Marek

http://www.americanmcgee.com/wordpress/?p=81#comments ha!

What I think is pretty awesome is not just that Peter Jackson hand-picked Ancel to do this game, but that he decided to do so after EA totally shut him out from the LOTR games. If EA hadn't screwed up, UbiSoft/Ancel would not have gotten King Kong, but the license would have gone to EA as they're regarded as sort of the default big movie franchise game publisher. Obviously some director's ego might have been part of this, but it's funny how EA doesn't seem to get along with Jackson, Coppola, etc. (This and more in the current issue of Wired by the way. Wuxtry!)

This will sound weird but ... board games... card games... D&D (never done roleplaying, actually). I feel like I've been ignoring those a lot. If I want to play a board game I usually just play something familiar, like RISK which I've known forever. Same with card games. All I ever play is Chinese poker and I never bother investing time to learn any other card games from anyone. Though this holiday I did try one of those board games from that famous German guy, which was good, and also some weirdass bean trading game which was totally hilarious and awesome. I don't have quite as strong experiences of ignoring things in video games. There are some genres I generally avoid though, not because I have an unfounded bias against them, but simply because I've tried such games and not liked them much. This goes for a lot of driving, sports and beat 'em ups (like Street Fighter etc.). There may also be other things I'm not necesserily going to check out myself (I dunno ... Pokemon? Obscure interactive fiction? Fishing simulators?) but which I would definitely at least try for a bit if someone introduced them to me. Hmmm. Mentioning beat 'em ups made me remember that I do enjoy brawlers, even though I've played very few. Have there been any good 2D brawlers on any platforms recently? Sorry for free associating for half this post.

It's one of those things that's only funny when you know a lot about these personalities (e.g. it helps to have seen Iwata's GDC keynote), so it might not be for everyone, but I sure did enjoy it.

I'll just have to last word so that neither side has

Sorry I deleted my Resident Evil 4 reference just after posting that. (I said that I thought it was a perfect example of what's right in games; the level design, atmosphere, camera, controls, etc. But that I also wished there were less games about zombies and other things we've seen a thousand times.) I do not hate zombies, but I'm getting pretty tired of them. I don't think you could justify a new zombie game series right now without giving it a unique twist. Put some zombies on a fucking plane or something. Call it Zombie Plane. If the pilot is infected, you have to kill him and land the plane yourself. It's a flight sim FPS.

I think game design has improved by MILES AND MILES AND MILES in terms of the actual contents of a game. Level design, world design, interface design, etc. have all gotten dramatically better. Many old games were awesome, but a lot of them also cheated by having you do the same things in roughly the same environments forever. Back then this was still acceptable, but not today. People demand varied, compelling gameplay in a variety of settings and mostly that's what we're getting. The mission design of the modern GTA games is something we could only dream of 15 years ago. Just compare Wolfenstein 3D to Return to Castle Wolfenstein, delete nostalgia from the equation, and then tell me which you'd rather play. (Hint: it's not Wolfenstein 3D, or you're lying.) That said, I feel that when the industry was younger, there was a higher chance of interesting concepts worming their way through the system. Back then it was easier to say "LET'S MAKE A GAME ABOUT XYZ OMG!" and get it done, which led to a few creative disasters, but also some real gems that would never ever get funded today. Maybe I'll comment on the industry crashing bit later, but I really need to get back to work.

Vimes ... saw your sig ... in that San Andreas mission just be sure you turn around back towards San Andreas before the plane passes you. That way you'll be next to or slightly in front of the plane. Now you'll have plenty of time to slow down or accelerate to make it to the ring. Just ... in case you were stuck there.

If you need any hints let me know. I had to consult a walkthrough for some puzzles towards the end that were required some major out-of-the-box thinking. You might have stumbled upon the same ones.

Wow lots of obscure events there. The Game Technology Expo 2005 in Moscow? ... Oh man, Microsoft X05 in Amsterdam, Pays-Bas. You have no idea how frustrating it is to have such a high-profile event right on your doorstep and not be invited. (I guess Microsoft did invite me to something else in London but it's not quite as cool.)

Eh it's alright. I thought the combat system was really tedious. It's got nice graphics and it's certainly well-made considering it runs on Flash, but I got bored pretty quickly. Edit: oh, I guess your sole reason for being here is to promote this game. Nice use of the fartey though.

Any game that has the goal of making people cry, or teaching people about some high-level idea about the life, the universe or everything (see: Why games feel irrelevant?) has a high chance of failure. Pushing philosophical points, or pushing tears, are terrible conceptual starting points. Things will come across as contrived or cheap. More generally speaking, I believe that a lot of video games could benefit from more universal stories about characters with real lives and real motivations. Once we get some more humanity into games, more of them will become genuinely meaningful to people. That's not to say there isn't a place for stories in which the president's daughter gets kidnapped so she can be injected with a zombie virus so that she can be brought back to America and infect everyone (wtf?), but it would be dissapointing if stories in games remain monopolized by the plot-centric action variety.

The Games Convention that was just held in Leipzig is probably your best bet. It's primarily a consumer show, but there's also some business and press going-ons, which means it's a bit more exciting than most consumer shows. (Companies bring more exclusive stuff to the show etc.) This knowledge comes second-hand though, as my schedule hasn't allowed me to go there yet. However, as a general rule, expos suck. Not all of them are as bad as E3, but they're always at least pretty bad. At GDC it's the conference you'll want to check out. Don't bother going with an expo-only pass. A friend of mine did the volunteer thing and said it was pretty crappy (you'll miss 80% of the conference). But if you can somehow get inside the conference with the student program that's great. As a student you'll probably have an easy time getting into a DiGRA conference. I was there when it was first held and I only had to pay admission and show a student ID. Be warned though, the lectures can be really slow and academic. But it's a lot better than going to an expo.

When a company feels it's necessary to make such statements, the opposite of what they say is often true...

I like your site's design, and its intentions are really good (so I wish you all the best with it!), but its title or slogans aren't really appealing to me. GAMES ARE ART! is a bit of an empty statement. It's like saying motion pictures are art, or canvases, or videotape. Games aren't art. They aren't not art either. As a medium they can be anything, so it seems a given that they CAN be art? Posing the question 'is it art?' usually spins the debate into much less productive territory than simply asking why a game is interesting or why you care about it more than others. Instead of the implication that there needs to be a general concensus on whether something is art, you can just share your personal experiences of the work in question. I find this more insightful and leads to much less time being wasted on circular high-level discussions. Don't get me wrong, I get what you're trying to do. I think it's very important to look at video games in more than the usual way. Intelligent writing about video games will help form a better awareness of the "video game aesthetic", or whatever you might call it. But I think that's a constant gradual process we're all part of, and it doesn't really need any screaming manifestos of this kind. I guess I would've liked the site better if its message were a lot less overt, and if it were called ... say ... hambob. Hope you don't mind me ranting about it and I certainly hope it doesn't discourage you, cause the more indie sites the better. Anyway, yeah, I'll go back minding my own website now. Sorry about that.

Google is slowly taking over the world. But... they're doing good to the internet. This Google Talk thing runs on the Jabber open standard, which means it could give rise to tons of new Jabber clients and maybe even result in a universally accepted IM protocol (much like how WWW, Usenet, IRC, e-mail etc. are universal). That's a Good Thing.

Yeah, this is getting ridiculous. Everyone quit your jobs.

That was a really good read. (It's fun reading polished final articles by you and not having the experience spoiled by having seen earlier drafts.) I think the "audience already being there" bit is extremely true. I long for the day the whole game industry system realizes just that.

Uhh yeah, I'm fairly excited about Nintendogs. I can't predict whether I will actually like it, but playing it sounds worth it even just for research.

Aug. 22: Advance Wars: Dual Strike from Nintendo Aug. 22: Nintendogs from Nintendo Aug. 23: Pac n' Roll from Namco August: Yu-Gi-Oh! Nightmare Troubadour from Konami Sept. 19: Tak: The Great Juju Challenge from THQ Sept. 26: Trace Memory from Nintendo September: Lunar Dragon Song from Ubisoft September: Ultimate Spider-Man from Activision Oct. 17: Scooby-Doo! Unmasked from THQ Oct. 24: Metroid Prime Pinball from Nintendo Oct. 24: Real Time Conflict: Shogun Empires from Namco October: Marvel Nemesis: Rise of the Imperfects from Electronic Arts October: Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney from Capcom October: Texas Hold 'Em from Majesco October: Trauma Center: Under the Knife from Atlus Nov. 1: SeaWorld: Shamu's Big Adventure from Activision Nov. 1: The Incredibles: Rise of the Underminer from THQ Nov. 7: SpongeBob SquarePants: The Yellow Avenger from THQ Nov. 9: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire from Electronic Arts Nov. 14: Mario Kart DS from Nintendo Nov. 28: Mario & Luigi: Partners in Time from Nintendo November: Disney's Kim Possible: Kimmunicator from Buena Vista Games November: Dragon Ball Z: Supersonic Warriors 2 from Atari November: King Kong from Ubisoft November: Mega Man Battle Network 5: Double Team from Capcom November: Need for Speed: Most Wanted from Electronic Arts November: Pac-Man World 3 from Namco November: SBK: Snowboard Kids DS from Atlus November: Sonic Rush from Sega November: The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe from Buena Vista Games November: Viewtiful Joe Double Trouble from Capcom Dec. 5: Animal Crossing from Nintendo December: Golden Nugget Casino from Majesco December: Ultimate Card Games from Telegames Fall: ATV: Quad Frenzy from Majesco Fall: Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow from Konami Fall: Dig Dug Digging Strike from Namco Fall: Dragon Booster from Konami Fall: Frogger: Helmet Chaos from Konami Fall: Shrek SuperSlam from Activision Fall: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 3: Mutant Nightmare from Konami Fall: The Sims 2 from Electronic Arts Fall: Tony Hawk (working title) from Activision Fall: Zoo Tycoon from THQ Q4: Blades of Thunder 2 from Summitsoft Q4: Mini RC Rally from Summitsoft Q4: Texas Hold 'Em Poker Pack from Summitsoft January: Age of Empires: The Age of Kings from Majesco January: Bust-A-Move from Majesco January: Guilty Gear Dust Strikers from Majesco Q1 2006: Dynasty Warriors (working title) from Koei Q1 2006: Metroid Prime Hunters from Nintendo Q1 2006: Ultimate Brain Games from Telegames Early 2006: Nicktoons Unite! from THQ

Another wonderful 1up one-sheet article. I never talk to game store clerks. Do you?

Season two started this week on the Sci-fi channel. If you like character-focused science fiction like Firefly you should probably watch it. It is also a story about a spaceship (or actually spaceships) on the run, though it doesn't have that high-spirited action/adventure flavor of Firefly and is mostly very dark, gritty and political. There's still some aspects of the series that I don't really like, which I assume are mostly conceptual or visual leftovers from the original 70ies version (I didn't see this version and probably won't ever watch it). But the series overall is extremely strong and very character-focused. It has a very strong sense of direction and continuity. I'm enjoying it a lot. I think there's only been one weak episode during the whole first season - all the other ones were totally amazing. One aspect of the production I really like is the relatively low number of technological gimmicks. They made up this thing that they can't use networked computers on the ship or the Cylons (the robots that are after them) will hack it and take control. So even though they're in this futuristic ship they use real phones, paper notes, marker boards, etc.

... well, apparently there is one, but I haven't read it. According to the postmortem's fact sheet the game cost 11.8 million to make.

Something makes me think B5's influence on DS9 has been way exaggerated by sci-fi fans over the years. Maybe it proved the viability of non-episodic sci-fi to conservative execs, but I doubt B5 originally inspired DS9's non-episodic direction. (Or inspired the idea of having a space station, which isn't quite the kind of genius avant garde idea you have to steal from anyone.) If you actually go back and watch the season 1 DS9 finale, or the season 2 opening trilogy, you can already tell where the series was moving towards. Very political, very continuous, etc. But I guess the Star Trek heritage held them back. I think the major contributing factor to DS9 going totally non-episodic was Voyager starting up, which sucked Rick Berman's attention away and allowed Ira Steven Behr to gradually take the show where it was supposed to go. Anyway, hurray for geeky discussions.