game, wherever and whenever they want, gives a sense of freedom you just can’t get on other devices. Console gamers don’t have to worry about user license agreements or activation codes or how their game will one day become unplayable when a developer decides that hosting servers is no longer worth the coast.  Yet here we are at the cusp of the next generation and the biggest aspect of the industry is salivating at getting the same sweet deals that the much less popular P.C developers are getting. 

-          Why, why are they seemingly running head long off a cliff like this, my best guess is they never thought to higher an Anthropologist or Sociologist to analysis social data instead relying on Statisticians and math majors, most likely Public Relation Bachelorettes to do the job.  That’s a problem, and I know many people won’t know why, but as much as we want’ to believe that humans are this paragon of logical operation that is simply not the case.  Humans act off of evolved instinct more often than not and analyzing date that was essential assigned arbitrary numbers by some half-wit with an excel sheet will not Bring about accurate results.  Subjective date requires subjective analysis and I’m not convinced that Microsoft or most of the Gaming industry knows this. 

-          My best prediction is that by putting a cap on used games and restricting the next gen content as much as Microsoft is doing will put a big damper on new game sales.  Microsoft learned with the Kinect that most of their user base doesn’t have a grand living room with a piano in the corner and they’ll learn again just how poor people really are.  Not everyone has the ability to constantly buy new games.  The install base for this next generation will drop dramatically for X-box one, if a user has 5 games for the 360 they will have 2 for the One. 

                15 New Games

-          It’s not a bad thing to have new Kinect games.  I know that’s a ridiculous statement, and even if I somehow am gifted a new X-box I probably won’t be even remotely interested in those types of games it’s still nice to know that these games will be available for the audience that likes the Kinect. 

-          New IP: probably won’t be exactly what we are expecting but I’m looking forward to being turned around on my opinion about this device by whatever Microsoft’s first party studios can bring. 

-          Halo will be ready in a year or two, I don’t know why but for some reason I’m expecting that the new halo game will be either drastically different than its predecessors or simply delayed for a longer development time.  Perhaps Microsoft is expecting a slow first year, like Nintendo had and won’t want to release this system seller until they have a proper install base. 

-          Fable online:  ok I’m officially crazy but Fable seems to be set up for this type of service and with all this broadband DRM talk it makes sense that the next Fable game will have a very social, on-line focus that will probably far exceed expectations. 

                    Sales Prediction

-          This will not be the success that Microsoft is hoping for.  With the latest press release regarding the X-box one, Microsoft has shown its colors but rather than taking the blame for the new generations features they are shifting that blame to the third party gaming publishers and in effect supporting their constant accusations that people who buy used games are essentially stealing from them.  This will not bold well for those COD playing 13y/o’s who probably trade in their old COD in order to supplement the purchase of the new COD, in fact most COD players probably do this.

-          All Sony has to do this win over those FPS gamers is not have the same consumer hating tactics that Microsoft and its third parties seem to be employing.  This lack of used functionality will most certainly hurt their sales, not demolish them but it might do enough to make the company double take and close down a couple of studios in the process, and if Sony takes this tactic as well then we might be seeing a dramatic reduction is the number of employed game developers in the industry. 

-          The ultimate truth is that Microsoft is ignoring the core, and treating the core like criminals, thief’s that are stealing from their multibillion dollar corporation.  It’s the core that takes up the initial mantel of buying new consoles and it’s the core that through their passion convince others to buy that gaming system and have that same level of enjoyment.  Without the core backing them, Microsoft is in for a rude awakening at the end of its first year of sales.

  PS4

                The more I learned about the X-box One the more I wanted to buy the PS4.  Perhaps the press conference was a little long but I was truly excited about plying the games that they showed and interested in how the features that they highlighted will enhance my gameplay.  I think Sony gets where the market is, how it will change and are preparing for that future.

                  The Core strategy

-          You don’t really have to look very far to see where Sony is leaning in this next generation.  Sure they have a lot of social media features and built in connectivity for sharing but it’s how they are trying to use this technology to enhance the gaming experience that shows their leaning.  The so called ‘core’ does let’s plays, writes armature reviews of games, likes showing their abilities in beating a difficult part of a game.  It’s as if Sony is planning on using core gamers to supplement their marketing on social media sites as appose to simply buying adds which is probably Microsoft’s strategy.

-          They also appear to know the main reason many of us buy their console and that’s for the excellent exclusives that Sony’s first party’s produce along with all the fantastic multiplatform games available. 

-          Sony is targeting the market that already exist and trying to take away from Microsoft’s user base while at the same time extending themselves to more online based services as oppose to cable box’s and T.V.  

                  Used Games

-          It’s the question on everybody’s minds and Sony has been surprisingly tight lipped about this feature.  My general prediction is that like Microsoft they will allow developers to decide on this feature but rather than having the systems required to connect to the internet they will instead only have that requirement for the particular games that use DRM.  It won’t be that much different than Microsoft but at the same time Sony will have the consumer more in mind by allowing them to use their consoles like real console gamers typically use them.  I’ve more faith in Sony than Microsoft at this point and that might be misplaced but so far I haven’t been painted like a criminal by Sony.   

                The amazing First party studios

-          Sony is rivaled only by Nintendo in its first party support and the general level of quality typically expected from those games.  We’ve seen a glimpse of the new Infamous and a showing of the new IP that is knack and we know there are more to come. I am however expecting that there will not be a rush of new games in the first year launch window.

-          I think that both Sony and Microsoft know that this next generation is going to take longer to get off the ground than the last and are going to stager their release accordingly.  That being said the third party support for this next generation console will be superb, it might take a couple of studios a while to learn where the games are being played but eventually, within the first year Sony will be the Go-to box for all games, just like X-box was at the beginning of this last generation. 

                Sales Predictions

-          It’s going to be a slow start but I predict that Sony is expecting that.  However once people see enough reason to put down their last gen devices they will most likely pick up a PS4.  In the end I predict that Sony will be the leader of this next gen console race. 

  Nintendo

                The Wii U has been out for nearly a year now and is finally beginning to pick up some speed.  I predict that E3 will mark the start of a big marketing push by Nintendo to gain back much of the Wii’s install base, get ready for the start of a new revolution. 

                  The never predictable direction of Nintendo

-          I think Nintendo built the Will U first and foremost with its own gaming IP in mind and secondly with the idea that the future is not in T.V but rather in the World Wide Web.  The Wii U game pad is tailored made to connect with various devices and its ability to connect all your streaming services is something I, as a consumer, am quite intrigued by. 

-          I don’t have T.V and I don’t particularly like T.V and it’s me that Nintendo is targeting.  But if that’s the case then why don’t I already have a Wii U?  Games, I answer knowingly and that’s one thing that will probably change during and after E3

                Why you no have press conference?

-          My prediction is that Nintendo has a lot of really good demos or full games to show on their floor and are expecting to make a big push with the gaming media with a lot of big announcements.  We all get excited for a new Mario and Zelda and my best bet is that Nintendo has a lot of big announcements ready for E3 and are simply going to use the Nintendo direct on Tuesday for some of the less savory of announcements, like a exclusive partnership with Capcom or something. 

                Games

-          Zelda HD, new 3D Mario for the home console, Metroid, F-Zero, Mario Cart Universe, Star Fox U.  Nintendo is going to have major announcements and these are some of the games I think they will talk about.  More importantly I think the time is right, I think the connectivity is there and the online requirements are ready, I predict that the biggest announcement from Nintendo will be a Pokémon MMORPG for the Wii U,  ya I really am crazy.  Also Smash bros will be talked about but not shown.   

                Sales predictions

-          It’s a solid second place for Nintendo this next generations, they have all the features that the X-box has with none of the draw backs, it might be a harder sell but with a proper media buy they can get consumers on their sides.  And the games will come, maybe not from third parties but from Nintendo itself, those games alone will do a good job of selling this consol.  I’d be pleasantly surprised if they get comprehensive third party support but I don’t expect it.  Nintendo isn’t expecting massive sales like the Wii had but I think they have a proper strategy laid out for the next couple of years and they will start Turing over a big profit after this years end.

The Industry

-          Subscription based services:  I’d be surprised if this doesn’t happen, it’s a good way to get people to buy your console and requiring a subscription user to connect to the internet once a day or once a month for conformation isn’t a bad thing.  It’s takes a lot of effort to build up 300 dollars when you work minimum wage and lowering that initial price point will do a lot for the average consumer. 

-          Varied game prices:  the best thing that can come from DRM is if developers lower their game prices for users, perhaps have an opt in service for games.  You can either pay $60 for a normal game that you can resale as much as you want or pay $20 for a new game that you can only resale once.  Lowing the price of entry can only help the consumer, even if it means restricted functionality consumers will shell out the dough for a lower priced game.

-          Indi games boom:  it’s so much easier to make indie games now that it used to be and we are going to see a big push for Indie games this next generation.  I’d like to see a paid service that allows you access to say 5 games per month for around $10 a month, that would be a big win for the consumer and perhaps the developers as more people will pay to play those games.  There can even be a tiered system that allows users who pay $20 a month to get access to big release for that month, maybe they’ll have a bandwidth cap or simply arbitrarily classify games. Whatever the method is this new generation is an opportunity to get more gamers playing more games, and if the industry stops treating people like thief’s and starts looking for new ways to provide services for the consumer not for the developers than perhaps this next generation will be even more appealing that the last.     

[farmersdigest-blog]

My top 20 Games of all time

1.) LOZ OoT

2.) Pokémon Heart gold, soul silver

3.) LOZ MM

4.) Dragon age origins w/DLC & Awakening

5.) Civilization V

6.) LOZ ALTTP

7.) Sonic 3 and knuckles

8.) Heroes of might and magic 3 & Chronicles

9.) Mass Effect 1,2,3

10.) Final fantasy X

11.) Super smash brawl

12.) Diablo 2

13.) Super Mario world

14.) Gauntlet ps2

15.) Fable 2

16.) Mario galaxy

17.) LOZ WW

18.) Red Dead Redemption

19.) Ages of empires 2

20.) GTA Vice city

So I spent a little bit of time today thinking about all the games I’ve played throughout the years.   I thought about which ones I remember fondly, which ones affect my life in varying ways, which ones I put the most hours into and which ones I remember being absolutely and completely amazing pieces of art.  I started by trying to remember all the games I played, than moved those games around in order according to the previously mentioned criteria.  In the end I ended up with a list that I think very accurately expresses my overall video game experience throughout the years.

  A Few notes:

  Ocarina of times was an absolute no brainer, it was the first game I ever completed on my own, I put god knows how many hours into the game not only playing it but also helping my sisters play through the game and ultimately I see this game as a beautiful piece of art that is worth studying for any video game maker.

  Pokémon Heart Gold and Soul Silver are by far the epitome of the Pokémon experience; everything was done right in this game.  It took the formula of Pokémon (one that has literally taken hundreds of hours of my life) and perfected it.  There’s not much more to say than if you love Pokémon or are interested in getting into the series than this is the game to buy.

  Dragon Age Origins is by far the most compelling game I’ve played this generation.  It’s obvious that Bio Ware spent a lot of time and care when developing this game; I only wish they spent the same amount of time when they made Mass Effect 3. Everything from the story to the game play this is a game that no one should pass up playing. 

  Civilization V had its glitches and frustrated the hell out of me when they would crash my game but the gameplay was so good and engaging that I worked through that even opting to play in tactical mode and sacrificing the fantastic graphics for the enjoyment of the game.  This is a game perfectly suited to my over active imagination.

  A Link to the Past and Sonic 3 are tied in my opinion, they booth represent the panicle of that generations gameplay and are some of the best games in their respective franchise.  I have a lot of fond memories of these games and I never stop enjoying them.

  Heroes of might and Magic 3 is more on her for the Chronicles than the main game but since the chronicles are made from 3’s engine it’s only fair the add the main game.  Chronicles and the story of Tarnum probably made a tremendous impact on my ability to read as before I played these games I don’t think I had ever managed to read a novel of any sort.  I was invested in the story and raised my own reading compression lever to get to the point where I could actually appreciate it. 

  Mass Effect 1 is a game I never want to play again, mainly because of the load times but 2 and 3 are utterly fantastic except the ending of 3 which just reeks of EA’s money grubbing hands.  Other than that the story is fantastic and the game play in 2 and 3 are eternally enjoyable.

  Finial Fantasy X is another game that got me with its story, it’s the first and only Finial Fantasy game I ever played and I can’t for the life of me figure out why I haven’t played more of these fantastic titles.   I’ll always remember getting my wisdom teeth pulled and powering through the game beating it for the first time while my cheeks where drooping down to my shoulders.

  Brawl is mainly on here over Melee because I didn’t play Melee, I didn’t have a game cube and I have countless found memories playing brawl with my best friend. 

  Diablo 2 is permanently etched in my gamer memories because my dad would constantly erase mine and my sisters characters along with the would game off the system because he didn’t think we would play them again or he accidently erased them when he defragged the computer.  But every time without fail we would reload it on the computer and play the game though again, plowing through it with a different character, enjoying every minute. 

  Gauntlet for the PS2 is a game I constantly bring out for parties, or I used to when the PS2 was hooked up, no matter who they were, if they played games or not they would enjoy this game.  I still remember playing through this game getting to level 99 with my sister and finally betting the boss, it was a great time sink then and still is today.  If only they would make a new one, that would be something. 

  I’m replaying Fable 2 for the third time after playing though the mess of a game that was the original Fable and I’m constantly surprised by how fun this game is.  Its obvious it’s not technically the best, it doesn’t have the best story and it’s graphics a little outdated but every Simi good and mediocre thing this game does somehow adds up to a wonderful masterpiece.  I love this game I love playing through it and would recommend it to anyone who is even remotely into video games.  As far as the argument about Fable 3 being better, the plot on paper looks more interesting and if you bullet point everything out it might seem like the better game but still there is some sort of magic that Fable 2 has that 3 doesn’t (IMO).

  Red Dead Redemption blows me away this it’s amazing game play its top notch story and it’s absolutely beautiful graphics.  I got lost in this game once and have every intention of replaying it a second time, sometime in the future.

  So that’s my list and I’m sticking to it, as I said it’s a mix of varying factors and it’s defiantly not objective but I’m happy with all my choices.