Weekend Confirmed 163 - Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon, Monaco, Marvel Heroes

The show need a new segment "1st world problems with Jeff cannata" seriously those are all just on point. Nobody likes to change inputs if you've got five you have to wait like 5 flips, then god forbid you pass the one your looking for go through them all again F that!

wow garnett such a ps fanboy, are you kidding me live is the most dominant online gaming service on any platform. you are the one that said it was the year of the ps3 for 8 years now and i'm still waiting for that to happen. next xbox will destroy ps4. good luck promoting your fanboism of a loser ps4.

Xbox live has plenty of diversity, Sony has little to no advantage on that. What lacks diversity is the product gamers consume and play. The list is so shooter heavy, because that's what gamers want, and that's what gamers play.

This whole argument about wanting consoles that only play games is silly. That's not how the trend in technology goes. The majority of consumers want devices that do as many things as possible. That may not be what "hardcore" gamers want, but this is a problem with our community (of core gamers, not specifically this community; I see this on other forums, too): people who identify themselves as "core" gamers believe that they move the industry. They do not. It doesn't matter if you don't want social aspects on your console; the less hardcore crowd does. There are a lot more of them.

We often forget this. People who spend their time participating in video game forums and listening to (or making) video game podcasts are *not* the majority of gamers. When we talk about what "average gamers" want, we tend to forget that we are not average gamers.

http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/patrice-desilets-isn-t-with-ubisoft-anymore/1100-4634/

Sigh... looks like Ubisoft is pulling an Activision and pissing all over the talent responsible for a great deal of their success.

Patrice Desilets created arguably their most successful property EVER in Assassin's Creed.

The notion that a publisher not only can't make it work with him in order to give him the chance to repeat that success is stupid, but the idea that they would go so far as to blatantly screw him over in the process is just absurd to me.

I'm interested to see if any other information about this comes out, but until it does, I stand firmly with Patrice Desilets and hope to see him regain control of the projects that he conceptualized to begin with.

2 quick thoughts one for indie Jeff the Internet most of America can't access for always on, but everyone now owns "Smart TVs"? No those aren't expensive at all right lol. That's why the console do everything is more important then it just plays games.

Second on the WiiU its sales struggle and wonderful 101 not being out. First it literally hasn't had 1st party software since day one. Sales will spike upon every new Nintendo release. Lets talk launches now I have to wait one year to be right, but the new consoles not going to have game til holiday 2014. Big droughts happen think the wonderful 101 is bad, lets just look at Dragons Crown a vita launch day release. It's what launches look like even if games are ready install bases aren't so games are delayed until they have a audience to sell too.

So I just finished Far Cry 3 last night. Took about 45 hours (I cleared the first island but kind of raced through the second) and by the end, had forgotten about the ambitions the story had to be "commentary." Then the last ten minutes...reminded me. To avoid spoiling the ending I'll just say I think it failed completely at what it was trying to 'say,' while still being a very fun game. But it made me wonder if a triple-a title is every really going to be able to function as subversive socially commentary.

So for those who haven't played it (and again avoiding spoilers) the game embraces a bunch of video game and movie cliches: it's the story of a 25 year old white American rescuing an oppressed native tribe on a third world island. There's a beautiful native princess. A mystical benevolent african american character. Etc. The problem is of my playtime I spent 40+ hours PLAYING these cliches. They engaged with me in a fun way and a straight face in a game that was very fun and engaging. Until the last 1 or 2 missions of the main story when the game built to what felt like an unmotivated climax. [THERE IS A MILD SPOILER AFTER THIS TEXT] The end of the game features a choice, and the one that invokes the proper "commentary" ending asks you to do something that made me feel gross. If you choose the other the story just ends in total anticlimax. [HERE ENDETH THE MILD SPOILER]

The other triple-a game with similar aspirations that jumps to mind is Spec Ops. Spec Ops had the opposite problem for me. It was a well-told story but I find the gameplay itself exhausting and a grind. That exhaustion actually SERVED the story but didn't make for an experience I wanted to keep coming back to in the evenings.

I'm really excited that we've entered an era where technology is allowing designers to have greater aspirations with games than just popcorn, but is it possible for a triple-a game to actually provide interesting commentary, given the common structure of most big games? Or is it just, if a game tries to provide commentary about violence and it's main mechanic IS violence it's likely to fail?

Just curious what other people thought.

So I want to thank you guys.

I heard the concept for Blood Dragon I was excited.
I saw the trailer for Blood Dragon and I was more excited.
I listened to you guys talk about it and I am now not getting it.

It is all down to one thing. If you are trying to do a homage of a trashy 80s movie you can't take the piss out of it or wink to the camera while you are doing it that defeats the entire enterprise. Those old movies work specifically because they were 100% serious no matter what was happening. Just how this can't be the new Duke Nukem because Duke also took himself 100% seriously in his games.

Taking the piss out of something while you are doing it seems the easy way out, I would have been far more impressed had they just committed fully.

With Regards to the MS rant in this episode, I pose a scenario. The rumors of an HDMI input in the Next XBOX bring up some interesting opportunities. Imagine the XBOX being an overlay to your TV. Garnett talks about getting home and immediately turning one of his consoles and wants the consoles to be input 1.

Well, imagine if the Next XBOX allows you watch TV. Maybe if an ad for a movie comes up and you could hit a button and immediately switch to the movie on netflix or buy tickets for the next showing.

Maybe your watching a movie and an ad for the new Madden comes up. You click a button and purchase it and you can begin playing it in 5 minutes.

You're watching an episode of Game of Thrones and you realize you missed an episode. Without switching to another app you can go back and watch the episode you missed.

Imagine you can just hit a button on your controller and switch to a game without changing the input in your TV.

Look, I'm a gamer first and I want to see this a game machine first. But at the same time, a box that can bring movies, music, next-gen games and TV together into 1 input and have all of that one button away can be a very powerful story to tell. I for one am very excited at the possibilities.

I actually think the industry is a better place when Nintendo is doing terribly. Whenever Nintendo platforms gain power they tend to
So to Jeff's point about Smart TVs, I'm just going to quote myself from 4/1:

"I think ... the gaming industry's survival ... depends on the metamorphosis of Android from phone OS to a desktop platform. ...the only people who need a Core i7's processing power for instance, are professionals ... in fields like graphic design, video editing, etc. You can buy mini Android PCs right now that will do 90% of what anyone does with a desktop---word processing, email, video, and web surfing (what Jeff was talking about)---and they cost less than $100."

So in context of Jeff's input frustrations, Sony can just extrapolate the Playstation App onto an Android PC, by creating a virtual OS for the PS4 on an Android Monitor that the PS4 hardware plugs into. Friends lists, game data, the Playstation Store all could be handled by apps on the display's own processor.

Basically, you could access your games as widgets on the Android desktop. Then it could boot into Sony's Playstation App interface---you can watch who's live streaming gameplay on the widget, then when you want to play yourself the monitor fires up the console hardware so you can run the graphics locally.

The PS4 actually already has an ARM processor designated towards background downloading, so this would be just another step in that direction. Incidentally the latest Snapdragon processor can also decode 4k video. So could sell such monitors as dedicated 4k movie platforms, and also use Apple's same line of marketing---say its a "Retina Display," or as people said of the iPad when it debuted, a mega giant iPod touch.

By putting 4k in say a 30-40 inch monitor, you make the display technology more affordable, and you make the technology more discernible---because the same way an iPad screen can be more impressive/entrancing than a big screen tv, you can actually appreciate the pixel density when the screen is at a minimum viewing distance.

Also I'll quote myself again from 4/6, Sony has already made an "external game console" of sorts for one of their Windows laptops:
Also look at this Sony laptop, the VAIO Z, which works with an external GPU that you plug into your laptop:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/27/sony-ultra-slim-13-inch-vaio-z-laptop-revealed-in-europe-packs/

So Microsoft's strategy of trojan horsing the shit out of the Xbox hurts them because it makes it more difficult to do what the box was designed for: running games. Beyond Smart TVs making game console apps redundant, Samsung's latest flagship plasma lets you plug a harddrive into the back of the tv, and run a DVR off the display itself. So on cable cutting, vertically integrating with Comcast isn't going to solve any of these problems. Its just going to make Microsoft more money.

Now that said, its a tough proposition to say in order to use this console, you need this special display. But Sony could very easily release the smart monitor version of the PS4 as a secondary SKU. They could put the hard drive, and perhaps even stuff like bluetooth, wifi and ethernet in the monitor, and have a slim version of the PS4 that literally just directs the graphics to the display.

If you look at the trend for computing across the board every device you buy is more and more specialized. You're often paying more for less horsepower, but for a better crafted/organized user experience. That's why Apple succeeded in the first place with the iPod. Microsoft conceivably putting Windows on a game console is like the opposite of that.

I do believe that Nintendo will have a chance to get back in the game.... next Next gen. But I don't even hear them in the conversation among gamers I know in recent months. There is very little interest in their system with the PS4 coming out.

As for Microsoft's nextbox... the admission that they moved back their reveal to "better position" the console in light of the PS4 reveal does not bode well to me. The 360 was disappointing in terms of exclusives for me and I don't think that Microsoft has caught on to the idea of beefing up the games yet. I believe they really are more interested on being the center of the living room... which might be cool for casuals, but I only care about the games.

I think hindsight has given most naysayers an appreciation for Sony's little get together. While it was lacking in some departments it did diverge a lot of information about how the system will play games. An underrated and not much talked about was Sony's eyeroll, "yes all those streaming services will be their obviously with more to come." I just have a feeling that Microsoft will do the exact opposite and talk about the other non-game stuff. The type of features that matter 1 year after a systems launch when the price goes down. Sony and Microsoft still have E3, Pax maybe, the conference in Germany, and TGS to talk more about the system.

Garnett's idea that Nintendo can get away with just talking to the hardcore does not seem to have proven out so far. There has been no noticeable jump in sales for either the 3DS Or the Wii U after Nintendo starting doing these Direct communications.

The idea that Microsoft (and Sony) should stop talking about those other services is kind of silly. If more than half of the activity on the Xbox is people doing other things than you need to talk to that audience. It like telling Microsoft to ignore half their audience to appease a vocal minority. I have not seen a smart television that is easy to use as my Xbox. Not to mention I already have a dumb television and I have no motivation to buy a television.

Perspective, it's something so many seem to forget about when talking about Nintendo and the falling skies. Through 4 months the PS3 sold 2.4 million units. The Xbox 360 sold 2 million unit. The WiiU sold 3.5 million units. So yeahhhhhh once again Nintendo is in trouble just like the conversation about the 3DS a year ago is really not a story. Plus it's not even close to accurate, they're fine even in the face of new EXPENSIVE hardware, that will lack software for another 2 years or so. Ughhhh PERSPECTIVE.

Just a quirky observation about the banner ads for Wartune.

Despite the ads being plastered with "18+" and "rated AO" and so on, the actual artwork in the ads is, actually, pretty tame. Considering to some of the other ads that have been thrown in my face, I would dare go so far as to call the Wartune ads tasteful by comparison. I don't know anything about Wartune or it's content, but I the ad gave a better first impression than the likes of Evony and Scarlet Blade.

Maybe we don't need to suppress all sexiness in games, maybe we just need the sexiness to be presented more tastefully.

That's been on my mind for some reason, just thought I'd share.

So I think Jeff's issues with GTA really bring to mind issues with sandbox design vs linearity. My biggest qualm with the GTA franchise, and all Rockstar games has been the mission design. The advantage of linear level design, is that all the elements that make the experience fun are assembled right in front of you.

What GTA always lost me on was the experience of failing a mission, then waking up in a hospital or police station, and having to find the trigger point for the mission to restart. What happens is that it makes the playing experience very inaccessible. This is a problem with sandbox games across the board. Garnet often speaks about how too many choices in a game can be overwhelming, but for me, its more a matter of becoming bored and frustrated.

To me the lost art in game design today, is the simple joy of game mechanics themselves. Designing a mechanic that works in a specific way, and testing that against a wide variety of obstacles is the whole point and essence of what gameplay is. When people talk about wanting choice in games, I can't help but shake my head because of this. To me, running to a mission prompt through a lifeless world is not anymore gameplay than watching a cut scene. Putting the sandbox between me and the mission, doesn't give me choices, it limits the degree to which I can use the mechanics in a way that makes playing relevant.

There's really nothing remarkable about the worlds of a sandbox games either, and being there in and of itself is not "fun." Elders Scrolls games have pretty much always been ugly. Skyrim was probably the closest to not being outright hideous to where I want to vomit, but I mean at the end of the day even that is just a bunch of snowy mountains and generic stone buildings. And the same goes for Rockstar games for the most part.

This is also why I don't really acknowledge the notion of "ludo narrative dissonance." I disagree with Adrian Chmielarz' premise that you can bifurcate video games between simulations and toys. Neither a simulation or a toy stem from concepts that "video" and "games" do. A lego block is not the same thing as Monopoly. In this analogy, a more accurate comparison to "toys" would be the game controller itself, or the game console. In this sense, the concept of "ludo narrative dissonance" doesn't have to do with what appears on a tv screen, its what happens when you take your playstation controller outside and pretend its an air plane by making motor noises with your mouth and moving it through the air in arcs.

So if you were to look at Lego video games honestly, you would probably call them mediocre platformers with a cute art style. And that makes sense because they're licensed products. They're designed to appeal to our knowledge of the brands they're associated with---not the products those brands produce. But through Adrian's prism, its like the standard of what "the platformer" doesn't even exist---even though that is genre title totally unique to the medium. Its like "Lego Star Wars is just a toy. Isn't that cute?" So in this culture naval gazing culture, we have forfeited what truly makes up video games' identity. Its all pseudo intellectual non sense.

Ahh the great original Star Wars trilogy... Never forget a tribal race of Care Bears took down the galactic army of the empire.... Yeahhhhhh after that jar jar binks doesn't sound half bad.

GTA 5 money matters lol. Listen all I want the entire map unlocked from the start, and cheat codes more easily accessible, or should I say customizable.