Weekend Confirmed Episode 37

By Garnett Lee, Dec 03, 2010 12:00pm PST Fix yourself one last leftover turkey and stuffing sandwich and get ready for a great show. Epic Mickey and Gran Turismo 5 both arrived and headline this week's Whatcha' Been Playin? In the Warning Jeff's return to World of Warcraft gets things started and then it's on to your thoughts on having fun versus being competitive. Sales for Move and Kinect, a new squad-based shooter from Yakuza's creator, and the rest of the week's videogame news bring the show home in the Front Page.

Weekend Confirmed Ep. 37 - 12/03/2010

Subscription Links:

We've got a handy player to listen to the show right here on the site if you like:
Listen to Weekend Confirmed Episode 37 (player window will pop-up)

And if you're on GameCenter, you can play the show here:
Download Weekend Confirmed Episode 37

Weekend Confirmed comes in four segments to make it easy to listen to in segments or all at once. Here's the timing for this week's episode:

Whatcha' Been Playin: Start: 00:00:00 End: 00:30:08

Whatcha' Been Playin and Cannata-ford a New Game: Start: 00:31:12 End: 01:02:04

The Warning: Start: 01:02:56 End: 01:34:40

Music Break featuring "Let Me Put You at Ease": 01:34:40 End: 01:37:50

The Front Page: Start: 01:37:50 End: 02:08:37

NFL 'Tailgate': Start: 02:09:39 End: 02:18:23

Music Break this week features "Let Me Put You at Ease" by Jonathan Carter aka graphicnapkin. For more, check out his official site and follow him on Twitter.

Original music in the show by Del Rio. Get his latest single, Small Town Hero on iTunes. Check out more, including the Super Mega Worm mix and other mash-ups on his ReverbNation page or Facebook page.

Jeff can also be seen on The Totally Rad Show. They've gone daily so there's a new segment to watch every day of the week!

Our Official Facebook Weekend Confirmed Page is coming along now so add us to your Facebook routine. We'll be keeping you up with the latest on the show there as well.

Click here to comment...

Comments

See All Comments | 58 Threads | 216 Comments
  • This is a general Weekend Confirmed comment that applies to a lot of things being said in previous shows...most times by Garnett. First, I love the show and listen to every post, even though the argument bias can be frustrating sometimes (ex: like how the PS trophy "Level" system was deemed worthless in one show, but the overall XBL gamerscore was considered a great way to track overall progress in another...I believe both statements were made by Kanada, but I'm not positive. Oh and btw...I think both PSN trophies and XBL achievements are near worthless, so hopefully any fanboys can stop crying out troll).

    ANYWAY, that being said. Garnett, although I thoroughly agree with you that developers should push what can be done in games, especially when it comes to player choice/consequence...I think we as the game players often forget what is required to do that. All game devs are under the same restrictions: time & budget.

    This article got me thinking: http://gameinternals.com/post/2072558330/understanding-pac-man-ghost-behavior

    I saw how incredibly complex programming for a "simple" game of pacman is. Some of the requests that we make as gamers would just fall short of requiring game manufacturers to be capable of creating true AI. Having a game where your one decision at any given moment would change every conversation, quest, geographical location...is an undertaking beyond what can be accomplished by a game developer. We have to remember that a writer for that type of game would never finish the story, because it would have near infinite endings...let alone the guy(s) who have to code that stuff.

    Although we should keep pushing and expect more out of our developers, we have to remember the ultimate cliche saying of "Rome wasn't built in a day". We complained about the delays of GT5, but could you imagine the length of time that it would have taken for Fable 3 to come out if everything and anything could be changed on the fly by the player? Peter Molyneux tends to dream like that (aloud) and I think he "gets" what we want, but if he can't produce it, and even abandoned his Milo project, it says something to how difficult a task it is...ESPECIALLY when budget/marketing/time restrictions are involved. Game producers only know that COD:BO sold a TON withOUT all of that "player choice" so do we ever think that a producer will care enough to sink millions of dollars and several years (maybe even a decade) into an "ultimate choose your own adventure" game that still may or may not sell?

    All things having been said, my point is this... when we as gamers talk about what would make a game better, we should also keep in mind the business/logistics side of things and not expect a developer to be able to deliver a mind-blowing, unbelievable game with infinite choices...in a little over a year and under budget.

    Thread Truncated. Click to see all 6 replies.

    • "[We should] not expect a developer to be able to deliver a mind-blowing, unbelievable game with infinite choices...in a little over a year and under budget."

      --Oh, definitely. There are a myriad of reasons for why this line of thinking has become a little more commonplace in our gaming circles. We would be better to have more realistic expectations than to expect Alpha Protocol to fight in the same weight class as Mass Effect. Luckily, this is where we look to our gaming history to quell our desire for depth!

      In the ye olde days of gaming, we depended on a past-time we now call emergent gameplay, as you all know. The game simply could not give us enough, so what separated the good games from the great games were how the game facilitated our imagination and let it "fill in the blanks", so to speak. With the advent of Minecraft, I advocate a return to the line of thinking that says, "Well, maybe we shouldn't be competing on that front unless we really know what we're getting in to." Mass Effect and BLOPS are great in their respective ways and I know it can scratch an itch that the other can't. So instead of expecting a universality to a professional game experience, we should embrace these differences (NOT shortcomings) and give credit where credit is due.

      But, we kinda know this already. It's just difficult sometimes when we get all excited because games have pushed us further than yesterday; that this golden age of gaming has us so blasted out of our expectations that we begin to falter on our expectations. We're so desensitized from the awesomeness that we're getting from games that we mistakenly come to "anticipate" and call it "expectation". If we take a step back for a day or two and breathe deep in our games, we'll stagger at just how fantastic our games are and there's never been a better time to game than now. Better than complaining about the closed narrative of BLOPS, we should think "Oh, hell yeah I'm SO glad they crafted this experience for me. I can't wait for the next one!" There's fun to be had, so let's seize it and not lament what we didn't get.

      Also, yeah the whole logistics of game design, production, and everything contribute to the limitations on a game. If we really don't like it, we could always table-top game and let our imaginations obliterate invisible walls and bad voiceacting. HAYOOO