Ramblings of the Angel from my Nightmare

Who's to blame?

2007-02-19T16:56:00.000Z

An interesting topic came up one wedensday in Visual Design Class. Who is really to blame for the so-called consequences of media?

Take for example, the famous Chucky incident. In 1993, Child's Play 3 was blamed for the murder of 2year old Jamie Bulger in Liverpool. The 10 year old killers (who have recently been released amid much controversy) supposedly saw the film, and imitated a scene where a victim is splashed with blue paint. There was a lot of mention of the links between the film and the crime in the UK press at the time, and a moral panic ensued.

Yeah it's the whole violence debate, and no I'm not going to discuss that. The issue that was raised was, are we, as potential game designers, to blame for this? Are the makers of the movie to blame for the murder? Take this for example:

'A young girl nicknamed "Snowly" died last month after playing the online game "World of Warcraft" for several continuous days during the national day holiday. Snowly's friends, who share the same game community, say that Snowly was a very diligent member and a key official of their community, who was always connected to the Internet. Several days before Snowly's death, the girl was said to be preparing for a relatively difficult part of the game and had very little rest. She told her friends that she felt very tired.' [Source]

Now I remember reading this article in the Metro on the way to work one morning, seeing a picture of an online funeral for her and just thinking...you idiots. Coming back to it now though, and bearing in mind that was at 8:15am, it makes me wonder. Are game artists responsible for making these environements so addictive to the player? And with games becoming more realistic, are people not going to be dragged into this secondary life even further?

Or is it simply down to the gamers? Are they to blame entirely for spending 50hours playing a game without eating or sleeping? So many other gamers manage to take breaks afterall...There are just those who find themselves addicted, like a drug addict. What can be done to remedy this issue though? Sure you get reminders ingame on mmorpgs telling you to take a break...but who even pays attention to that?

...Just a random thought...

Week 16 : Gaming Cultures

2007-02-19T16:13:00.000Z

'In 2002 the Cybernetic Culture Research Unit at the University of Warwick revealed that computer games have been responsible for the thumb replacing the index finger as the primary digit for the youth of today, countering the natural evolution of the body.' [Source]

A flatmate randomly said to me the other day in the kitchen over the daily race to the oven; 'How can you sit there all day and play games? Don't you get bored?'

So I went about the task of explaining to her that, playing games all day is just the same concept as watching tv/movies all day, or playing music. And like those entertainment cultures, Gaming allows you to find the genre that appeals to you most, thereby sucking you. Same as if you really like rock music, you might listen to Metallica and SOAD all day. Or if you're into your tv soaps, you'll make sure you catch Hollyoaks and Eastenders, and then probably tape Corrie or catch a re-run later.

Yes to some, this may seem a bit 'sad.' And I guess I'm over-exaggerating when I say 'all day' (unless you're a mmorpg fan in which case, it might apply.)

Speaking of MMORPGs, I find their gaming culture the most fascinating. At first, I pondered how anyone could sit there on the pc literally 24/7 talking to randoms on a game guarenteed to consume your life. Having played Lineage2 recently however, I soon discovered why, and how easilly possible it is to have your day consumed.

'Youth culture and MMORPG’s has become a closely associated topic particularly within Korea, since the introduction of graphically realistic online games such as lineage2. Survey’s of online gamers by the 'Korea journal' depicted that the general age group for Korean players were, high school students (40%), college students (38.1%), junior school students (17.8%) and a small portion of people aged between 20-30 (4.5%) (Whang .L, 2003 Whang and Chang describes the Cyberspace of online games as serving as a whole new living space for youth, where they can carry out daily activities centered especially on social relationships and [[Information Society - Leisure Leisure]] (Whang .L, 2003). MMORPG’s contain a deep social subculture for youths, with the formulation of guilds and bonds relationships with various online members, these communal aspects driven by MMORPG’s encourage player loyalty towards the game and thus the virtual world becomes more then just a game but a separate world in itself. An anthropological study by Heckle revealed that long-term players were largely drawn towards the social aspects of online role playing games and that no distinguishments were made between online and offline relationships (Heckle. l, 2003).' [Thanks wiki-media-culture!!]

I also enjoyed [this] article.

Since coming to University and having a lack of tv licence, I've found myself immersed in my own 'gaming' cultures' to the point of playing non-stop, should I have nothing better to do of course...like erm, work, yeh. I wonder if this puts me in a generic university gaming culture? Afterall, we generally have more time to play games than say, your 20-something with a 9-5 job, or a kid at a 9-3 school day. Sites tend to like the word 'teen culture' but I feel this is somewhat too broad. My teenage culture for example, is going to vary from anothers. To say teen culture is heavilly influenced by technology and entertainment methods....'delivery mechanisms' however, would be correct.

I remember the lecture we had from...Ian Smith? 'Whose games are they anyway' and all that jazz. You have people so obsessed with games and probably movies, that they make those machimina...things. (Though I do admit...red vs blue can be hilarious).

Gaming culture is nothing without genre. Yeah yeah, I keep mentioning that word but it's true. People flock to genres of games thus creating a culture around that genre. So you get your rpg cultures, internet gaming cultures, sports game cultures, etc.

And [this] is an example of gaming culture perhaps taken too far...

BaHahahahahaa...foolish boy!...

Week 15 : Game Industry Intro

2007-01-15T17:38:00.000Z

The Gaming Industry is a lot larger than what most people think. When you actually sit down and consider all the games out there, the numbers really start to mount up. I'm not just talking abut games you find in stores. No, look at how many free flash games are available for download over the net, or try the 'serious games' out there, like Edumatainment. There are still bedroom-coders out there, only, they don't make as much money as they used to. Games they produce are more likely to be traded online for free. Good to get your name out there, maybe. But not good for paying the bills.

I found [this editorial] about PC gaming, in particular a quote about pc gaming vs console, and it made me chuckle since I had a similar...misadventure. With console games, you simply buy the game and voila! You stick it in the console and away you go. With a PC game...it's so much more complicated. You have to consider the graphics, RAM, and if you even have enough HDD space. Even then, your sound card might not be compatible and blah blah blah. It's irritating, and I can see how this might greatly effect the pc gaming industry.

I tried to play Lineage2 on my laptop with 256MB RAM. The game worked, with 5minute lags...So I contacted the game messageboards and tech support. The advice I received from normal gamers was to buy more RAM. The advice I received from tech support? "Your graphics card is not compatible with the game. You cannot play the game. Please update your card." Yeh...didn't I mention in the e-mail I was using a laptop? I took a real persons advice over a computer generated response...So I bought 512MB RAM and voila! The game worked like a gem. Maybe if NCSoft supplied better tech information, more people would subscribe to the game?

Anyway, over with that little rant. A quote from John Breedan of gameindustry.com:

'So there you have it. Yes, you can make amazing graphical feats for your games and even if it costs hundreds of dollars to play, my guess is that a lot of gamers will follow. Or you can design a tight game that appeals to a lot of people with a good plot and solid gameplay, and people will flock to you as well...Depending on your tastes and budget however, there is a game out there for you. The industry keeps innovating and we players continue to be entertained. More than movies, more than television and sometimes more than reality, computer games offer us some great interactive experiences that are not soon forgotten. Just don’t forget to sleep and eat, at least occasionally.'

Okay so we've established that the game industry knows what they're doing to attract the customers. So why is it still suffering? I thin k a lot of it is still to do with taboo. When you tell someone you're studying Game Art Design, they tend to turn their noses up as if to say "why aren't you doing something worthwhile?" Infact a lot of peers tend to laugh and say "oh your course is so easy, you just play games all day and knock up some drawings." ...If only... I'd like to see them survive 5minutes on 3DSMax. Hell I'd like to see myself survive 5minutes without cursing or screaming HELP!

It seems the biggest industry challenge is knocking up games that still appeal to customers. No one wants to buy an unoriginal game when they already own the predessor, unless it's an anticipated sequel. But there are so many games out there people have never even heard of. Nomad Soul? Shadow of Memories? Two amazing games but I bet few people have played them. Your average Jack and Jill are probably too anxious to pick up a title they've never heard of in a shop incase they waste 5 - 40 odd quid.

Budgets are another issue, and the fact that, to make some games, you need to battle copyright issues. Like the Resevoir Dogs game; maybe the game would've been even more successful had Quinton Tarantino's name been plastered all over the front cover, with a picture of the film cast in 3D graphics? Then again, the game would've cost a whole lot more to create.

Money makes the world go round. But even though it's sickening when jobs are outsourced to cheap labourers in Asia, you can see why the industry does it. It's annoying and irritating for those of us who want to work in the industry, but so far it seems to be keeping the industry alive. How do films get funding? Games need to be more recognised if they're to survive. I don't think the industry is about to die any time soon, but for those of us facing designing games of the future, you kinda question how easy or hard it's gonna be to get an actual job. Move to China, anyone?

I found [this] too, and I smiled.

'The videogames industry is continuing to fail women by not producing suitable content, a senior executive at Electronic Arts (EA) has said...EA's own research found that 40% of teenage girls played video games versus 90% of teenage boys and most girls lost interest in games within a year.'

From the start, it can be argued that the target audience for games was men. Men programmed the games, men played the games. Probably because shooting and violent pixel games weren't very appealing to women in the 50s and 60s. But with the change of times, games alos changed, and became more male orientated. Games like Tomb Raider came along, where scantilly clad 'heroines' provided more entertainment for the average male gamer. Again, not eactly very appealing for girls. It's a task the industry is facing; how'd you make a game that appeals to the average girl? The Sims2 managed it perfectly, that is, according to EA. I personally get bored after 2hours.

"They don't want 'pink games'. They are not trying to play girly games where Paris Hilton and Britney Spears go shopping and put make-up on...Those kind of things have not been that successful."

...Like, duh...

Maybe a 7year old would wanna play a bratz game or something, but not a teenage girl. From my own experience, most females of varying ages, enjoy MMORPGs. BBC also [backed up] my beliefs. Perhaps because their partners are obsessed with them though? Do some girls only play computer games to spend time with their boyfriends/husbands?

Oh dear Sony. Do you really think the colour pink automatically attracts girl gamers?

Week 11 : Elements of Gameplay

2007-01-15T17:37:00.000Z

When it comes to defining gameplay [wikipedia], it seems that there's a lot of confusion between 'game mechanics' and whether to include story, graphics and sound or not. I swear I've already written a blog task about gamplay?

Hmph...Well according to wiki, general gameplay 'includes all player experiences during the interaction with game systems, especially formal games. Proper use is coupled with reference to "what the player does". Generally, the term "gameplay" in video game terminology is used to describe the overall experience of playing the game excluding the factors of graphics, sound, and the storyline.'

I don't think this really helps to explain to any Jack or Jill what gameplay is exactly, and I still argue that 'gameplay' and 'genre' pretty much come hand in hand when it comes to games. Gamplay can define the genre of a game, and the genre of the game also defines the gameplay. A standard FPS will have both similar and different gameplay, and even game design aspects to a simulation game. When designing a survival horror for example, aspects like environments, scare factors and battle systems seem to be key occuring gameplay aspects.

Compare Silent Hill to Resident Evil. Sure the plots are different, the monsters and overall 'feel' of the game is different. But when you get down to raw basics, can't you argue that, the gameplay is the same? You're still controlling an actor type character, running around shooting things and trying to survive until you reach the final boss. This is where you have to dig deeper, past bare basic ideals, to define what makes these games different. Which is why I think elements like sound, story, characters and graphics, should be included. Afterall, look at NextGen consoles. It's clearly obvious that there's a high demand for amazing graphics to 'enhance' the gameplay.

Speaking of NextGen, the console also greatly affects gameplay. I played Zelda Twilight Princess on both the Gamecube and the Wii and I tell you, once you play it on the Wii, there's no going back. The wii remote just makes the experience a whole lot more interactive and enjoyable, as opposed to button mashing. This is a game mechanic though...should it be included with gameplay? Of course. It affects your overall gaming experience afterall.

With NextGen consoles now not only changing the way we play games, but also how they are designed, the 'rules' of gameplay are probably in need of a re-vamp. I think gameplay is of course important, but it does seem to be the integration of many factors under one title.

Week 10 : Elements of Story & Character

2007-01-15T17:36:00.000Z

Can't beleive I'm so behind with these tasks! Anyways no point crying over spilt milk. Whilst drugged up on Day Nurse pills, I'm gonna attempt to catch up.

"The single most important rule in character design is "the game comes first." The type of game you're developing will determine most of your character-creation decisions. A character is just a tiny element of any game, and in many cases, it is a superfluous element. If a game works without a character, it shouldn't have one. The rules of elegance apply - look for the clearest, simplest way to represent an idea." [Link]

I've been intrigued by the 'Avatar' and 'Actor' explanation found in the same article, and started going through my games trying to make sense out of the theory. Basically a third person character is going to be an 'actor' whereas in first person, you're more likely to be controlling an avatar. I don't believe this theory literally applies to all games though. For example, a lot of First Person POVs rely on a story mode in conjunction with your standard shoot shoot arcade and multiplayer modes. It's in the story mode where the characterisation comes into play, interfering with the 'player's illusion of immersion.' Timesplitters for example, is a crossover game that uses Avatars and Actors.

I wouldn't say a character is a tiny element of the game either, because I beleive a character can break a game just as easilly as it can make it. Yeah so this depends on the type of game; the main characters in Halo and Unreal Tournament don't really need to be that spectacular, much like the story. Then you can go to the other end of the scale and over-empthasize story and character, to make a game like Final Fantasy. But take a game like Prince of Persia, and you find a nice balance between character, story, and gameplay.

I bought an RPG game called 'Xenosaga,' merely because I wanted the 3 for 2 deal but couldn't find anything I didn't already own. So I'm intrigued by the fact it has 2discs, taking me back to the days of 3discs for FF7. It looks promising; I can already tell the story is going to span for hours of gameplay. Sadly, the story and the characters are just too much. The focus on providing cutscenes far outweighs the actual gameplay, and I find myself sitting there, bored, staring at the screen and wondering what the hell is going on.

I find it strange that movies turned into games are usually quite poor, especialy because the story and characters are already pre-made for you, and should generally be of high-quality to attract people to watch the movie in the first place. I think this is where game designers start to become lazy. I bought Lord of the Rings:The Third Age, and wasn't even treated to a decent ending after hours of fighting the same old orcs, trolls, and goblins. It was sloppy, and relied far too much on the success of the movies. Though new 'actor' type characters had been made, I felt no attachment to them whatsoever. They may as well have been avatars...

There's a nice little review of it here infact :) Pleased to know I'm not the only one who was disappointed!

I think a successful character relies on integration between story and setting. Obviously you can't have a Roman Centaurian in a sci-fi setting, unless it's a time travel story, or he's outfitted in something that suits the time era. But that no longer makes him a Roman Centaurian, he becomes a futuristic Gladiator. It all boils down to the same thing that attracts us to characters in books and movies. How are they dressed? What are there motives? Hero or Villain? What happened to them up until now? How old are they? Do they like prefer tea or coffee? Heh. All the type of questions an actor would ask themselves before playing the role of a character. Without a deeper understanding, the character could just turn out to be a plank of wood with some lines being spoken by a mediocre actor.

Then again, the first game character to gain massive popularity, was Mario (according to Wikipedia). Main character turned mascot, but all he ever says is 'It'sa me, Mario!' or 'yipee!' and other random sounds whilst jumping and, stuff. Same goes for Link, who never says a single word. It just goes to show how important the character design is. Would Mario and Link still be so popular if they came out speaking quotes worthy of Shakespeare? Probably not. It would ruin the game style and genre, and probably make Nintendo laughable.

Zelda : First Impressions

2006-12-09T14:16:00.000Z

Zelda Twilight Princess... ...or should I say Zelda Twilight Fishing? I watched as a fellow DMU student spent half an hour trying to catch a fish during the annoying, nitty gritty introductory gaming. So we sat there, trying and trying to figure out how on earth Link was meant to catch the fish. A dozen attempts later...and Link throws the caught fish back in! Success on the next attempt...alas...more mini quests to do!

Slightly irritating to say the least. Nintendo advertise how amazing the game is, with horseback battles and new dungeons to explore as a wolf. Instead, we're treated to reality fishing o.o' I don't recall OOT taking so long to accquire a sword and shield. Hopefully that's the last fishing 'adventure' in a long long time...

Yes Link, it's called a fish. Now put it down and go hunt some goblins!

Week 9 : Game Tech Intro

2006-12-09T12:07:00.000Z

Any Jack or Jill can tell you that a console without a controller of some form is about as useful as a fish and a bicycle. Designing the controller that will allow the player to actually play a game, probably involves as much thought as designing the console itself. Why? Because for a start, ergonomics have to be considered, that being the comfort of the user. No person wants to hold a controller for hours on end, only for it to cause pain or discomfort. That just ruins the gaming experience. There's also other product design factors, from the style, to the button configuration to suit the actual games, to the overall layout.

I've never really been a fan of using a keyboard for gaming. Infact, it causes me a great deal of stress to have to tap the right key amongst dozens. But I still remember the old joystick I used to use on the old Amiga PC. Rather similar in design to the Commodore joystick, it practically was a 360degres movable 'stick' with a single red button. Hardly the most versatile of controllers, but it suited the games of the 80s and their lack of button commands. The design however, wasn't the most comfortable. After hours of play your palms would just ache along with your shoulders. I think the design spawned from old arcade machines, minimalising the concept into a smaller, household version to fit in the palm of your hand. Joysticks are still being manufactured to fit the contours of your hand better, but they've pretty much died out.
With the launch of the Nes or Famicon in 1985, came the first Joypad, which would pave the way for future designs. Following in 1986 with the similar brick design was the Sega Master System gamepad. With the development of gaming, there will always be a development in how the game technology works. The hand held concept provided better comfort than the primitive joystick, but as you can see, there was still plenty of room for design improvements.

The Snes and Mega Drive controllers were a step up from the brick designs, and also something I can more personally relate to having used both. The L and R shoulder buttons were introduced changing the way you actually hold the pad. In addition, more buttons to again suit the evolution of gaiming. Games like Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter needed more buttons in order to configure fighting manouvers. I loved the 8 direction design of the Mega Drive D-Pad, as opposed to only 4 directions, but for fighting games, 3 action buttons weren't enough. The 6 button pad was too complicated however. In addition, buttons like 'turbo' were introduced, essentially allowing the player to cheat so long as they owned this 'special' controller option. I remember how annoyed I used to get playing games against my brother, and he'd just hit turbo and basically kick my ass. I'm glad such ideas have in general, been scrapped.

But it does seem that joypad designs follow on from each other regardless of console make. Ideas are borrowed and improved in order to make the console more versatile. This leads to more developes wanting to design for said console. Take for example, the XBox controller. I never actually liked it because it's so damn big, much like holding a brick. But that same opinion goes for the Dreamcast controller too which, incidentally came out before the Xbox but bears striking similarities. Just look at the button colours and overall shape! They should've been sued! The XBox360 controller is also very annoying to use, and still too big. While playing Dead or Alive for example, people tend to hit the start or select buttons. That to me spells bad product design.

Though the Sega Saturn had the first controller to use an analog control stick, marrying the joystick idea into the joypad. The N64 also used this idea but it was Sony and Nintendo who raced against each other to toy around with the dual analog concept, bringing the finished product out with the PS2 and Gamecube. The use of 3 handles on the N64 and Gamecube pads were slightly...unusual. It took me some time to get used to it, but at least the transition from playing a playstation game to a nintendo game was strikingly different.

I've always found the playstation controller easy to use. It fits the contours of your hands and suits all types of gamers, regardless of their level or experience. From personal experience, I've handed my PS2 controller to someone who'd never held one before. She didn't put it down for 5hours...The evolution of the PS controllers however, makes me frown. The boomerang design was lightweight and better suited when considering ergonomics. Many people seem to think that Sony were competing with Nintendo to create a unique design in response to the wii remote. [Link] Yeh, I agree, and sure, Sony probably did copy the motion detection, hence why vibration features are now disabled. It's disappointing but, all controllers are an improved duplication of their predecessors. It's sad to say but, since the general pad design hasn't changed to better suit their next gen console, Sony may be at a disadvantage.

I was sceptical about the wii remote. Afterall, not only does it abolish the conventions of the joypad controller; it's a completely new and innovative design, which is bound to change the way we see and approach next gen gaming. Yet being fortunate enough to use the wii remote, I have to say, it's genius. There are of course certain downfalls. Such as the fact several people are going to be suffering repetitive strain injuries playing wii sports. It's almost an incentive to exercise while you play, which sounds like some sneaky government tactic. But, on the plus side, it's a step up into virtual reality gaming. While playing wii sports tennis, I found myself holding the remote like an actual racket, and swinging as though actually hitting the ball. The same applies to golf and baseball. Yet as Nintendo themselves said, the design concept was 'to make gaming as accessible to people of all ages and all abilities.' Not quite sure if an old granny would be able to manage the physical strain though...The potential of the future though is cloudy. Is copying the wii remote ideas really that simple? Sony can't even get away with the motion sensing, so imagine trying to improve the wii remote design while staying original? I don't think it can be done but, nintendo and sega managed it before. What's stopping Sony or Microsoft from making a similar remote design?

Nintendo also dominate the handheld gaming industry. With the Gameboy and now the DS Lite, they managed to secure their company even while the N64 and Gamecube went downhill. The gameboy has always been like a joypad with a screen imbedded into it. The DS however, is yet another innovative design, and easy to use. Even my mom wants one to play brain training on! Heck, even my nan was pretty impressed!! It seems Nintendo are just coming up with all the amazing new ideas, leaving Sony and Microsoft to trail behind...

Week 8 : Tell me a story mr video game!

2006-12-04T22:34:00.000Z

story
–noun
1. a narrative, either true or fictitious, in prose or verse, designed to interest, amuse, or instruct the hearer or reader; tale.
(More definitions of 'Story.')

Cutting to the chase rather quickly, I've mentioned my own opinion about storylines in games before. That being; I definately appreciate a game if it does have a good storyline, but at the same time, I won't shun a game if it doesn't. For example; compare the storyline of Super Mario to Final Fantasy 7. Italian plumber saving a Princess from a dinosaur, versus an ex-soldier facing world destruction at the hands of a comet and his former hero turned nemesis,... and that's just the very tip of the iceburg. Yet there are still those who, if asked, might say they prefer Mario to FF7 thanks to the difference in game genre and gameplay. There was no real storyline to Pong and Pacman, but they're not the best examples to use seeing as, they were the cutting edge games of the time...when computer games didn't really exist.

But back to games now, the storyline to Shadow of the Colossus wasn't amazingly unique. Boy wants to bring his girlfriend back to life, so he consults the higher powers above and hunts down 16 giants. Simple. Without a doubt, every person I've spoken to about the SotC storyline has remarked on the beauty in simplicity. It's the crazy colossus battles that makes the game; but I'd argue that the storyline is still the actual backbone. Without a reason, the main character woudn't have a reason to hunt the colossus. As a gamer playing this game, I also expected there to be a story behind the actual colossus. An explanation as to why they inhabited those sacred and forbidden lands only.

It's proven that a game doesn't need an amazing story to sell well, but that's also the sad thing. Because even if a game does have an amazing story behind it, there's always the chance that a more fun, carefree game will do better. Take Max Payne 2 for example. The first game was a big success, thanks to the stylised Film Noir atmosphere, chapter by chapter story developtment matrix-esque, bullet time gameplay, and of course, the popular game moding aspects. But by the time the sequel came out, despite an equally good storyline, it didn't do as well as the first. It's a shame to think that so much work has gone into creating and exploring character psychologies, to not be as appreciated as it should be. Would it be more welcome in a movie? But isn't the gamer better connected to the characters and story, as opposed to a film fanatic? A gamer is able to shape the story and in some games, the character. A film viewer is only able to watch.

The best storylines seem to shine mostly within the Roleplaying game genre, possibly down to the fact that the battle systems can be repetitive. I think in a mmorpg especially, a captivating story is more essential. There's only so many orcs or whatnot a player can slay, without getting bored. I haven't and don't intend on playing World of Warcraft, but I have played Lineage2. The problem with these types of games, is their clever knack of life consumption. You could spend days, weeks, MONTHS travelling across the diverse maps, only to find that the developers keep adding new sections. Lineage2 gets the game story across, through the use of various quests. But within a mmorpg, it's really the player who makes their own story. The base story has been made for you, creating the base world and so forth. Yet the moment you start playing quests with other people, is the moment you realise you're making this game up for yourself. Or at least, the fun part. As a player, you're experiencing a 'virtual life' within this fantasy world, but at the sad cost of leaving your real life behind you.

Is there a story in Pro Evo? Or Tekken? Of course. Different stories appeal to different people, just like different games do. Beat em up game stories always seem so far fetched though. Whoever heard of a fighting tournament involving a kangaroo, a panda, a bear, and a dinosaur? Oh, and let's not forget Mr and Mrs Mokujin, the living trees. Whereas Call of Duty may be a war story, but...I don't recall Russia and Germany playing capture the flag in my history lessons :)

I came across this flash rpg game on NewGrounds. True it only lasts about...5minutes? But with the developing story, it either has huge potential, or it'll be viewed as 'just another RPG.'

Worth the wait?

2006-11-28T23:56:00.000Z

...Le sigh...

How much longer must we wait to play ff12!? By the time it FINALLY comes out in the UK, I'll be too preoccupied juggling Twilight Princess with erm ...work! ..Yeh ...uni work. ^^'

Anyway.

Tis not fair. I want to engage myself in a new story already! I want to witness the new summons and fight new bosses. I want! And trying to replay FF9 just isn't good enough. Besides I've said it before and I'll say it again; 9 is the worst of the 'series'. (In my opinion before you beat me with a stick!)

On a different note, one review claims Twilight Princess has better boss battles than Shadow of the Colossus. Naw...can it really be true? But what can be better than aiming up at a giant sandworm's glowing stomach pods, then galloping over on your trusty horse, to leap off the saddle and onto the worm's wings, and! And! And cling for dear dear life as it lifts off...

We shall see. And as for FF12...-sulk-... If it takes this long for the last PS2 ff release...how long for the first ff ps3 game?

Week 7 : The importance of Game Art Direction

2006-11-20T17:43:00.000Z

Ouch, I'm lagging behind! But I'm a happy bunny. It's a good job I made notes during the Rick Nath lecture for such a blog! *Insert cheesey smiley face here*

So, Art Direction. Naturally, any job that has 'direction' in the title is going to be pretty damn important in the scheme of things. The gaming industry is of course, no exception. It's infact the highest step within the art department of gaming. Though, the job seems like it leans more towards the business side, and less towards the actual creative side. I suppose it marries them both together, neglecting certain aspects, such as practical art creation. Afterall, the art director is responsible for monitoring his team of artists, not to mention all the research, resources and budgets, and leading the actual production overview.

But let's not forget the creative importance of translating one's ideas into both artistic and technical capabilities. He is responsible for every artistic object in the game; the characters, textures, props, locations, lighting styles, polygon and texture budgets, concept art. All of which set the visual tone, mood, and contribute to the story and general feel of the game. Afterall, modern furnishings in an 18th century stylised game, would be more than out of place...

So Left AND right side of the brain working overtime there! It's a tough job, and when you read something like this, the requirements and responsibilities seem endless. Oh, and an Art Director is with the project from start, to finish, all the way to bug fixing and finalised marketing materials.

I think the key quality to being an art director, is experience, and artistic ability. You can't shape a game world without both the artistic and technical knowledge, and the experience of putting this knowledge into actual practice. If that's not enough, you need to be able to confidently translate your art style guide to a group of artists, and maintain this style. It's a common fact all artists work in their own different ways, so imagine trying to successfully collaborate all styles into one?

Communication, another key aspect therefore. The ability to show your vision to your art team through mostly words. It would be difficult to convince your art team about your vision for the game, if you can't show them conceptual plans. That's where skill comes in. I know I wouldn't be best pleased following ideas that the person can't put onto paper first.

I wonder how much artwork the art director actually does? By that, I mean practical art. It seems the point of the job is to delegate tasks and supervise. I think I'd find this quite difficult, as I'd be tempted to do the work, or as much of it, myself. It's way too early in the day for me to even think about considering art direction though. Most companies advertising for the position, desire 5years previous experience within the industry, along with lead artist experience and strong traditional art skills. I'd need to develop my technical knowledge, and in particular, 3D modelling and problem solving skills. I've lost count of the amount of times I've sat there on 3DSmax and screamed my lungs out before starting the mesh over...again...

Week 6 : From Pong to Next-Gen?

2006-11-14T19:11:00.000Z

The word 'gameplay' to me, generally refers to computer games and the player's overall experience of playing through the game. Like what feelings it evokes, how much you enjoy the game, etc. It doesn't include the graphics, sound and plot but, these are usually accessed in sub categories. This therefore makes gameplay hard to judge though since, what one person enjoys, another might hate. Whereas one gamer may perfer graphics over plot, another will disagree. For example;

Re: "Myst"
I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Non-interactive graphical wallpaper can be very beautiful, but after a few seconds I get bored. I want action. Contrived challenges like puzzles make me feel very puny and stupid. I don't play games to be anally retentive, I want conflict and action. (Eugene Jarvis quote)

Yet Myst sold over 11million copies and held the 'best selling computer game of all time' title throughout the 90s. Hmmm...

Then to confuse matters even more, according to Wikipedia some critics argue that gameplay isn't really the correct term to use! Instead, when discussing the aspects of a game, one should use the term, 'game mechanics.' Sounds quite silly really if you ask me, since the whole point of a game, whether it's computer based or tradional, is the aspect of playing. Game + Play = Gameplay, simple. Chris Crawford could argue this point into the real psychological reasons for a game's purpose and why we play them, but a game is still designed to be played, or 'used', or else it's purpose isn't fulfilled.

I love how Chris Crawford refers to computer games as the 'current 'fad' though. Can we really call computer games a fad? Maybe I'm wrong but, I was under the impression 'fads' only last a few years at most, before rapidly deterioating, like Tamigotchis and Furbies for example. Whereas video games are constantly being developed and improved, for example, the new wave of next gen gaming. I can't see the computer game industry suddenly collapsing; we'll probably be playing games for eternity.

When designing games, the genre has a massive impact on the design principles. An rpg for example, requires an intriguing storyline. No gamer is going to sit through hours of strategic battles and turn based battle systems without the rewards of feeling like you're playing through a movie. At least, that's my take on it. I remember playing Unlimited Saga not so long ago and absolutely hating it for the strange battle systems and mediocre storyline. A beat em up game however, would rely more on the character moves. Sure there might be a story, but look how far-fetched Tekken is. Then a sports game doesn't even need a storyline as such.

No single person is responsible for the game design. It's a task that marries the artistic team with the technological team, and I wouldn't say one or the other has a lead part. It's an equal responsibility to fit the criteria needed to design the game. Perhaps even more so with Next Gen gaming. Go on any recent game website, 8 in 10 will have access to concept art and sketches. Game Design and Gameplay are now crucial to the developers also, and it's probably the console tech potential and consumer demands that's caused this.

For me, in short, a game can have bad graphics, or bad sound, or even a bad plot. But so long as something there captures my attention, I'll happilly continue to play through it.

I'm not done yet!

2006-11-07T23:45:00.000Z

Yeah, I still feel like writing random stuff, despite needing to finish my sketches for tomorrow. With it being 11:30pm, I don't think sleep is on the cards. But I just want to say how hyped I am now about the Wii and, in particular, Zelda Twilight Princess.

But first. SHOCK HORROR! Could I actually be starting to LIKE these blog shenanigans? I'm blogging a non task! Hurrah! Haha...Hmmm maybe it was the coffee and red bull combo I had earlier?

Heh, back to the topic. I got frustrated with my wheelie bin, basically. Now usually, the average student probably goes to youtube when bored. If you don't, then make it your new 'hobby.' It's simple, now repeat after me: Youtube = SUPER DUPER FANTASTIC. Note the full stop too. I'm advertising by forcing you to beleive my bias opinion :)

I sinned though. Youtube wasn't on my list. No. After discussing the wii remote with my fellow peers, my curiousity was furthermore sparked. I had the urge to stare at pictures of the Wii, and read about the hardware and controller. Don't you just love how websites psyche you up without much effort? My well informed brother already told me about the Wii channels but cmon, these things you have to see for yourself. You can make a wii me! :) Oh how easilly I'm entertained...

If raising a brow and then deciding I like the wiiremote, despite previous speculation, wasn't enough, then the link to Zelda Twilight Princess was the icing on the cake. I'm hooked...and possibly ruining the game by constantly seeking new trailers and images. It's bad, but so so good at the same time. This has to be the game I'm most looking forward to, even more than, dare I say it? Than,... Final Fantasy 12! Feast your eyes, on these: http://www.gametrailers.com/gamepage.php?fs=1&id=2631 (And don't come back here until you've watched at least one trailer! Try the one titled 'Trailer 2')

I've never met a singe person who doesn't like Zelda. Maybe a few don't see the attraction but, that's because they haven't played the game so, they don't really count. When you think about it, in theory, all the games are the same. You a boy called Link dressed in a green outfit, equipped with a sword, a bow, and a shield. Your job; save Hyrule and the Princess Zelda. The standard enemy; Ganondorf. Favourites return, like the Deku Tree, Gorons, and let's not forget the recurring theme of the earth, water, and fire spiritual stone things. But it never gets boring, because despite the same story, it's not exact. That's the beauty of it. There's enough nostalgia there to make you think, 'awww I remember this from Ocarina of Time!' But not enough to make you think 'God...been there, done that, pass me another game.'

It's fun. It's replayable. Why? Because it's a fantasy adventure, where the player is captivated into this well-concepted world of integrated imagination. There's aspects of Lord of the Rings, particularly in Twilight Princess. But from a psychological concept, is it not true that we long for fairytales, not only as children, but when the harsh reality of manmade life smacks you hard in the nose? You want to escape to this simple story with a happy ending. Typical hero story, that's all we require to smile. There's no direct gore, as in, no red blood spurting from chopping off goblin limbs. Sure you slaughter loads of monsters but let's remember now children...they're evil, bad, naughty. It is, essentially, a kids game. A family game. At yet, it appeals to all ages. For the designers to achieve this is, I think, genius. Saying that, Twilight Princess is looking rather dark and gloomy and yet, they've still managed to maintain the 'cute' appeal to the characters. Nintendo, I salute you.

At midnight, this is the best explanation I can come up with, as to why I keep returning to the Zelda games. But that's without even mentioning the incredible gameplay. Take Ocarina of Time for instance. I beleive it was the first game I played where your character could ride a horse. Not only that, you controlled the horse, while shooting arrows at those cute ghost things. It's not just button bashing; there's skill to your sword techniques. The fact that each enemy has a certain weakness and strength to be discovered; like the skulls on fire, or that worm thing that swallowed you if you got too close.

And if the puzzles and npc interaction isn't good enough to keep you entertained...there's always the beautiful graphics to drool at. I'm not just talking high quality rendering. I'm talking about the actual game scenery. From the lakes and quaint villages, to the gloomy temples and dungeons. OH! I almost forgot the music :) *Hums the zelda song*

If you watched the trailer, watch it again. Go on, do I really need to tell you? If you haven't, geez...whats the hold up!? Shame on you! Oh yeah, and I found a decent review. It's here: http://uk.wii.ign.com/articles/744/744044p1.html Though at first I thought the guy was being balanced, I had to have it pointed out to me that the opinions are infact disguised as facts so...I'm still on the hunt for a genuinely un-biased review! If you like a game series, your opinion is immediately bias. I've now learnt how journalists feed off this. The dirty sneaky trickster mongrels! :)

I leave you with pretty pics to go 'aww' and 'yay' and muse/giggle over hyperactively, tee hee!
(All images from IGN.)

Who thought fishing could be such fun!?
Yup, Hyrule's in trouble again :)
Epona! Maybe....o.O? Who cares, it's a horse! ^.^
Now if only I had the game...I could find out sooner who the heck this kid thing is! Grr! Curse you delayed release dates!

Trials & Tribulations of a Game Reviewer

2006-11-07T20:41:00.000Z

...'Blarg'...

That was my first thought when I first read this weeks task. Oh, and then the more comprehensible...Where the hell do I start?! And how do I stop myself from going on and on and oooon! If I was writing a review about a game, I'd probably be finished and tucking into dinner by now. Maybe. Sadly, that's not the case. You see, I've never really thought about games journalists, and this NGJ manifesto is new news to me! But after a fair amount of time spent reading until my eyes bled from the intensity of my laptop screen,...I decided I like this Kieron Gillen dude. (Yeh you can read his blog here: http://gillen.cream.org/wordpress_html/?page_id=693) I like his approach to blogging, and just, telling it how it is, basically. No uber complicated interlectual jargon. Not that it's stupid baby talk but, what he writes is really comical and easy to read, in my opinion at least. Maybe he's just good at keeping his readers 'sweet' thanks to years of article writing practice. But it's also obvious just from reading his blog that, these 'stupid' game journalists can get away with rambling about complicated stuff, making it seem that they know what's going on while leaving readers just confused but, satisfied. I say that because, even though I like his writing style, the blog tends to drag. In all fairness, I'd rather read what he has to say on paper at my own pace. Screens just sting the eyes...

...Or maybe that's just me?

But anyway. I read a monthly games magazine. It's called...Games, with a lickle TM sign above it if you're getting confused. A few years back, I remember purchasing the monthly editions of 'Play', and in particular, 'Official Playstation Magazine', just because you got a free demo disc with the mag. Although, the mag DID cost 5quid so....wasn't reeeally free, more like 3quid for the disc and 2quid for the polished paper. I stopped buying it when I realised I was spending 60quid a year, which could've been used to buy 2 extra games minimum. Heh...like my way of thinking? And why do I buy this magazine? Well firstly it gives me something to read. Secondly, it involves games and pretty pictures. Thirdly, it informs me of what's hitting the shelves, and what I need to buy/avoid. All in all, yes, Kieron Gillen's right. 'Games magazines are buying guides.' It's undeniable; the information is there to create a reaction. Either you like what the reviewer is rambling on about enough to go out and buy the game, or you crinkle your nose after reading the review and flick the page. May as well grab a copy of argos or something. It's like being a kid again and hunting for christmas pressies.

"OooOOoo yeh! I'll have THAT one! Sod that one but I'm definately pre-ordering that!" C'mon admit it...it sounds familar. And if you see your favourite game series on the front cover, you're more inclined to buy the magazine, only to find that, apart from front page game coverage, the rest is just, shit. Excuse the french. Like you'll find some Barbie watersports game and think...where the hell did this come from!?

Despite all this, I find the reviews in Games mag to be incredibly well written. I wouldn't buy the mag every month otherwise. Although I only just realised how subjective the reviews are. I'm not sure if it's just me, but the whole style of writing seems to be...erm, young? There's just an energetic and jovial vibe that keeps your attention. It's informal, haha like a blog! Course, you could argue this but, for some, the whole point of gaming is for 'fun.' It's only natural then that the reviewers inform you of the next shelf fillers in such a friendly manner. I also realised this is just another typical cheesey sales tactic. And here's another; the movie trailer approach. Take for example, this article for Prince of Persia, Sands of Time, published in Edge mag in feb 2005.

'The dagger plunges into the cold blaze of the glinting sand and you have a moment to breathe. A moment to sense the shapes of all the things you won't have time to think about: the consequences of what you've done and the consequences of what you haven't; the price of what you've lost and the price of what you're yet to find; the things you've changed and the things that won't change back. Before the shapes have time to form it starts, pulling you back past every shout of wonder, every splash of sudden sand, every breathless ache of victory: faster, faster, faster. And then the world is as it was, cool and quiet as raindrops, and you can take another breath. But by the time it leaves your lungs it has begun again - the same midnight race, the same moon-bleached balcony. A different prince. A different you.'
(http://www.edge-online.co.uk/archives/2005/02/prince_of_persi.php)

C'mon...that's nothing like the game. Sounds more like an actor telling us how he prepared to play the role. It's over-exaggerated to the point of being poetic and a good piece of creative writing. Already, the reader's attention is grabbed, leading them to read a mountain of writing. Don't get me wrong; I like the article, up until the 6th paragraph, which is why it gets tedious and I start sighing through mental strain. The reality of the game is; you press a damn button and time reverses. Then you jab another button and Prince slashes up some sand monsters. Again don't get me wrong, I LOVE the PoP games. Oh and, the article also ruins the game. As in, if you haven't completed the game, the silly reviewer literally tells you the ending in a rather sneaky way. I hate that. I think if you're going to write a review, no matter how subjective you wanna be, please, PLEASE for the love of any deity, don't spoil the game ending!

Am I going off tangent? Probably. I had to take a mini break to check the difference of subjectivity and objectivity. Yeh, it's been awhile since I wrote an english essay. So who pays the wages of these 'fundamentally stupid, lazy' people? Erm...us, the big boss guy and the game publishers PR team people? At 4quid an issue, you start to wonder how many magazine copies are sold a month, and then if that's even enough to cover the wages of all the editors, journalists, plus printing...for a months hard labour. Nah. The developers want good press, so they take a gamble. And surely this is a business studies question? A small portion would come from sales and the rest, from all the mag advertisements in the back pages and, elsewhere? When I read the word corrupt though, I start to wonder...are some journalists just being paid to write a nice review? Afterall, when you're subjective, you can pretty much hide the facts underneath your cheerful opinions.

Which leads me to say that, I don't think an article should be completely subjective. What's the point in that? Anyone could write a subjective game review. Example;

"I like Halo. It's good because you can play people online and drive vehicles. The graphics are amazing, and you can have hours upon hours of fun gamplay. Now go buy the game, just because I'm telling you how awesome it is."

No thanks mate. I want to read about the facts, and I want to read an arguement. No game is perfect afterall, so I don't want to be fed a bunch of lies, based on one person's opinion. But this is just my opinion, and that's one of the issues facing these games journalists. You can't please everyone - fact. You can try to please the majority with some butt kissing and half opinions. But this just goes to show that, as of late, all you really need to sell a game is some damn good advertising, pretty pictures in magazines, maybe a tv or internet advert, and a really good review with 5stars or something of that nature. It's sad, but true.

Now sing along: 'Money makes the world go round, the world go round, the world go round!'
Do I still like the Kieron Gillen blog? Yes.
Will I still buy GamesTM after these new found revelations? Yes.
Do I think my own writing style is subjective? Yes, but I hope it's backed up by some objective facts.
Can I find any non-subjective reviews? I'm still looking...Any review always comes down to an opinion, even if it's backed up by a fact. This doesn't just apply to games, but also music reviews, music, and books. Only by experiencing the product for yourself, can you form an opinion. It's not good to listen to the jargon of others and yet, we're all guilty of surrendering to bias advertising. If we didn't, a lot of companies would be out of business by now.
Do I think the internet will overtake paper? Eventually it will, but hopefully not for a long time. Sure we're saving a few trees but, we'd all end up blind! :)

To the 2000s, and beyond!

2006-11-01T21:34:00.000Z

Gaming in the 2000s...

But first, some slight procrastination.

I.Hate.Blogspot.

If anyone dares to mention the 'if at first you don't succeed, try and try again' then I'm gonna attack them with my uber cool glow in the dark mouse! Probably a good thing that it's now forcing me to do my weekly tasks before the 23:59 deadline on tuesday, thanks to buggering up this entry a dozen times. Well, more like twice but, you get the idea >.< style="" size="2">Enough ranting. I told myself I'd re-write what silly Blogspot refused to publish, just to tick me off. But I've already gone way off tangent to the point of wondering where I should restart. Let's try with repeating the title.

Gaming in the 2000s...and Beyond. So I click on http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/hardware/crossplatform.ars/2 and I'm smacked in the face by budget details; mostly about how Halo 2 cost billions more than Pac-man and yet, Pac-man sold way more copies. That's actually really scary, from the point of view of someone who actually wants to work in the gaming industry. Pacman made a 300million dollar profit, whereas Halo2 made a 360million dollar profit...unless my maths is sketchy? Either way, considering only one programmer worked on pacman compared to 190 on Halo, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that Mr.Pacman programmer earned a fat paycheck. Lucky guy. Then when you realise that, obviously not all games do as well as Halo2, the ancient Pacman is still outshinning some games when it comes down to costs...And games are costing more to develop, so the sales costs are just gonna keep going up to meet the demands for better graphics for the so-called 'casual gamers.'

I got bored of arstechnica and it's more, business like planning ideals. I'm not doing a business degree, and I hate maths. So I clicked on http://www.emergent.net/index.php/homepage/news/news?action=news-detail&id=398 and was reminded to say something about next gen game consoles. Heh, the whole point of the task. While everyone seems to be drooling over microshite's xbox, (sorry, I'm hating microsoft at the moment) I'm still staying faithful to nintendo and sony. Okay, so it's a bit of a contrasting relationship, bit of an affair really, seeing as they're rivals. But the big question of 2006 seems to be; will you be getting a wii60 (wii + xb360), or a pswii (ps3 + wii). I haven't yet heard anyone mention a...ps360, but I guess that's possible too? Though I heard someone say that was just stupid...Either way, the cards have shifted into Nintendo's favour. Did anyone notice how, with the arrival of the Xbox360, the Gamecube kinda, disappeared? You'd walk into Game or Gamestation and be bombarded by PS2 and XB360 shelves, only to find a small section at the back dedicated to Gamecube, and mostly second hand games. But now, everyone's eagerly awaiting the arrival of the wii.

Why?

Is it the innovative remote controller marking next gen, almost virtual reality gaming concepts? Or how about the fact that, Zelda Twilight Princess, one of the most eagerly awaited games of 2006, is being released literally with the console. Maybe the price is the major bonus? For me it's all 3 factors. So are Sony being smart with their strategical planning? Methinks not. Will Sony continue to rival microsoft and nintendo? Most likely. Most people seem to want a PS3, eventually. I know I do, it's just a case of when, like when the price drops / when I can earn 600quid! Though Sony have lost a few fans with their illogical lik-sang shenanigans, which I'm still confused about. I doubt anyone will hold it against them for too long. Besides, Assasins Creed anyone? Final Fantasy 13? :)

Speaking of Sony, I just randomly hit their website to check out the PS3. Namely, the controller. Obviously the console industries are being pressurised to own the best games on their consoles. Sony will fight to keep for example, Square-enix games and resident evil, especially after the gamecube nabbed re4 first. XB360 meanwhile practically owns Halo, and Nintendo has the mario and zelda favourites. But what about the need to create new and exciting hardware? Hence, the controller. Think back to the days of Atari, with the crazy joysticks. Now think to the evolution of the joyPAD, and now, wireless controllers and...a remote? When I first saw the wiiremote I just thought, what the hell is that!? Infact, I'm still not convinced but, I won't knock it til it've tried it. When I first had my PS1 though, I found the PS1 controller just, moulded against my palms like it was another limb. N64 and Gamecube pads took awhile to get used to but, the xbox pad was WAY too big. It was like holding a brick!

The wiiremote makes me think of Virtual Reality though. Remember that kids show, 'Nightmare'? The poor kid would have this huge helmet placed on his head, forcing him to walk around blind through computer generated room to room, while his friends would navigate him through the dungeons. Great show. So this is pretty self explanatory, but when you look at the wiiremote and how you can actually immitate playing tennis, as in using the remote as a racket...well that's pretty much virtual reality. Next they'll be trying to incorporate the 5 senses more into gaming. Though that might require plugging neural sensors to your head...so don't expect that for another good few decades at least.

I saw a crazy report awhile ago, about dedicating a room in your house to future gaming. The console had a wind machine and different lighting plugged in, so the atmosphere of the room would change as you played the game. Though the amount of people prepared to dedicate a whole room to their gaming might not be so great, when you think about it as an idea, it's pretty amazing. I also read about a realistic pacman. Can't remember it exactly since, it was an article in the Metro that I really should've kept! But you play the game actually walking down an actual street, being chased by ghosts and picking up yellow dots. Good stuff. Now imagine playing a virtual reality survival horror :)

I actually hope gaming in the future steers more towards reality effects. Sure, people, well I should probably say some people play games to kinda, escape from reality. But the wii has already started to marry the 2 together more recognisably. Maybe some day we'll abandon playing games with an actual controller, who knows? Gamers will resemble the motion capture people hehe! But the question is; who would be prepared to play like that? Take me for example...I was put off talking into my DSLite mic! It's not like you can sit on a bus and tell you nintendogs puppy to sit...people kinda think you're a little strange.

And I leave you with my gaming history again. I think I only got my own ps1 because I was sick of using my brothers.

First ever PS1 games: Spyro the dragon, Alundra, Wild 9, Medieval, Pandemonium and Abe's Odyssey.
Later followed by: FF Origins, FF7 + 8 + 9, Tekken3, Spyro2, Crash Bandicoot 2, Alundra 2, Star Ocean: TSS, MDK, Xena (dont ask), Terracon, X-men Mutant Academy, Future Cop LAPD, Destruction Derby, RE 1 + 2 +3, Wipeout 2097, Silent Hill, and let's not forget MGS.

N64: It's all about Zelda OOT really, but also had Mario64, Mariokart64, Shadowman, PerfectDark, Goldeneye

On the PS2, my first game was FFX. As for Gamecube: Legend of Zelda - WW, RE 4, REZero, RERebirth, FZero GX, Eternal Darkness, Monkey Ball2, MGS Twin Snakes, Super Smash Bros Melee
and Luigi's Mansion :)

PS2 list can wait til another time since it proves just how addictive buying games can be, especially when you've got your own wage coming in. Tired now, so I think I'll leave it there.

Not quite the 'Middle Ages'

2006-10-24T18:46:00.000+01:00

Ask a person about their childhood, and they might recall learning to ride a bike, or their first pet which happened to be a goldfish later flushed down the loo, or maybe they'd talk about their favourite childhood movies and tv programmes. Ask me, and I'll take you back to the days of Atari, Amiga 500, Snes, and my personal favourite, the mega drive :) Being born in 1986, I missed half of the 80s decade sadly. Fortunately, my older brother of 5years introduced me to the world of gaming, and more importantly, the world of Sonic. I seem to perfectly recall the first time I watched my brother play it on his brand new Mega Drive; my eyes widening in delight to this cute blue hedgehog in red and white sneakers, drilling holes through walls and jumping on wasps and crabs which fired red fireballs from their claws...Classic. It was only a matter of time before I was hooked.

So how did Sonic come to be? Another trip to wikipedia reveals that the early 1980s were actually pretty tough for games designers and developers. Publishers such as the still going Electronic Arts appeared, and basically cheated those poor designers of their game ideas, by copying popular arcade games. But the Commodore 64, Apple 2, Atari 800, and Spectrum had arrived, taking over households 8-bit style! With them, came the significant 'genre-defining' games, like the first ever 3D game (3D Monster Maze - never played it), the scrolling-shooter (Defender), and Battlezone, which was the first game to use vector graphics in a 3d world. All these of course, were before my 'time.' While Dragon's Lair would set the ball in motion by being the first game to use Full Motion Videos (yay!) in 1983, there's only one word I need to mention, and that word is...Pacman. Hehe! It's amazing how such a simple game can get your adrenaline racing, just at the fear of your little yellow dot thing being caught/eaten by the ghosts. What a totally bizzare game concept, but you gotta love it all the same. When you think about it, such games should be worshipped in a hall of gaming fame. I wouldn't go so far as to say that without them, we wouldn't have some games today. BUT! I would say that, some of the games today might've taken a little longer to make, had it not been for these revolutionary games. Genius.

The 1980s also saw the rise and improvement of 'PCs,' namely the commodore 64, but along came IBM which paved the way for Sierra King's adventure quest games, Lucasarts, Doom, and of course, Quake. Infact, a lot of 1980s game talk seems to revolve around home pcs in the majority. I always used to get confused between the Amstrad, Atari, and Amiga, still do infact. But with IBM Compatible PCs came 16Bit consoles, since 16bit colour systems were the new way to go. By 1984, computers and consoles offered and equal gaming experience, and in 1985, the NES re-rose to fame in North America, with Super Mario Brothers. I beleive that you're either a sonic or a mario person, and I have to admit I've always preferred sonic. The Italian plumber is good, but sonic is better :) Tails + Knuckles + Dr.Robotnic...you just can't compare! The successful RPG francise, and my favourite game genre, begun with Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy, two games which continue to entertain. And let's not forget the beginnings of Metal Gear Solid, and The Legend of Zelda. It's amazing how these games have survived over the years; you'd think re-making a game over and over would be tedious for the players, but I continue to enjoy every FF, MGS, and Zelda game. I wish I'd been able to play these early versions of my favourite gaming series actually.

Moving onto the 1990s, and we see a rise in the gaming industry. The Mega Drive dominated the US in 1989, but gained a rival in 1991, aka the SNES. Consoles suddenly had rivals! Developers were actually making games FOR different platforms, as opposed to just experiementing in their spare time. The gaming industry had come a long way in just 30years. I don't remember ever hearing around the NeoGeo until 2years ago, but it arrived in 1990 as a arcade quality 2D graphics engine and therefore, very expensive to buy. What shocks me is how quickly games consoles started appearing in the 90s. The Sega Saturn appeared in 1994, and Sony appeared with the famous Playstation. Only two years would pass before the N64 was also released, which would THEN be followed by the Sega Saturn in 1998. The first game I had on the playstation was called Pandemonium, and I still find it enjoyable to play even now, despite shoddy graphics. I think it's the whole nostalgia that enables people to play older games and still like that. It's a sense of returning to your childhood, the same effect you'd have watching an old movie or tv show. Look how old Tom and Jerry is, but people still love it, same with some Disney movies, etc. Even books and music last throughout the decades.

Without a doubt, Final Fantasy 7 changed my way of thinking about computer games. I still remember the day my brother brought it home in 1997. I looked at the box and thought...what the hell is this!? Is it a platformer perhaps? What are the grids and numbers everywhere? Why does my main character have a huge sword and strange, spikey hair? WOW! Why are 8 characters listed in the manual!? Then he put the disc in and I sat there, waiting for him to shoot/beat something to a pulp...as you do. But no. Instead, I was treated to the amazing FMV opening sequence, and the unique turn based battle systems. It was amazing; like playing through a movie at your own pace. The script and outcome were all pre-written, but you were in charge of how your character's developed statistically. You were responsible for the progression of the story, and I damn well wanted to uncover the immense storyline. 11/10, easilly.

So what other old games did and would I play? I seem to recall Monkey Island and it's annoying 100+ floppy disc changes on the Amiga, along with Rainbow Island which was just cute, and Golden Axe. Dunno why to this day, but my brother hated that game, while I LOVED it, despite it being uber hard to get past level 3. Perhaps I'll give it another go if I can get hold of the damn thing. The only thing I remember about Altered Beast, was the great difficulty involved, and the 'RISE FROM YOUR GRAVE' deep voiced continue screen. I heard they remade it but it wasn't that good? Meh. Infact, I think I'll just list all the other unmentioned 'retro' games I can remember!

Toe Jam and Earl - anyone remember the 'oogey boogey oogey boogey' man? xD
Streets of Rage - sidescrolling beat em up fun!
BattleToads - its got toads dressed like biker mice from mars, what more could you want?
Castle Wolfenstein - the last boss (Hitler) was almost impossible...
Nicky Boom - no one's ever heard of this game, but I really loved it! A platformer with amazing hippy music. Don't remember the story though sadly.
Street Fighter - I was always Chun Li or Blanca...just cos he almost my name lol
R-Type and ThunderForce 4 - Amazing spaceship shooting games, and even better on 2player. Kinda like the evolution of Space Invaders, I guess.
Mortal Kombat - One word : Fatality :)
Aladdin - This was great on the Mega Drive! It was literally like playing the disney movie, which made the game that much better.
Star Fox - Great to watch, never enjoyed playing it though much.

1950s - 1970s gaming

2006-10-17T20:59:00.000+01:00

I love wikipedia, hence my mouse immediately hovered over the link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_computer_and_video_games) and the page was opening up before I even knew it. So, the task is to investigate the early history of computer games. When people mention retro games, I immediately think of the likes of Pong, Space Invaders, Pacman, and the weird games I had on the old Amstrad and Atari. Like this one game, where you controlled a caterpillar and had to follow food trails while trying not to run into your long body. One of my persona childhood favourites.

According to wiki though, the first computer 'game' was designed for a Cathode Ray Tube? No idea what that is! But it was based on the world war 2 radars, which when you think about it, isn't really that surprising. At least, I don't think so. Not surprisingly again, the first ever computer games were created as a means to investigate human and computer interaction...again it's kinda, self explanatory. The simplest example being that of Tic Tac Toe/Noughts and Crosses; a well known board game that was transported into electronic format by Cambridge student A.S.Douglas IN 1952. Well erm, it was bound to happen.

This was followed by Tennis for Two, another game I never, ever heard of, so I was genuinely intrigued to read about it more. Basically, it was designed by William Higinbotham in 1958 to entertain visitors at Brookhaven National Laboratory, New York. (http://www.classicgaming.com/features/articles/computergaminghistory/) Also supports this thesis, to a far greater depth. It's quite amazing that Tennis for Two was completed within 3weeks though...and just as one of the many showcases to prove to the public that the labs were safe? Kinda like an exhibition, but the revolutionary machine complete with games controller wasn't even shown for long. Kinda sad really, and though nowadays people would turn their nose at such a simplistic idea, I can understand that at the time, it must've been quite fascinating. Moving images are responsible for entertainment, hence we have films. So to be able to interact with this moving image not created by yourself serves as something new and exciting. I think it's pretty significant, or at least it's something to think about? Yet then again, to be honest, I don't really understand what playing a game of tennis has to do with the cold war and nuclear safety of the labs. But the game succeeding in attracting the attention of the public at least, in particular, the local high school kids and students. A common factor of today :)

Yet according to: (http://www.jesperjuul.net/thesis/2-historyofthecomputergame.html) Spacewar was the first computer game, developed in 1962 by...wait for it...a group of students :) Most computer games were designed in universities infact, so they were only available on the uni mainframes, which sounds just about right. This is why it's hard to track the history of gaming, afterall, William Higinbotham apparently never patented his Tennis for Two game. I guess in the 60s, since computing was a new and exciting subject, it would've appealed more to the youths. It's not surprising then that games were programmed in Universities and leaked through ye olde ancient cyberspace. Funnily enough, I even had to double check that the internet was around in the 60s! >.<>

Okay so, moving on.

Back to the 1970s...the era of Arcade gaming :) A certain company called ATARI was formed, and along came THE first commercially available game....PONG! Yay, finally a game I can relate to! What a classic...surely EVERYONE has heard of or played pong? I'm sure you can even play a version of it now on Sky Digital!? Hell, you can even play random 3D versions on the net. I even thought Pong would be the first ever computer game...bleh, close enough. Afterall, it seems it was kinda based alomg the lines of Tennis for Two and Spacewars. Does anyone remember the cheesey sound effects? :) Ralph H Baer, I salute you!

And so, coin operated arcade machines claimed world domination, hehe. Although 'nowadays' (yeh yeh i know, i sound like an old lady!) they're a rip off! I must've spent five quid or more playing TimeCop at the cinema once, whereas they probably cost the equivalent 10p or something back in the day. May as well just buy the game for home use! Speaking of which, it appears home gaming consoles were also introduced around 1972ish. MY first console was a Mega Drive...but it was my brother who had the Amstrad and Atari around 1988ish, so cue hours of 2player retro games that I can't remember the names of!

To think that I've been playing these evolving computer games since the 80s is both quite a scary and amazing thought. And that seems to be a good place to sign off, especially since I can't really comment about the 1950s - 1970s gaming experiences on a personal level.

Coming next : 1980s gaming! Cue tales of Golden Axe and the 100+ disc changes of the Amiga!

The first task of many

2006-10-10T17:13:00.000+01:00

A lot of people have said blogging is a lot like writing a diary. Well I've noticed mine is especially. No, not because I plan to start every entry with: 'Dear diary. Today I woke up at 7.30am, and now I plan to write some boring malarky while laughing at the dicaprio idiot who dies in Titanic. Blah blah blah.'

Truth is, I never really kept a diary, mainly because I found the whole concept rather pointless. If I have an opinion, I'd rather voice it to a real person, rather than on a webpage. Chances are few to zero people will even glance at it. Any diary I did for some reason start writing, lasted about two days max. Such is the current fate of my blog so, I figured the weekly task would motivate me into actually writing something here.

So I spent a fair amount of time reading through other people's blogs on the game art design course, and I have to admit, blogging isn't as bad as it first seemed. AS bad mind you. Afterall, it is another way to 'express one's self,' and if the blogger updates frequently and uses their member profile, you can learn about people you know, and random strangers, far more quickly. Take for instance: http://ohdearmybrainisleaking.blogspot.com/
Written by John.A; a 22yr old pisces born in the year of the rat and located in the UK studying game art design! (See I know so much JUST from reading the profile.)

Hehe, nah on a more serious note, I think his personality as well as his 'daily life' really shines through his writing and the subjects he blogs about. For instance, I can now tell you he bought 'Enter the Matrix,' owns a DS and thinks us first years will all die fast on Call of Duty (Psh!). He also first questioned the actual point in blogging, (as i continue to) but now updates regularly and proves to be an enjoyable read complete with fairly amusing comics. So erm..kudos to him! Now if only I can figure out how to put pictures on my blog? :(

Bearing in mind what I've read, most if not all blogs seem to marry objectiveness and just random personal opinions. There's the whole Big Brother phase though, where everyone just wants to leave a piece of themselves somewhere to prove that they actually exist; which in some cases means making a total idiot out of yourself on tv. Though I beleive anyone who wants to be on Big Brother is an idiot in the first place, but moving on! It's so much eaisier to claim this 'fame' on the internet though, and without even giving away your true identity! Nameless fame maybe? Bleh...I could call myself Catwoman and slag off President Bush which would incite comments that vary from 'YOU SUCK!' to 'Yes I agree with some of your points...however...' (I much prefer the second seeing as the person's brain is actually present and functioning correctly. )

To conclude before I continue to ramble incoherantly - plus I want to flee from the library asap and get ready for some random party. I can't help feeling that blogs are still slightly useless. I mean, unless someone knows who you are and the addy to your little online diary, the chances of anyone actually reading your blog are quite slim. Take for example, my blog. The only people likely to even look at it are course related peeps. And possibly Mr.John.A, just to make sure I didn't insult him. Maybe the odd lost person will somehow stumble upon it and read two lines, before tottering off. I also have to say that, even though I can quite happilly type on and on for ages not caring who reads it, it feels almost stalkerish to read about a person you don't even know in person. Where do we draw the line between being freakily over-nosey and having a good read? Or writing to fill boredom and being an exhibitionist / fame-seeker? Kinda gets you thinking about this invisible audience you're writing for. Unless you write about something really random/crazy/intriguing...and even then, who actually gives a flying monkeys butt?

At the end of the day; we're just plugged into a wall. Do I make sense? You tell me :)

2006-10-04T21:09:00.000+01:00

Those Blog Shenanigans!

So here I am... I think? After several...interesting rounds of Call of Duty (aka damn those snipers!) up on floor 9, followed by pancakes, yes pancakes for dinner, and then the usual 'how are you? Are you coping alright?' phone call from the mother; I figured yeah, now would be a good enough time to set up my blog. That was at 6:30 by the way. As usual, Bill Gates proved to be an absolute genius, especially when my Internet Explorer randomly closed on me about, ooo three times? Not a good start really, combined with my own procrastinating of the musical and social variety. Come to think of it, Devil May Cry 3 is still calling out to me from the shelf. But anyway, over 3hours later and I'm publishing this first post. Haven't really written a blog before, so hopefully I won't bore anyone with my off-tangent rambling - it's the curse of essay writing!

Right well, a bit about me I guess. As far as games, music and movies are concerned, I'd probably play/listen to/watch just about anything. I do have a soft spot for RPGs though, namely the Final Fantasy series. I might have to write about just how 'awesome' FF7 is one evening. Same with Shadow of the Colossus, and Silent Hill 2 since, I think that video we watched missed out/didn't explain just how good the storyline is. I'm a big fan of Resident Evil too, and can't wait for Zelda:Twilight Princess to find a place on my shelf. I haven't been able to buy Kingdom Heart2 yet though, annoyingly, and FF12 seems to have disappeared (again) off the release dates lists. Pretty annoying. So if you like FF or RPGs I'll happy talk about the difficulty of that damnable Ruby Weapon, and the uber coolness of Sephiroth. Yes, even though he killed 'the flower girl.'

Still reading? Feels weird writing 'I' all the time, almost naughty to not be all extra-formal and 3rd person. Anyway, I've rambled on enough, so I'll leave you with this. The 12 best game toilets thing reminded me of this youtube vid a friend sent me. Hopefully this link will work!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzO1mCAVyMw