To Haul!

Well, I didn’t get the OCZ NIA. Didn’t get the Falcon either. I’m intrigued by both and will probably pull the trigger on one when my birthday circles ’round next month. I steered clear for now though. Instead, I got this:

Maybe it’s just a product of getting old, but I’m pretty excited about my new bag. Of course, it is light-years better than what I’ve been using:

I won’t get into a whole photo series, but if you could see the frayed edges and holes in that trusty, old Triple 5 Soul backpack then you would understand. Its time had come. The new hotness is a worthwhile replacement, and will serve me well during the coming Sundance trip. I’ll miss the old bag though; it’s seen me through a lot. R.I.P.

I am still wrestling with the NIA vs Falcon question though. I’m thinking more in conceptual terms now since I’m not getting either one for at least a month, if even then. Still though, it’s an interesting conundrum.

Mind-control in video games is by far the cooler option, but it really does sound a whole lot like learning to use a new control system which is as far removed from reality in some ways as the current wave of input devices. Really, I see our gamepads, Wii remotes, keyboards and mice as having the edge since there’s a physical thing to interact with.

It probably feels intuitive to dart your eyes around the screen and have the game respond accordingly. This is notably the least functional aspect of NIA by the way, at least according to reports. However, I can’t see how other input commands – such as clenched teeth – could really feel natural when tethered to, say, firing a weapon.

The Falcon, on the other hand, enhances the physical sensation of interacting with the virtual space. The best example I read – I believe it was on Joystiq, but I honestly cannot remember – described a scenario in which the Falcon’s motors lock in place when a boss zombie pins your avatar in Left 4 Dead. Now that’s just neat. Especially if your hand is physically wrenched in a direction as a result of the action, which seems to be the case. If only they weren’t charging for individual game profiles.

I’d still love to hear firsthand impressions of either device from any of you readers. Same goes for any thoughts you have on the Think vs. Feel control systems. Do you think there’s really a future in video games for brainwave-reading devices? Do you think the approach taken by the NIA moves in the right direction?

How about the Falcon and the added level of immersion it promises? Is it worth paying a premium for new games if you can have the extra layer of engagement with the game-world? Do you even want to experience the realistic feel of weapon recoil from your video games?

To Think or To Feel?

I know the holidays are over, but my Friday the 13th birthday is fast approaching and I didn’t ask for anything during the December madness. Except for work of course, but that’s a year-round concern. Since I’ve always been a little bit of a gadget whore, I was kind of operating under the assumption that I’d eventually just find something cool to serve as a combined Hanukah/birthday gift.

An independent pair of random occurrences in the past 24 hours have led me to two fascinating PC input devices and I’m having a hard time figuring out which way I’d like to turn, or if I should just hold steady and chalk both up as gimmicks for the time being.

First up you’ve got Novint’s Falcon controller, a sort of force feedback-enabled 3D mouse. Check it (image source: Joystiq):

Housed within that globe-thing are motors which supported games use to give the experience a more tactile feel. The easiest example of this is gun recoil, but the device can also pass along sensations of weight (such as when lifting objects in Half-Life 2), resistance (from bumping into a wall or being pinned by a zombie in the soon-to-be-supported Left 4 Dead) and the like. There’s also this newly released (and bundled) Falcon pistol grip to consider:

There are some definite downsides though. The Falcon itself supports very few mainstream games, and as far as I can tell there is (or will be) a cost attached to obtaining the profiles (which are treated as mods) for certain titles. Valve getting behind Novint means free updates for their games, but in-development support for titles such as Battlefield 2142 and NFS: ProStreet have a $30 price tag attached. Understandable perhaps, but a definite turn-off nonetheless.

There’s also my personal setup to consider, since I have my PC plugged into the living room TV. Meaning I can’t integrate the Falcon as a permanent fixture, since wires would have to run across the room. And since I’m guessing the thing needs an independent power supply, I fear that setting it up will too often discourage me from using it.

Option B is decidedly more fascinating, but carries greater baggage. OCZ’s Neural Impulse Actuator, or NIA, is the market’s first brainwave-reading PC input device. Using the seemingly straightforward configuration program, you’re able to “map” facial muscle movements to the keyboard command of your choosing. There’s a bit more to it than that, but the idea I’m trying to express here is mind-controlled games. See here:

Unlike the Falcon, the NIA is designed to support user-created profiles. If you can get the hang of taking control using a mixture of keyboard, mouse and thought-based commands, this baby will work with anything.

Unfortunately, the technology doesn’t seem to be all there yet. Many reports I’ve read suggest that the NIA’s functionality varies wildly from person to person. Of particular concern is how much trouble the device seems to have reading “glances,” which is no good for an FPS junkie like me.

The NIA also seems more like an entirely new and radically different (albeit cool) interface than it does a natural complement to a game’s immersiveness. The Falcon appears designed to enhance your “feel” of existing within the game-world while the NIA instead offers you a new way to interact with the system. The idea of clenching teeth to fire a weapon sounds intriguing, but I worry that the “mind controls” would end up feeling more like a gimmicky glimpse of the future than an enhancement of the experience.

All in, a pretty balanced set of costs/benefits between the two options. I may just skip both and watch them closely for awhile, see how things develop. If anyone out there has tried either or has an opinion to share, please do. Whichever one I end up with (if any), you can expect to find detailed observations on it here.

The Proof is in the Posts

A long time ago, in another life it now seems, I used to work in the music industry. Not the high-powered world of Napster hate and Courvoisier mind you, but real in-the-trenches type stuff. My work mainly involved management and promotion in the relatively niche Jam Band scene, a section of the industry known for its focus on grassroots promotion and word-of-mouth popularity. Never once did I think the skills I picked up in that field would be useful here.

Everyone seems so intent on hating UGO right now; I thought I’d try to bring some balance by doing a little grassroots promotion for my friends there. You say there’s nothing good coming from the site? Well then, I respond with LINKS! Before going any further, I also want to assure you readers that Ramblings is not going to become a UGO satellite site. It’s just that the events of the past 48 hours have hit very close to home, and I’m left on the outside to watch as friends who I respect deeply are unfairly dragged through the mud.

First up is a series of “Narrative in Gaming” interview features from frequent UGO contributor Locke Webster. Locke sat down with creatives involved in the development of Fallout 3, Far Cry 2, Dead Space and Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune to discuss the role of narrative in those games.

Fallout 3
Far Cry 2
Dead Space
Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune

Next is a post from UGO’s Rene Rosa, made just after Spore Creature Creator’s release last year. One of Rene’s creations was banned for carrying the descriptor “Not a penis.” So he fired back in the Gamesblog with this humorous post, masking a commentary on EA’s lack of culpability in what the end-user does with their products behind his razor-sharp wit.

EA Bans Spore Creature Because it is ‘Not a Penis’

Now I’m going to shine the spotlight on Chris Plante. He actually came to UGO some time after I started writing for them, but he’s quickly become one of my favorite working writers in this field. His gaming humor site Hardcasual sits comfortably in my blogroll and should not be missed either, but his touch on UGO’s features elevates the value of even a simple “Top 11″ charticle. His 2008 end of year round-ups were particularly inspired, so I’ve linked those below.

Video Game Saviors of 2008
Video Games Heartbreaks of 2008
Be a Better Gamer in ‘09

And finally, there’s Russ Frushtick. The man who owns UGO’s games content. This fact makes Russ the hardest personality to capture in a couple links, simply because his work transcends daily posts. None of the above would be possible however were it not for him.

The two links that follow lead to Russ’s controversial review of Left 4 Dead in which he disparaged the relative cost of the game in light of what’s on the disc. He, like many of us in and around the UGO office, loved actually playing the game. The $60 price tag just didn’t feel right though and he took Valve/EA to task on it in the review and a subsequent post.

Left 4 Dead review
Thoughts on the Value of Left 4 Dead

There’s been a lot of talk since this UGO/1UP fiasco started about gaming’s “PERSONALITIES.” It’s become the buzzword of the moment as people have railed against the loss of their favorite voices at 1UP. I can understand the frustration, but I just can’t abide the misinformed hate. UGO has PERSONALITIES of its own. These are people who play just as many games and care just as much about the growth of the industry as the rest of you. I would encourage you all to give them a chance before you condemn them for being indirectly associated with the 1UP layoffs. Don’t hate the players folks… love the games.

Think children, what does it all mean?

If you know me, then you also know that I’ve been watching this UGO/1UP situation unfold with something that pretty well exceeds “great interest.” It’s a bummer about the loss of those podcasts and the people involved with them, but as with any acquisition it’s pretty clear now that their relative cost outweighed their benefits and so they had to go. I can only send my best wishes out to all those who suddenly find themselves looking for work in these uncertain times.

I’m writing here now for two reasons. First, I want to share something I read this morning on NeoGAF. A post from 1UP Editorial Director Sam Kennedy, whose job is still intact following the acquisition. It’s a very frank statement, and I think it’s something that’s worth sharing with those unwilling to read through 50 pages of GAF hate to find it. You can check it at the link here or keep reading to find it right… here:

Sam “Capnsmak” Kennedy, via NeoGAF: Hey guys, I haven’t really read through this thread — 50+ pages! — and I probably won’t ever be able to. But I did want to hop in here since, well, this is a pretty fucking big deal, I just lost almost half my staff, and God knows what sort of hate is flying around right now.

There’s no way to rationalize this for most people, and I don’t want to sugarcoat anything. My blog (for anyone that actually read all of it) was sincere — this is a great thing for 1UP. Lord knows we need some better infrastructure and backing. As for many of the podcasts and other shows that we worked so hard on — and the people that produced them — obviously, not so much. And I’m not saying that’s OK, and I’m not saying you should even be remotely fine with that — it kills me (and, to be perfectly honest, even the UGO people), that not everything could be preserved.

And I’m not here to defend this. It freaking sucks. But from my vantage point, UGO did what they could to, what I consider, “save” 1UP. Obviously, all of us would have wanted to see things go differently — most of all me, considering I just lost many of my closest friends as coworkers and employees today.

A couple of things to realize, though:

Fact: 1UP was a business that was losing money.

Fact: This economy sucks and the ad market is diminished.

Fact: Ziff Davis has been trying to offload 1UP for years.

With those sorts of factors playing against us, something had to give. Everyone loved the stuff we did, but our business wasn’t in the best of shape (see: Ziff-Davis files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy last summer).

My hope in all of this, over the last year or so, was that some company would come along and be able to buy 1UP — the entire operation — and run with it. And I think UGO had actually originally approached 1UP with those same hopes.

But the reality of the market was that no company, including UGO, was willing to sustain 1UP as it was. And that includes Ziff Davis. I hate to to break it to you, but the sad fact was that there was little hope for 1UP to continue as it had been. Not in this economy. If any company out there would have been willing to support us as we were, they certainly didn’t step up.

The only company that really did was UGO, and they did their very best to continue 1UP.

So like I said, while UGO may appear like the bad guy here, in a lot of ways, they just did what few, if any, other companies would. And, from everything they’ve indicated to us, they are completely supportive of 1UP and its people. Believe me, they were in the office today and were just as distraught about the losses of any of these shows and the people.

Of course, that doesn’t make things any better for any of us. Fact is, we — as in, the games industry, not just 1UP — are losing some great things today. I’m with you in mourning. But I have a commitment from the UGO guys that they — now, actually, we — are going to do whatever we can to help these guys out and look for ways to continue these shows with them and/or to look into possibilities for new shows in the future. I’m not saying everything will be back to “normal” as you knew it anytime soon, but I am saying there should be some good things to look forward to in the future.

But anyway, now’s not the time to think ahead — certainly not for me, at least. Right now I’m just concerned about my friends. I just came back from a night of drinks at our regular spot, where lots of the games industry showed up to show their support for the guys. Honestly, it was so great to see everyone come out for the team. While a part of me is certainly happy about what UGO/Hearst has just done for 1UP — because, like I said, it could have been a lot worse — today was the worst day of my life.

My other reason for writing here this morning is to step in and defend UGO for a minute. As it says up there on the right, I’ve been contributing content there for more than two years now. There’s a GREAT bunch of people running the show there. Games editor Russell Frushtick is a salty industry dog who knows and understands the biz from every angle. He’s got solid journalistic instincts AND ethics, and he’s passionate about delivering the best content he can every single day. Associate editor Chris Plante is equally committed, and is a driving force behind some of the site’s best original content (see here and here).

Then there’s Chris Radtke. This is the man who originally brought me into the UGO fold back in November ‘06. He is my own personal hero, not only for having introduced me to this “dream” line of work but also for helping me keep going all this time with the benefit of his experience. He’s had a vision for his team at UGO since the moment I met him, and through the years I’ve watched as he’s worked passionately to hold steady in the face of some pretty rotten stuff. He has a keen understanding of far more than just the video game industry and you should not doubt a single word of what he posted on UGO’s Gamesblog last night. So many people are so easily jumping on the “Die UGO” bandwagon, but you’re forgetting that there are real people in the organization, people who care deeply for both 1UP and the industry we all cover.

I wish the recently departed members of the 1UP team the best of luck, but I also wish my friends at UGO an equal amount of luck in weathering this Hate Storm and giving one of the Internet’s best gaming resources a sorely needed financial kick in the ass. I’m honestly not sure what my own fate will be following this recent turn of events, but these are simply the times that we live in. I remain loyal to the people who helped me grow to this point; that’s the perspective I bring to this whole fiasco. You Bandwagon Haters out there ought to sit and read through UGO’s Gamesblog, the great work being done there by guys like Russ and Chris. Continue fearing the Reaper, but know that UGO is not it.

UPDATE: I’ve got your related post right here.

Stirring the Internet’s Cauldron of Hate

When you write frequently and in public places on the Internet, there are bound to be readers who disagree with what you’re saying. Every writer working for a web-based publication is forced to quickly acclimate to the torrents of anonymous hate which have a tendency to fill up comments sections.

I tend to take a fight-or-flight stance towards hateful comments: either I hit back with a reasoned defense or, when such a response isn’t possible, I flat-out ignore it. The one reprinted below, posted this morning on my GTA IV PC review at UGO’s Gamesblog, is simply too entertaining to be allowed to fade into obscurity. It’s definitely in the running for my favorite comment of ‘09:

From “onlyhate”:

“fcuk you retarded Adam Rosenberg!!. GTA4 was a mess and you give it all A’s. Fcuk you. you didnt play the pc version. you play the xbox360 or ps3 version and give the marks to the pc version. did you play the game till the end? i guess not. then how can you review the game when you didnt finished or even PLAY the fcuking danm thing?

Adam Rosenberg is a whroe.”

I’ll let that speak for itself. What about y’all? I know at least some of you reading this create words for Internet consumption. Do you have any favorite bits of Hate which get a special place in your dark and twisted Writer’s Heart? Any of you readers think you can top that one up there? Please, by all means share your hate below.

A brief Public Service Announcement

I’ve disabled that very annoying Snap Shots feature. This means you’ll no longer get a pop-up previewing a link’s destination whenever you hover over it. Isn’t that what tabbed browsing is for anyway?

Sorry for the inconvenience. Game on.

The Dirty Dozen: 2008’s Criminally Underappreciated Games

I feel like Rosenberg’s Ramblings can’t possibly be a proper video game-focused blog until at least one charticle has been posted. Since my page dwells in the shadowy corners of the gaming Internet, known to few and read by fewer, I feel it’s only natural that my first official list casts a spotlight on some of 2008’s more underappreciated gems.

Some of these you’ve likely played and forgotten; others you missed entirely. Maybe there’s even a title or two missing. Lord knows I didn’t get to play Operation Darkness, but a WWII-based tactical RPG featuring vampires and dragons can’t be totally without merit, can it? The running theme binding all of these selections together is that I played and enjoyed each and every one of them. So please, feel free to append your own choices in the comments section below.

Viking: Battle for Asgard (released March 25, 2008)

A third-person, open-world action/stealth-RPG published by Sega and developed by Total War architects Creative Assembly. I simply don’t understand the lack of love Viking received. Set across three wide-open maps, the goal throughout is to continually build your Viking army (and your viking avatar Skarin), the better to crush enemy-held camps, villages and castles in epic-scale invasions. The combat is pretty brutal too, with slow-mo decapitations and limb removals serving as the norm.

AWAY: Shuffle Dungeon (released October 30, 2008)

Mistwalker’s/Artoon’s Nintendo DS-exclusive AWAY: Shuffle Dungeon was released at the worst possible moment, arriving the same week that Fallout 3 hit stores. What’s more, I think people may have been frightened off by the simplistic, overly cutesy visuals. It’s too bad for that; AWAY ‘s dual-screen dungeon shuffling and between-dungeon city-building makes for incredibly addictive, and frequently challenging, gameplay.

Bangai-O Spirits (released August 12, 2008)

Treasure’s original Bangai-O hit North American Dreamcasts in March, 2001, the same month that the console was to be discontinued here. Its DS-exclusive sequel Bangai-O Spirits features 160 levels plus a full-featured level editor. User-created content can even be shared as sound clips, which can be recorded into another DS via its integrated microphone. At first glance, the game seems like a standard 360-degree scrolling 2D shooter, but a variety of weapon effects, environmental features and enemy strengths/weaknesses create a distinctly puzzler-like dynamic.

Chronotron (released May 2008)

I tried this here Flash game months ago on Kongregate because of good advertising. Chronotron drew me in with a Simpsons reference headlining its description: “It’s about a robot that goes back in time for some reason. (His best friend is a talking pie!)” While I never did find the referenced talking pie, I did find a game which toys with time-based puzzle play in a way very similar to another fairly popular 2008 release, Jonathan Blow’s Braid. This one’s free though, meaning all you have to do is click right here to play it.

The Club (released February 19, 2008)

Bizarre Creations’ The Club is definitely a flawed game, though the core ideas were sound. It’s essentially The Running Man in video game form, mixing the thrill of wanton virtual violence with a racing game-like focus on running laps and time trials through the carnage. All of the festivities are overseen by a disembodied booming announcer’s voice (think Unreal Tournament or Mortal Kombat). Unfortunately, the multiplayer was a flat-out missed opportunity. For a game so rooted in the mentality of classic arcade games, it’s criminal that the only online play options were sorry, utterly generic modes cut from the deathmatch/team deathmatch cloth.

Hail to the Chimp (released June 24, 2008)

Wideload Games’ hilarious Hail to the Chimp remains my favorite party game of 2008. The basic idea of animals duking it out for control of the clam vote – and thus, the Animal Kingdom – in the wake of the lion king’s departure is great on its own. The metric ton of game modes onhand in Hail is further supplemented by fantastic writing. Not only is each candidate realized as a unique, wacky persona – from Floyd the Walrus’s new age ramblings to Murgatroyd the Jellyfish’s incomprehensible burblings – but there’s roughly 90 minutes of hilarious animal kingdom television to be unlocked in a cable guide-like interface.

Korg DS-10 (released November 4, 2008)

There are quite a few DS titles on this list, and with good cause. No gaming platform has exhibited more flexibility than the DS. Sure, it can play games. But it can also do any number of other things, such as fully emulate the Korg MS-20 synthesizer in AQ Interactive’s Korg DS-10. A series of virtual knobs, dials and switches result in a pitch-perfect (no pun intended) digital re-creation of Korg’s excellent, oft-sampled classic synth. Beware though: an aptitude for composition or at least some willingness to learn are required to reap the full range of benefits that Korg DS-10 has to offer.

N+ (released February 20, 2008)

Okay, Metanet Software’s N+ wasn’t exactly underappreciated when it hit Xbox Live Arcade back in February. The simple-yet-stylish platformer starring a stick figure ninja scored high with critics and even garnered a Game of the Year nomination or two in recent weeks. Feb ‘08 is a long time ago however, and much has been released since then to push N+ aside in many gamer’s hearts. Seeing as how N+ offers four-player co-op, a full-featured level editor, online leaderboards featuring full replay videos and – let’s face it – some of the most downright challenging arcade-style gameplay outside of Treasure, I felt that one more end of year mention was in order.

Rise of the Argonauts (December 16, 2008)

Had Liquid Entertainment’s Rise of the Argonauts been released two or three years ago, it would have been a smash hit. Perhaps even an early 2008 release – or early 2009, as was originally intended – would have been better for it. Instead, Rise came along at the tail end of 2008 – fraught with the bugs of an unfinished work no less – and will likely fade into obscurity as a result. That’s a crying shame, since (tech troubles aside) Rise of the Argonauts is an extremely competent action-RPG set in a fantasy-world version of ancient Greece. It may be imperfect, but it’s a damn good time with its satisfyingly gory combat and atypical RPG mechanics which are based on the ties you build with one of four Greek deities.

Spider-Man: Web of Shadows (released October 21, 2008)

Shaba Games’ Spider-Man: Web of Shadows is also imperfect, but it gets two very important things right. The first, web-swinging, is nothing new; Shaba worked closely with the usual Spidey dev, Treyarch, to implement their excellent web mechanics for speeding through New York City’s urban jungle. The second however is all Shaba. In Web of Shadows we finally have a Spidey game where fighting as the webcrawler feels right. An incredibly well-conceived combo system gives players the ability to wipe out entire gangs of nameless cronies without ever once setting foot on the ground. For any other troubles weighing the experience down, swinging and flinging are both incredibly entertaining.

Silent Hill: Homecoming (released September 30, 2008)

Is it fair to call Homecoming the best Silent Hill game since the second one? I really want to know, as I’ve never played 2 in its entirety. I can tell you this though: Silent Hill: Homecoming is exemplary survival horror, by far the most well-executed example of sticking to genre tenets that I’ve seen in years. Perfect pacing and elaborate level designs lie at the core of Homecoming’s dark, twisted heart. Really, I’ve said all of this before, and recently, on UGO’s Gamesblog.

What’s Cooking? with Jamie Oliver (released October 21, 2008)

I can hear some of your snickers from here. A freakin’ cooking game? Well, no. See, it’s not really a game. This is the thing about the DS. It can play games, but it can also run a variety of useful apps. What’s Cooking? is best described as an interactive recipe book. Sure you can do virtual practice runs for one recipe or another in a game-like space, but that’s kinda besides the point. What’s Cooking? features a powerful set of filtering options for its cookbook, a built-in cooking timer and ingredient shopping lists. It’s not perfect – where, for example, are pictorial examples for some of the more difficult procedures – but it represents yet another compelling step towards a more multi-functional future for the Nintendo DS.

Prince of Persia’s Touch of Orientalism

A couple weeks ago I reviewed Prince of Persia for Nerve’s 61 FPS blog, a site well worth checking out for their decidedly atypical video games coverage. Back on Persia, it’s a fun sort of spectacle-heavy game, though it did ultimately leave me dissatisfied with the distinct imbalance between risk and reward. In my final assessment, I characterized the game as a massive dynamic Quick-Time Event with environmental signifiers replacing the usual on-screen button prompts.

It also became increasingly clear as I played that the game’s newly reworked Prince – transformed here into a loudmouth wisecracker – contains the DNA for the likely character to be played by Jake Gyllenhaal in 2009’s summer adaptation of the franchise. The in-game avatar bears more than a passing resemblance to the movie star, especially when he opens his mouth and the snark begins to flow. Had Prince of Persia (the game) dropped a good six months later, I’ve little doubt that we would have seen Gyllenhaal credited for likeness and voice acting contributions.

This brings me in a very roundabout way – I promise, I’ll get back there – to New York Times video game correspondent Seth Schiesel’s Prince of Persia review. I missed this piece when it was published on Christmas Eve, but I have Destructoid’s Jim Sterling to thank for bringing it to my attention in a post published late yesterday.

In his write-up, Schiesel explains that the Prince comes off to him as a “17-year-old American mall rat,” which he regards as a problematic characterization. The Prince’s “blue eyes, Anglicized facial features and what looks like a tan he picked up on spring break” are all indicators of an irresponsible treatment of the real-world culture referenced in the game’s title. He further claims that this Americanized Prince speaks to a general ignorance of Eastern cultures in the West, invoking theorist Edward Said’s notion of Orientalism.

Breaking it down into the simplest terms, “Orientalism” refers to a general misconception that the “Orient” – a dated term of reference relating to the peoples of the Middle East and Asia – represents a single cultural body rather than the diverse groups actually residing in those locations. Said theorized in his 1978 book Orientalism that the West’s fetishization of Eastern culture during the early 20th century was primarily a sort of subconscious “political doctrine” rooted in a perceived Western dominance over foreign cultures, particularly the East. More contemporary examples of Orientalism, which have cast the “Arab” as a menacing figure, are an extension of this idea.

The essential point Said was making with Orientalism was that in creating a Them, you – meaning we – define an Us. That’s about the quickest and dirtiest way to break it down for y’all. Schiesel states that as a result of these underlying tensions, he has “never been fully comfortable approaching the Prince of Persia games simply as a diversion.” He might well be onto something here, but I’m still going to cry mountains out of molehills.

The Prince of Persia franchise is now almost 20 years old. Perhaps there were traces of that old Orientalism in Jordan Mechner’s original inspiration for the series, but I would argue that more recent entries – starting with 2003’s The Sands of Time – have simply cashed in on brand recognition. The latest game, which intentionally spins off in a new direction from the Sands-Warrior-Two Thrones trilogy, does indeed sport a decidedly more Western flavor. However, I would argue that this is predominantly the result of Hollywood’s newfound involvement with the franchise as opposed to any ongoing cultural ignorance.

Our brand new wisecracking game-Prince is the stuff of movie posters and action figures. The upcoming Gyllenhaal vehicle looks to feed into that as a pure Summer Blockbuster, a glossy, spectacle-heavy fantasy-action flick. See? I told you we’d be back here.

Hollywood blockbusters cater to the broadest possible audiences by design. Particularly for a spectacle-driven release like Prince of Persia, star power and culturally relevant tropes are requirements for building mainstream appeal. The game may or may not directly inform the plot of the film, but I feel that the game will at least lay the groundwork for the film’s tone.

I also wonder if it’s even fair to castigate this individual game when the medium at large hasn’t evolved to the point for distinct national identities to have developed. In today’s world of gaming, there are two basic types of mainstream games: Japanese works and Everything Else. The latter category tends to be targeted primarily at American and European consumers.

Schiesel states in his conclusion that “simply being a video game is no longer sufficient to earn a pass from being held to account for shaping…perceptions and attitudes.” While he’s certainly correct there, I would counter that his criticisms in this particular case are misdirected.

Prince of Persia has become a Product of the mass media entertainment culture. Even if underlying biases continue to shape the tone and feel of the game-world, I don’t get a sense that the “perceptions and attitudes” which Schiesel references are being shaped in the execution. It’s clear to me in the playing that Prince of Persia is a work of pure fantasy, influenced first and foremost by its run through the Hollywood blockbuster mill.

I don’t entirely disagree with Schiesel, but the unwritten message between his lines seems to be lobbying for a name change. Perhaps there’s an argument for abandoning the Prince of Persia title in light of ongoing cultural tensions, but it’s just not going to happen. This is a brand that’s been established over the course of two decades. Building on that pre-existing popularity to sell a new product… hell, that’s capitalism defined.

What do you readers think of Schiesel’s indictment? Did you pick up on any of those underlying tensions as you played through the most recent Prince of Persia? How about its predecessors? Would a name change extinguish these concerns? Can you even see that happening? And finally, what do you see as the primary justification for the shift in tone as the series has moved from the Sands-Warrior-Two Thrones trilogy to 2008’s Prince of Persia?

R.I.P. Josip Idromeno

Nothing in video games this year filled me with more respect and unbound enthusiasm for the medium than when comrade-in-arms Josip Idremeno died in my arms. It was dark, late in the evening, when I found him buttoned down by enemy fire on a starlit African hillside. I immediately opened up with my AK, drawing fire away from my Buddy and eventually turning the tide of the battle.

I didn’t see Josip again until the last body fell, a few short meters away from his prone, writhing form. I rushed over to help, feverishly pumping syrette after syrette of healing fluid into my wounded friend. Alas, my efforts proved to be in vain. Josip expired a short time later and I could do no more than watch helplessly as my in-game counterpart gently brushed his hands over Josip’s eyes, closing them for the last time.

A strangely hollow feeling overwhelmed as I followed my map to the nearest safe house. Not quite raw grief, but something considerably more powerful than disappointment that my African adventure through Far Cry 2 would continue on with one less ally at my side. In short, I had somehow come to care for my virtual friend’s well-being.

Prior to his death, Josip and I had collaborated on a number of operations. I saved his life several times before his untimely passing, often throwing myself into greater danger than I normally would simply to draw fire away from him. He in turn offered me multiple opportunities to build my reputation, making my search for the notorious arms dealer known as the Jackal that much easier. A real emotional connection had been established through these shared experiences.

Even the creeping presence of gameplay constructs didn’t diminish the impact of Josip’s loss. It was clear after I hit him with the first healing syrette that a happy ending was not in store for Mr. Idromeno. Normally a guaranteed life-saver, the syrette did nothing on this occasion. So I hit him with another. And then another. I knew they wouldn’t work – especially since my stock of three syrettes did not change after each injection – but it didn’t stop me from hoping they would.

When it was at last clear that nothing could be done, a final syrette was used – this time depleting my stock by one – to ease Josip’s passing. The only difference between that final injection and the failed life-saving attempts which preceded it was that I’d elected this time (with a button press) to send my Buddy into the sweet hereafter. Despite this very obvious element of artifice, I just couldn’t shake that hollow feeling as I trudged to my safe house save point.

It’s the strongest emotional gut-punch I’ve experienced from a video game since the death of Aeris in Final Fantasy VII. Only this time the choice was left entirely in my hands. Artificial or not, my connection with Josip was one I had actively cultivated by choosing to work with him and coming to help when asked. Far Cry 2 isn’t exactly being hailed as the year’s ultimate gaming experience, but I don’t have to think for more than a second or two when asked what the standout gaming moment of the year was for me.

Did anyone else out there in the ‘Sphere have a similar experience with Far Cry 2? Or any other game? If you had to pick one standout gaming moment for 2008 – not a full game mind you, but rather a single memorable event – what would it be?

Review Symposium in Review

Hmmm.  I’ve been walking the razor’s edge these past few days, teetering between opening my big yap or just letting things play out as they will.  Seeing as how I’m off to parts unknown tomorrow – meaning the haters among you will have to find me first! – I figure now’s as good a time as any to speak my mind.

May as well get straight to the point:  I’ve got some issues with Shawn Elliott’s Review Symposium.  I have nothing but respect for the assembled players, but I think the indigestible length of Part One proves there’s a real need to re-examine the current approach.  I can only hope Elliott is treating this as a constantly evolving entity, so that we might see some changes implemented before this golden opportunity to explore the divisive topic of video game Reviewing-Slash-Criticism reaches its end.

For starters, I think there are some conspicuous absences in the roster of collected speakers.  The participating players are almost exclusively professional critics/journalists.  Necessary cogs no doubt, but the end result after Part One has created a decidedly limited perspective on things.  I find it incredible, for example, that Part One of this Symposium – in which the value of review scores was questioned – never once touched on the distinct aura of mistrust surrounding mainstream game criticism.  That example isn’t even my observation, but rather an idea presented by a commenter on the Neogaf gaming forums.  I had a nice little facepalm after I read that; of course there’s a lack of trust.  Look at Barrington Harvey.  Gerstmann-Gate.  Any number of other, similar incidents.

And that’s kind of my point.  I think this discussion would be strengthened considerably by a more diverse selection of speakers.  People like theoriticians Espen Aarseth or Henry Jenkins.  Industry analyst Michael Pachter.  A ranking PR/publisher rep or two.  And definitely some articulate gamers, as in people with no connection to the industry beyond an intense love for its output.  All of these people spend a significant portion of their days thinking about games in some way, but not necessarily with the same point of view.  Having their input would provide an invaluable counterpoint to the generally like-minded roster which is currently in place.

I also think the straight-up presentation of the Symposium is far too imposing.  There are nearly 15,000 words in the wall of text comprising Part One, the first of eight sections.  There’s no convenient way to navigate through individual responses in the current setup and a single comments section at the bottom is hardly ideal for granting readers a place to respond and discuss.  Perhaps the Symposium should have been broken up into a series of smaller posts?  Maybe even posted piecemeal on a range of different blogs, all linking to one another?  Hell, each contributor could create their own Symposium-specific blog – it is free after all – and share thoughts in a discussion staged across a whole network of web pages.  It’s rough idea and I’m sure that plenty of holes could be poked in it, but it sure sounds like a more approachable arrangement doesn’t it?

Again, I have the utmost respect for the assembled players and I really do think they’re pushing a solid agenda.  The fracas over video game reviewing/criticism has been raging for far too long; clearly, a large group of people are not content with the way things are.  That said, I think the current format of the Review Symposium has so far accomplished little more than pushing the dead horse ideas around in a vacuum.  Even if you put aside the unwieldy presentation, the absence of input from the full spectrum of the video game industry has thus far condemned what could have been an enlightening, provocative discussion to a whole lot more of that same-old, same-old.

What do you readers think?  Did you walk away from Part One with any valuable new insights, ideas which haven’t been discussed at great length over the past year or so?  Were you able to read the entire thing?  Did you skim, or perhaps skip around to read your favorite writers’ words?  What do you think is lacking, if anything, in the format or design of this ambitious Review Symposium?