Friday, September 22, 2017

Weekly Link Round Up

It's Friday!!! Thank goodness. This was a week that didn't want to end! So let's celebrate with another Weekly Link Round Up! A listing of some of the best, worst, and silliest gaming news on the internet:

- WhatCulture has a list of 8 Ways All Video Games are Becoming Exactly the Same. Some of the items listed include open world narratives, even when the game isn't an open world. Or Day 1 patches to play the game. For once, WhatCulture is pretty on the nose with it's list. So much of gaming has changed in the last 5 years, and yet the experiences and content can be shared across games with relative ease. Looking over the list, I could name a dozen games that fit this list without having to strain myself to come up with an answer. Let's get some diversity in narratives and gameplay going, developers!

- The UK Telegraph has a list of the 20 Video Games with the Silliest Names. If you think SquareEnix titles are going to be on this list, you would be correct. Final Fantasy Dissidia: Dueodecim 012 and Kingdom Hearts: Dream Drop Distance, are just two of the several titles from SE that made it. It's a fun list to chuckle at; mostly to remember just how badly some titles are named!

- That Tomb Raider reboot has a trailer, and The Nerdist has a side-by-side comparison between the trailer and the recent game. It doesn't look bad, and at this point all we can hope for that it's at least passable given the legacy of video game movies. My only hangup is the poster. Have you seen it? Lara's neck looks almost like a Barbie doll. It's elongated and overly photoshopped to the point that it looks fake. That's all I can look at when I see the poster!

- Comcast Spectacor, a sports and hospitality venue chain, has bought an eSports team in Philadelphia, with the primary focus on playing Overwatch. The team doesn't have a name yet, but it's clear that the eSports business is really turning heads to get bigger investors involved up front before the first season has even begun!

- Capcom may have dropped the ball once again on it's signature franchise Marvel vs. Capcom. It's recent game, Infinite, has had social media in a frenzy over it's poor collector's edition with the cheaply made infinity stones and figurines. Months prior fans were making fun of the game's questionable graphics that transformed the faces of many beloved characters. The last MvC looked much better in the design department. But now fans and reviewers are not sure if the game is living up to the standards of both Capcom and Marvel in the story department. How the mighty have fallen.

- If you need a thoughtful piece today in your Round Up, head over to Polygon and read this op-ed on racism in online gaming. Yeah. It's still a thing. It happens a lot. And it's why a number of gamers refuse to play online, pull up the chat window, or use a headset. It's real and it needs to be addressed more openly, and honestly.

- Finally, Gamasutra would like to remind us that submissions for independent game discussions are still open for the 2018 Game Developers Conference. If you have a topic that you'd like for developers to converse about, post it. The worst that'll happen is that they'll say no to a video game about eating Tacos.

Thursday, September 21, 2017

The Case Against Remakes, Reboots, and Reimaginings


Yesterday, we talked about The Case For Remakes, Reboots, and Reimaginings. Today, it's the opposite. We're going to dive in why remakes are bad. Not just for film, but for any and all art mediums. I will try my best to stay objective...but I make no promises that I will. I am strongly against remakes and feel they take away new, creative content in favor of "what works." As such, we're seeing less of an impact on today's films, television, and video games - rehashing the same formula to produce the same thing over and over again while holding back the medium.

Settle in, folks. This is going to be a long one.

I should start off by saying that this current trend is all Disney's fault. Okay not just Disney. Tim Burton had a heavy hand in it too when he decided to 'reimagine' 'Planet of the Apes.' To his credit, the look of the remake is much improved from the original. If you remove all of the dialogue, it'd make for a unique silent film. Unfortunately the story does not live up to the visuals. It's bland, lifeless, and downright illogical.

The movie sold audiences well enough to make $362 million dollars over a $100 million budget. And with that, reboots were anew once more! It didn't matter that most critics disliked the film, or that a number of people will rate is as one of the worst in the 'Planet of the Apes' saga. Burton had a hit and studios followed suit to buy up and respin the rights to other classic movies. Such as King Kong and Total Recall. Movies that already had a legacy in their own right, were now being bundled up and packaged for the new century of movie-goers.


The legacy of reboots is not a new phenomenon. Did you know there are 3 versions of Ben-Hur? The original was released in 1925. The one most people will remember is from 1959, adopted from the novel of the hero and the first movie. And then there was the horrible 2016 remake of the 1959 version; with effects so bad that Video Brinquedo's work seems Oscar-worthy by comparison. So yeah, reboots are not a new thing. But it is more prevalent now then ever before. It's incredibly difficult to find original content in movies, television, or theaters these days. A quick Wikipeadia, IMDB, or movie poster check and you'll find so many are adaptations, remakes, or reboots of content that already exists.

The problem with utilizing something that already exists is that it limits ones ability to be creative. You're confining yourself to this one world/universe and must write within it. You have to keep the same quality of the original characters, locations, and motives. Say you want to reboot Dumbo, which is totally happening by the way, and you decide that the new twist is that the elephant is going to turn into a human boy! Well, you can't do that. Because that's going to rile up audiences and you destroy the message of the original story. You have to reign in your creative needs to ensure the content you create for Dumbo fits in that universe.

It's difficult to find a balance between creativity and maintaining the integrity of a pre-existing story. The few that have managed to do this are well versed in the art.

But most fail.

Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark. Alice in Wonderland (pick a reboot). SimCity (2013). Final Fight: Steetwise,The Bionic Woman. Knight Rider (which is getting a second reboot). I could keep going.

For every Tomb Raider, we get a dozen Footloose reboots.

This is part of my biggest arguments against reboots: creativity. You can lose a lot of it when you are tied down to one story. This is why we have a near shot-for-shot remake of Disney's live-action version of Beauty and the Beast. Or a literal shot-for-shot remake of Psycho from 1998. While Maleficent wasn't a great movie, passable at best, at least it was a remake that attempted to be different and provide a new perspective to the Sleeping Beauty tale. With Beauty and the Beast, I was so underwhelmed by the results. It felt like I was watching a near exact copy of the animated version, but with less flare, more glitter glue, and abuse of auto-tuning! Nothing about it captured my attention. The little changes that were made detracted from the film instead of enhancing it. Belle's introduction at the beginning, and the ending song...excuse my bluntness but what the hell happened here?

Aside from the extreme auto-tuning (why couldn't we dub over Emma Watson's voice?), what bugged me so much about these two moments is that their iconic status was wiped away. When Belle is first introduced in the animated film, she's the only one wearing a brightly colored outfit (a blue dress). The rest of the villagers were in more muted tones and blended in with each other. According to the animators, the blue dress on Belle was to help the audience find her among the large crowd scenes so that she wouldn't fade into the background. And it was to help signify her uniqueness. She is considered the "odd woman" in the town. She reads. She writes. She wants to learn and not be like the rest of the woman in her village (get married, have lots of babies, tend the home, etc.). To emphasize her individuality, she wears colors that defy the norm. This is again replicated in the ending scene of the animated movie. The Beast and Belle are dancing in their blue tailcoat and gold ballgown, while the onlookers are in muted tones of browns and yellows. Again to draw the viewers attention to the primary couple and emphasize their individuality.

The live-action version didn't do this.

Belle as Emma Watson got a blue-ish sort of dress that is a mesh of textures and patterns. It's not a bad design in the grand scheme of things. The problem is the villagers. Everyone stands out! They all have their own unique outfits, colors, designs, and charm. So as Belle traverses the town, she gets lost in the crowd. At one point there is a wide shot of the town square, with it bustling of activity as everyone sings. I had to pause the movie, get someone in the house to come over and do a 'Where's Waldo' activity to try and find Belle. She was hidden among the sea of color.

The remake stripped Belle of her unique identity by forcing her to blend in with the rest of the town. And this happens again in the ending scene with the dance. The Beast gets his blue tailcoat, albeit a different one with a lighter shade. Belle is in a white dress with some faded roses randomly placed across the garment. Everyone else in the scene is also dressed in white and creme. So guess what? Once again Belle fades away and if it weren't for the Beast, we'd be playing 'Where's Waldo' again. (Also, what does that say about the message of the movie? That to find yourself and conform you need a man to guide you? WTF Disney?)

This is what happens when you restrict your creativity to the limits of a pre-existing narrative. You change wardrobes and you end up altering the personality of characters!

And unfortunately this is the trend that we're likely to see for years. Reboots still sell while more original content continues to fall into the cracks of the floorboard. New ideas, different perspectives are being left behind. I'd argue that because our attention is so focused on reimaginings, we're holding back art. We're not allowing it to grow naturally when we force the same stories and characters on people adnauseum. How many times can we reboot Spiderman? We've had 3 versions in 15 years! These movies are getting funded and profiting by telling the same story over and over. We know what happens to Peter Parker and his Aunt and Uncle. We know about Mary Jane. We don't need to see another version for a 3rd, 4th, or 5th time. The same thing with Batman. I love Batman; easily my favorite of all of the comic book heroes. But for the love of all that's holy why do we have to flashback to his parents death in every single iteration of his story? All of the comics, the Tim Burton movies, the various animated shows, the Gotham TV show, the Christopher Nolan movies, Batman vs. Superman movie...and it'll probably happen again in the upcoming Justice League film. Even those who haven't seen a Batman product know about his parents getting killed, with the iconic drop of the pearl beads from his mother's necklace. We Don't Need To See This Any More. Stop Wasting Money On This Scene and Give Us Something NEW.

The art of entertainment is regressing as we continue to hold onto these reboots. Much like video game box art and movie posters copy/pasting themselves, remakes are preventing us from achieving art enlightenment!


Why so many of the reboots these days? Part of it is Hollywood and investors wanting to see a profit. While it's becoming cheaper to buy and use equipment to make films, labor is not. Producers don't want to invest in a film that has the potential to flop. The best way to eliminate that risk is to create something that is sure to resonate with audiences. We're living in the prime-time of nostalgia. Everything old is new once more. So it's not surprising that art is mimicking this trend to ensure it's survival. Why spend the money on a unique story that could backfire, when one could spend the funds on a reboot that is likely to see a profit.

The other part of the reboot trend is due to the audience. Instead of seeking out or demanding new content, we're content with seeing the same things repeatedly. It could be because of nostalgia. Some people may like the flurry of reboots. Or it could be that we simply don't care. It's hard to pin point the exact reason on why we're content, en mass, with the same deluge of entertainment being reprocessed.

I for one am tired of it. Tired of seeing them. Tired of hearing about them. And stopped paying for them ages ago. Video games have been on the cusp of the reboot phase, thankfully. But as we inch closer to the episodic release of Final Fantasy VII, don't think that other companies won't follow suit. Soon we'll have a reboot of Conkers Bad Fur Day, and no one wants that.

Wednesday, September 20, 2017

The Case For Remakes, Reboots, and Reimaginings

Last night I decided to watch the live-action 'Disney's Beauty and the Beast' on Netflix while I was going to bed for some background noise to sleep to. Why this? I have no idea. I was in the mood to punish myself, apparently. 5 minutes and 23 seconds in I was instantly rolling my eyes at the blatant, ridiculous, overbearing use of auto-tune on the main actress Emma Watson. I remember it being bad, but not this bad. While the auto-tuning is the most annoying feature of the film, it's not the only thing that makes this a bad remake: it's a bad remake for being a near copy/paste of the animated feature. It does everything wrong with a "reimagining" while pandering to audiences to ensure it was a success.

Aside: If you want to watch this thing that's called a "movie," you have to search for it starting with 'Disney' as the search term. Otherwise it won't appear. How's that for annoying? Thanks Disney! 

This had me thinking about other forms of media that take the remake route. Music, Television, Theater - that have not been immune to the craze. Some have resulted in some amazing renditions of the original art. Some flopped...horribly. Video games have largely been out of the remake/reboot cycle, instead focusing on re-releasing original content with graphical upgrades a few new bells and whistles. But it's still a creature knocking on our door and one day, we'll be flooded with a sea of rebooted games.

So, I decided to spend the next 2 posts talking about why reboots are good, and why reboots are bad. My personal position strongly points towards the "please God/Buddha/Cthulhu, no more reboots." But there are some remakes that have held merit, and elevated the art to a new level. Music is a prime example of this where some of the most iconic songs of the last 30 years are remakes of previously released work. 'I Will Always (Love You)' by Whitney Houston from 'The Bodyguard' is a remake from Dolly Parton's original tune. But for every good remake, there are a dozen bad ones.

Today, we're going to talk about the case for remakes and how that affects video games. Starting off with the positive side knowing full-well the negative is going to take some time for me to type and edit.

Good video game remakes have happened and have received either high critical praise or positive fan reaction. SquareEnix has been at the helm of some of the best reboots over the past 5 years, manly Tomb Raider and Hitman. By no means were they dying franchises, but they did take the old formulas and twisted them into new, genre defining games. Hitman's episodic content made me a believer that this type of system could work for future projects. Could, not should (Final Fantasy VII, we're looking at you.)

Even re-releases like the recent Crash Bandicoot, that have updated the graphics and added new levels, isn't a bad thing. It's providing a brand new generation the opportunity to experience the games of our youth while capturing the uniqueness of the original game. Crash was a game that defined the PlayStation brand and provided a new view into the platforming genre. Tomb Raider showcased that dynamic landscapes and control schemes for action-adventures is possible if you are willing to explore. Hitman took the tired concepts of "stealth" gaming and made them entertaining. The open world dynamics and interactive elements created a more livable landscape for the game.

When done well, or even marginally good, reboots can work.

From a film perspective, let's take a look at 'Maleficent.' On first glance, you're probably thinking this isn't a reboot. But it really is. It's the story of 'Sleeping Beauty' told from a new perspective. You follow Princess Aurora from her cursed birth, while she's growing up, and through her transition into becoming a queen. It does take some creative detours along the way that don't line up with the original story. As the title of the movie implies, this is a movie from Maleficent's eyes.

You see her hand in Aurora's story; manipulating it to her desires and out of love (big plot point in the movie that I won't spoil if you haven't seen it). Is it a great movie? Not really. The action is clunky. The casting could be better suited for Aurora, the Prince, and some of the side characters. The story is convoluted at points, and the plot twists are not as intriguing as they could be. But what the movie does succeed at is showing that a reimagining is possible if you're willing to take risks. Shifting the viewpoint to the villain and creating a plot line that allows her to blossom as the main character allowed this movie to become more then just another footnote in failed Hollywood history.

A good reboot is one that takes the original idea and expands upon it by providing an additional narrative, a new viewpoint, or an alternative universe from what we know. 'Alice in Wonderland: Through the Looking Glass', as subpar as the film is, was a good variation of original story. Instead of a traditional re-telling of the books/movies/plays, this was Alice as an adult returning to Wonderland but having forgotten everything that happened to her as a child. These variations of the story are welcomed. It tugs on the audiences nostalgia string, while allowing us to explore new possibilities in the worlds we love.

Reboots can provide a safe space for experimenting new concepts without the threat of losing it all. It's difficult to front money for a new creative project when one does not know the outcome. For studios, they want to ensure that they see a return on their investment. So producers, writers, directors, musicians, play rights - they turn to existing properties and reimagine them for the 21st century. It allows the creative team the opportunity to explore new ideas while helping reassure investors will see a profit. Everything old is becoming new again - people still want nostalgia and are willing to pay for it. We can't deny that this is still a very strong trend that will continue as Disney pumps out more live-action movies (Dumbo, Aladdin, Mulan). Even the reboot of Steven King's 'IT' has not only crushed box office records for the horror genre, it's had the third highest opening all year!

When done well, a reboot can add to the universe of the world we once knew. Maybe that's worth exploring a bit further and allowing artists to put their spin on old stories.

But when a reboot is done poorly, oh man. It's bad. Super. Bad. Stay tuned for tomorrow's post on The Case Against Remakes, Reboots, and Reimaginings.

Tuesday, September 19, 2017

From Bikes, to Trains, to Video Games it's the Biggest Toy Store There Is

If you're a child of the 80's, 90's, and even the early 2000's, you all know the magic that is Toys 'R' Us. For many, this was our introduction into video games. They were once a staple of the gaming industry as the leader of sales, until game-only retailers such as GameStop and EBGames hit the market. Even then, Toys 'R' Us held the #2 spot for years. I remember when the Nintendo 64 was released. My family and I waited outside of our local Toys R' Us the morning of, so we could be one of the first to see the console and play Super Mario 64, while my dad snuck away to purchase the system for us to have that Christmas. The game "station" set up in the isle was a flurry of color with Mario cut-outs all around the display. And it was the first time Mario talked in a game! So a number of his catchphrases were recorded and playing back through the cut-outs. Even before video games, Toys 'R' Us has always had this magical quality to it. It was one of the few bigger retailers of toys, with isles set up to look more like a Party City and less like a Macy's. There were rows and rows of nothing but toys, bikes, trains, and so much more. It has always been heaven for kids.

The announcement of the retailer filing for bankruptcy has been a long time coming. The brick-and-mortar stores have been dwindling over the years with the rise of internet sales. Toys 'R' Us always struggled to find footing with the online market. Coupled with vendors changing their sales tactics, put more pressure on the brand to pay back their loans faster then they could sell the products. $5 billion in debt later, and here we are. It doesn't make the story any less depressing.

So what happened to our gaming haven? GameRevolution posted a piece that the blame lies mostly with video games. The company's previous CEO, Gerald Storch, has noted that part of the decline in sales has been due to the shift of video games - not as much innovation, easier online/direct download access, has eliminated the need to visit retailers. That hurt the company's bottom line and they quickly fell from being a #2 video game retailer to now having 1% of the market. But it's not just this, or the shift to online buying that has caused sales to slump, Storch continued. "It's not that the internet is taking away our business, which is a popular story."

For families and children, there's been a visible shift in how they play. It's no longer about physical toys, instead it's cell phones and tablets. Kids wanted to play Candy Crush and Angry Birds, mobile video games that were only available on certain devices. By the time parents paid for the items to play the games, they didn't have much left to spend on blocks, trains, and bikes.

There was also a noticeable price difference in products between Toys 'R' Us and the discount, big box retailers: Walmart, Sam's Club, and Target. The same bicycle at Toys 'R' Us would be anywhere from $45-$100 cheaper at other retailers. Most of the toys could be found at a better price else-where. Unfortunately Toys 'R' Us wasn't able to provide products at a better value during the rise of Walmart. Because of this, more customers moved their purchases to other retailers.

Online shopping helped further the fuel for discounts - not the primary reason but a reason. I do remember back around 2009/2010 when Toys 'R' Us was trying to find a place online, I went to the site to reserve a game. Just to see if the process was any easier or cheaper then GameStop. Amazon Prime wasn't available at the time. The site was very cumbersome. It took too long to load. Games were not always labeled in their right category. If you spelled out the game title in the search bar, it would pull up no results unless you typed it exactly as Toys 'R' Us had it in their system (that included dashes, commas, and apostrophes). Sometimes the items wouldn't save to your shopping cart - or if you had items that were available now and others as pre-order, you had to place separate orders for each product. I think shipping was an insane amount too, $12 or $15 for 1 game. Half an hour later, I gave up and waited until the game was out to buy it in store.

The bottom line is that Toys 'R' Us hasn't aged with the current generation. They stuck to a formula that use to work for them; creating an empire of 1,600 stores. However, when children and parents began shifting their play/toy habits, Toys 'R' Us didn't follow. And that is whats hurting them right now.


Toys 'R' Us and it's affiliated brands such as Babies 'R' Us and FAO Schwarz will continue running business as usual during this holiday season - where they make most of their money.

Monday, September 18, 2017

Free the Mario Nip!

If you're wondering why you're seeing posts online regarding Mario's nipples,you can thank the Japanese video game rating board.

Super Mario Odyssey, the next in the line of Mario titles, will be the first game to receive the CERO (Computer Entertainment Rating Organization) B ranking. CERO is the Japanese equivalent of the ESRB. Until now, the franchise has always achieved A, which is suitable for all ages. B is for 12 and up. According to wikipedia, B ranks will be assigned for games that "Contain[s] some content parents may not like for children under the age of 12. May contain mild sexual content, some violence, mild horror content or infrequent use of profanity."

What could possibly be in a Mario game that would be the equivalent of an E10+ or T?

People have speculated that shirtless Mario for swimming areas, exposing his digital nipples, is the reason for the rating. But everything else is classic Mario. The jumps. The turtle shells. The abuse of Goombas. For comparison, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild also received a CERO B. Maybe this is a new trend for Nintendo games? Or it could be the CERO trying to curtail any potential parental concerns.

Super Mario Odyssey will be releasing late October - then we'll see what the fuss is about.

Friday, September 15, 2017

'Overwatch' Developer to Gamers - Don't Be a Dick

If you're an Overwatch fan and wondering why updates have been slow, game director Jeff Kaplan says it's the troll's fault. In a video update titled "Play Nice, Play Fair," Kaplan talks extensively about how Blizzard is responding to the toxicity of the game. As a woman, I'm all too familiar with the negative content we see in first-person shooters and competitive gaming. The few people I do play with on Overwatch always ask why I don't go to public chat or use a headset. Because by speaking I open myself up to a litany of harassment; in turn the game is no longer fun. I don't play to be harassed.

If you're playing outside of a team or competitive, Overwatch can be troll-heaven. It's at a point now where it's difficult to bring in new players and expect them to stick around when people either A) know how to play and have played for a while, or B) are toxic and will insult anyone and everyone in their path. That's not the kind of environment Kaplan and Blizzard wants to introduce people into.

Since the games launch in 2016, 480 thousand accounts have had action taken against them, with over 300 thousand from reports by other players. Reporting tools that were only available on PC are now on the XBox One and PS4 version of the game. It's a start and Kaplan acknowledges that they have a long way to go.

But it's also the gamers that need to take responsibility for their own actions. Blizzard, and other developers, can't stop everyone and there's no fool-proof system in place to stop harassment and trolls. "There is not going to be a moment where we have a magic patch in Overwatch that makes bad behaviour go away," Kaplan stated. "But it is a continual process that we are very dedicated to fixing and improving."

Blizzard doesn't plan to add "naughty pools" that some other games do. If you're bad and you're breaking the rules, they don't want you in the game. At all. "Overwatch should be an inclusive game space."

It's not the bad behavior that people have been focusing on, but Kaplan's comments that the toxicity is diverting resources from updating the game. Instead of making new maps and patches, they have to focus on how to stop people from being dicks to one another, and remove those who cause trouble.

So if you want more Overwatch updates, play nice!

Aside - the game is free to try out this weekend on PC. You need a Battle.Net account (which is free) to join.

Thursday, September 14, 2017

AI Built to Develop Video Games

It's bad enough that Google is trying to make an AI that will kick our behinds in Starcraft, now some researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology want AI's to develop their own games!

The Institute's communications officer Joshua Preston explained that the AI will develop a game's engine after watching a few minutes of gameplay. The technology is being created to help designers speed up the process of making a game, while allowing them to easily experiment with new content without it hampering their bottom line. During a recent test, the AI watched 2 minutes of someone playing Super Mario Bros. and then recreated the content by studying the frames, and predicting future elements. By letting the AI study the frames, the researchers conclude that the AI is able to provide more accurate gaming models.

Right now the AI does showcase limitations. It's able to work when action happens on the screen and it is able to interpret it. Anything happening off-screen, actions or events, are difficult for the AI to render.

Of course the inevitable questions were asked: would the AI put people out of work? Not likely. The researchers are looking at this AI as an aide, not a job replacement. It's not able to replicate stories or character development. And Quality Assurance people are needed to provide a better grasp on how people will play the game. An AI might be able to test a game, but they are basing their decisions off of math. A human player is less likely to think about the angle of a jump. So devs, don't freak out yet.

Although at this rate with the advancement of AI, I wouldn't be surprised if 'The Terminator' or 'The Matrix' type scenarios become a reality. Just saying!

Wednesday, September 13, 2017

Weekly Link Round Up

We're doing another early edition of the Weekly Link Round Up because there are a lot of articles gracing my feed this morning. They must be shared, for the good of the gaming universe. Here's what we've got today:

- Did you know yesterday was National Video Game Day? Yeah I didn't either until late last night, when I happened to be on Twitter. Well Kotaku decided to look further into this "holiday" and find out the truth behind it. In that it's another made-up, ancillary day being used to push for sales. If no one knows about a holiday, does it really exist?

- Forbes speaks with former marketing runner Cathy Beaupain, now president of Dermstore(owned by Target) about how to manage your ecommerce business to run like a video game. It's that 'gamification' thing again. The interview reads like an intro to business class one would take at a community college. A number of Beaupain's tips include A/B testing of your website, which most people know to do to ensure they get customers to buy more. She also talks about focusing on the customer experience and using data to determine what they want. Again, you learn that in Business 101. Click-bait article is click-bait.

- Polygon takes a look at how difficult it can be for adults who game for the first time. While a number of us grew up playing consoles, our parents and elders may not have. I know for my dad, he's very much a PC guy. If we handed him a controller to a PS4 or XBox One, he wouldn't be anywhere near as efficient. There's a steep learning curve to get older gamers into the groove. Our brains are not absorbing as much information as our youth. We have different physical obstacles to overcome. And terms/phrases kids may be use to using in a game have no meaning outside of it. Adults have to learn these things too, in order to stay up to date with the game. This article is an interesting view at the other side of the bell-curve with gamers.

- WhatCulture has a list of the 20 Most Underappreciated Games of the Decade. Before I opened the article, I made a guess on some titles that they may have on their list: Mad Max, No Man's Sky, and Watch Dogs. Turns out, I was almost right! They listed Watch Dogs 2 instead. Sadly WhatCulture, your definition of "underappreciated" is very skewed. They list games from Metal Gear Solid to No Man's Sky to try and seem hip, but it backfires. Many of the games listed were hits with fans and critics. Others were flops because they were bad games that didn't properly represent what they were trying to portray (Mad Max). This list needs to go back to the drawing board.

- Sky, a new game from the developers of Journey, was unveiled yesterday during Apple's event that also announced the new, stupidly expensive, iPhone. Initially it was mentioned that the game would only be available on Apple TV. Most gamers would never see it. But thankfully they clarified that it'll be released on Apple products first and then to other platforms. You can watch the interview about the game here.

- Nintendo is going to release more of the NES Classic console in the summer 2018. After the overwhelming response and sales, it was strange that Nintendo killed the program so quickly after release. Probably to drum up more interest, thus more future sales. For those who couldn't get their hands on the system earlier, don't worry. You'll have another shot.

- The creators of the web comic Cyanide & Happiness are jumping into the video game business. Their new action-adventure Kickstarter is only a few days old, has already achieved it's goal, and they are at work with their next product. I'm curious to see how this all forms. The game is taking a South Park: Stick of Truth approach by having the environment more interactive in a side-scrolling format. They did a great job with the card game, so we'll see what happens with the video game!

- Bleeding Cool News looks back at an 80's TV classic: Starcade. Very recently, with ShoutFactory, Twitch held a marathon, airing all of the classic episodes. Kids would play head to head in arcade games like Pac-Man for a chance to win prizes, including their own arcade cabinet. It's been rumored that the show is making a comeback, but with no set dates or hosts to confirm if this is really happening. Check out the interview with the show's creators to learn more about this 80's icon.

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

The Tale of PewDiePie's Antics Continues

This kid can't seem to stay out of trouble.

PewDiePie (Felix Kjellberg) is causing more waves on the internet for something he probably thinks is pretty innocuous. Over the weekend, the YouTuber streamed himself playing a game by developer Compo Santo. While doing so, he dropped the N-word. Arguably, he spoke it a bit too casually. He followed it up with "I don't mean that in a bad way." Again, too casual and nonchalant.

Needless to say, people took notice and are quickly firing back at the personality. He's not a stranger to this type of controversy after stirring up the internet and Disney earlier this year with his anti-Semitic "jokes."

Even with that stunt, he's still on YouTube. He's still making money. People are still watching him. He may not have Disney or YouTube Red backing him up, but Kjellberg is a defining force in the creative content community.

Which is why the surprising turn in the saga of PewDiePie come from Campo Santo, the developer of titles such as Firewatch. They have filed DMCA's takedown requests against the YouTuber for anything that holds their name or content. Campo Santo co-founder Sean Vanaman tweeted on Sunday "I am sick of this child getting more and more chances to make money off of what we make." He also acknowledges that as his game was streamed, the company was potentially making money from ad revenue and copyright regulations with YouTube; thus, in a way, they were complicit with Kjellberg's activities. Vanaman doesn't want Firewatch or other Campo Santo products to be affiliated with this type of hate.

Now there's a bigger question of if Campo Santo's request will ultimately win and what this will mean for other YouTubers? That's difficult to say. Some of Kjellberg's videos have been taken down temporarily while YouTube reviews the request. Campo Santo is only focusing on PewDiePie and not other streamers. But if the developer wins, could this open the door for more companies to do the same? YouTube is already downtrending with creators as rules become harsher for uploads and ad revenue. Many are moving to other platforms like Twitch to air content.

This could also be just a rally call against Kjellberg and nothing more. Vanaman has called on other developers to file requests against PewDiePie and stop supporting his work. It's not the first time the YouTuber has been in trouble, and it won't be his last. It's difficult to say what the outcome will be until it happens.

Kjellberg has responded just a few minutes ago regarding his actions. He did not address the take-down notices from Campo Santo. The video apology seems genuine.  He was "in the moment" of playing the game and fed on the words that he's heard others used while playing. But he doesn't blame them for his actions. Kjellberg admits that he screwed up and needs to learn from his mistakes. However, we've heard similar messages before. Given all that's happened to him this year, he should have wizened up already. It's difficult to tell if his apology has weight. And we won't know until time passes.

As a gamer and lover of swear words, I've been "in the moment." But I have never felt the urge to say the N-word. Or any type of racial, religious, or gender-related slurs. The most I'll drop is the f-bomb and move on. You can be involved in an activity so much that you may throw out a few swear words. It happens whether it's a video game or knitting. But when you use racial slurs, that's not a product of the game. That's something you've learned and use often enough to be part of your vocabulary. And that's the problem here.

Whether you like Kjellberg or not, he is a major force on YouTube. Millions watch his videos daily. He's become a popular figure for kids and teenagers. The majority of his viewers are under age. Which means PewDiePie is a figure some look up to. When you have that type of influence, it's important to be aware of what one says and does. Kjellberg's words hold weight and can affect an entire generation. That's important to keep in mind.

Monday, September 11, 2017

'Dad of Light' Exceeds Expectations

'Dad of Light'. Originally titled 'Daddy of Light' and changed by Netflix for some reason - probably to reduce confusion between this show and their 'Deathnote' movie, whose lead character is named Light. What is 'Dad of Light'? Well it's probably best summed up as a glorified mini-series to help promote Final Fantasy XIV in the most dramatic way possible. And it is adorable.

Based on a true story, 'Dad of Light' was produced in Japan by Netflix and aired earlier this year. It recently hit the international scene with 8 episodes, roughly 22-25 minutes a piece. The drama is about a young man (Akio) and his father (Hirotaro), bonding over Final Fantasy XIV, but in a very complicated, Japanese television way. Akio feels like he can never talk to his father. A few flashbacks showcase how Akio and his father never seemed to get along - they live in a space where they tolerate one another. When Hirotaro suddenly quits his job and retires, Akio wants to find out why. Instead of doing the normal thing and asking, because Akio is afraid he won't get any answer, he gives his father a PS4 and a copy of FF14 as a gift. The goal being to get him to play, befriend him in the game, and learn more about his dad. Project: Dad of Light!

Yeah, it's a silly premise. Along the way we learn about Akio's life, what Final Fantasy means to him, and how reality mimics his FF14 persona.

I watched the series over the weekend, and I was surprised that a good chunk of the story takes place IN the game. The production staff utilized FF14 to produce machinima sequences to showcase the dialogue and action in the game itself. Instead of it being solely on Akio and his internal monologue, you can see the characters in-game interacting with each other. It's a refreshing take on the father/son bonding story. Is the machinima perfect? Not always. FF14 does have it's limitations, and some of the camera angles are awkward - my guess is this was filmed prior to some of the recent patches that give more cinematic options. But for what the production team had, it's very well made.

'Dad of Light' is also very much like a Japanese half-hour drama. If you've never seen one before, then prepare yourself for a different form of television that you won't see here in the U.S. Subtly is not a word often associated with Japanese media. Even serious stories take a light-handed approach. Actors actions, dialogues, and expressions tend to be exaggerated. You'll find that there's still slapstick and self-deprecating humor to liven up the content. This type of comedy balances well with 'Dad of Light' when the series progresses and they touch on more of the heavy issues. No spoilers! But you may be boarding the feels train after watching this.

It also means that the "conclusion" to the story is not really an ending. Some things are resolved but there are number of open-ended threads with Akio's work life that never get addressed. Again, this is common in Japanese media. It's up to you to determine what happens next. The last episode is a solo piece with a brief recap of the first 7 episodes, before diving into it's own narrative. The story centers around a Lalafell that helped Akio and Hirotaro form their friendship. She talks about meeting her husband in the game, and the guild wants to throw them a wedding to make up for their lack of a real-world one.

The moments that stand out to me are in the earlier episodes when Hirotaro is learning how to play the game. It reminded me a lot of when my dad began playing MMO's. Knocking on my door and asking simple questions like "is it okay to talk to other people?" and "how do I buy this armor?" Things that most of us veterans would take for granted. Watching Hirotaro struggle and adjust to the game was very much how I experienced it with my dad. Plus one to the production on giving an accurate visual.

And for those of us who play MMO's, we know that it's more then just a game. It's a lifestyle. It allows us to see that there is still good in this world - that people are willing to help others without asking for a thing in return. That there is kindness, generosity, and honor among us. It's a chance to kick back and ignore the real world for an hour or two and experience a world bigger then ourselves. 'Dad of Light' reinforces this message quite well.

If you're a fan of the game, you'll probably become a bigger fan after watching this show. If you enjoy MMO's, give this series a shot and laugh at the gaming n00b moments. Enjoy Japanese dramas? You'll like this one. The later episodes will hit you in the gut. Curious but never seen a Japanese show or don't play MMO's? Be prepared for an experience.