There'll be even more rating around...

Tuesday, 8 July 2008

What they're proposing now is the removal of the PEGI system for games given over a 12 rating. Instead, the games will just be given a BBFC rating, if they're over a 12. I don't understand the point in this. From a parent's point of view, the PEGI rating is generall harsher than the BBFC rating: for instance, last year, 30 games were downgraded from 18 under PEGI rules to 15 under BBFC rules. That's not helping the situation of defending the young, if anything, it'll just aggravate the situation.

But what's far worse, is that this will pile BBFC's workload far higher than it is now. They already have to deal with all the films coming into the UK, and now all of the games too? That can only mean one thing for us UK gamers. More waiting than at the Savoy Grill. I dunno what idiot (actually I do, Dr. Tanya Byron) came up with this plan. But I don't like it. It's not good from anyone's point of view. Not the parents that want to protect their children, nor the gamers that just want to play games.

Needless to say, this has been met by huge disapproval by the industry, Sony, Nintendo, Ubi Soft have all made their voices heard over this. And rightly so, it's dangerous to their business too. Why plug more bureaucracy into a system which is already dying from that? Children can only be shielded from adult games by teaching the parents who allow 10 year olds to play GTA and the such. Sigh.

Labels: News, Rant

Author: random dave | Comments: | Leave Your Response?

Video Games: Hobby, Addiction or Cult?

Thursday, 5 June 2008

The experience of video games varies from individual to individual. Some gamers play a couple of hours a week, and others play a couple of hours every couple of hours. But I'm sure you already know that (unless you're the latter, then you might be unaware that the former even exist). So how can we possibly put any definition on a group of people ('gamers') that vary in their habit so much that they can't be put in the same time bracket, let alone under the same banner. Look at the example of nations: a person from a country will be a member of that country for their entire life, so we can, with reasonable accuracy, call them 'Swedish' or 'Mongolian' or 'Martian'. However, in these groups there are exceptions, and these exceptions have names of their own 'ex-patriates' etc.

This leads me to believe that there must be other categories next to 'gamer' that can be used. Xbox Live attempted to class this as 'Recreation', 'Underground', 'Family' and 'Professional'. But this did not work. And it didn't work because the majority put themselves as 'Recreational'. And yet, this number of 'Recreational' members varied so much in how often they were gamers at all. I classed myself as recreational, and I play for a couple of hours a day. My friend is also recreational, and plays a couple of hours a week. So Xbox Live missed the mark here.

You can't, as Microsoft attempted to do, define a group by the way they believe they play. A far better system would be to put a timer on the account and then you take an average of time spent on the account per week--this is then attached to the account so other people can see just what 'kind' of gamer this gamer really is (and mock/admire them suitably). GTA had the right idea. In the stats, its possible to view your 'Addiction Level'. Something which is, apparently, 'Spiralling Downward' for me. Naturally, this doesn't define my gamer characteristics, in the way 'addict', or 'healthy habit' would, but it gives the same idea.

It seems to me that all gamers come under three categories (categories they can't possibly put themselves in... because they'd lie): hobbyist, (the kind of hobby that stamp collecting would be considered) addiction (the people that say 'I can quit sure', but never could) and cult (they're aware they have a serious problem [more so than the addicts], but if you try and tell them they should do something about it, their eyes glow red and they pull out a level 43 scythe). People might be able to give up for a couple of months in the addiction stage, but they'll always return.

I'm not saying to be in the last two categories is a bad thing. It's not like heroine which actually has a truly detrimental effect, but I think everyone needs to understand (those outside the gaming circle more than any) that there's not just 'gamers'. A disgusting stereotype ranging from people with glasses and long greasy hair to people who own a mobile phone with Snake II on it.

Labels: Original, Rant

Author: random dave | Comments: | Leave Your Response?

World of Warcraft- SOCIAL GAMEEE.

Saturday, 10 May 2008

Yes, i'm writing a blog about World Of Warcraft, but dont panic. I'm not an obsessive.

Yesterday, another of my friends signed up for a WoW account, pretty much all of my friends have got an account even if they dont play it anymore. The reason for this blog in main is that, My friends sign up has caused all of us to utter "Re-Activation" this is an absurd craze in our social circle, where once every six months of so, we all start playing WoW again, fully cooperatively and level up together. It doesnt matter about the level difference, we help each other out, and its great. For a while, it ceases to become a game, and its just our social thing.

Last time we had a WoW lan and spent literally, 14 hours doing run throughs of an instance to try and get my main character the weapon he wanted. It was perfect symbiotic cooperation. And then, just like that, 3-4 of us would stop playing, and everyone would slowly grind to a halt around us.

So, Now this cycle has started again, I say one thing: All of the people who believe WoW players have no social lives are clearly wrong. I wont deny that certain players are on the game to an "unhealthy" extent, but on some level, I would say that the World has brought our little group of friends closer together, Starting to rely on each others abilities, and giving us funny anecdotes to share together. Now, we do the same thing with F.E.A.R on the Xbox360, and arguably people could say that the same thing is true in F.E.A.R, but I cant help but feel that WoW has a bigger appeal. I'm not saying i'm a WoW addict, and as a game I cant stand it, But Socially, i think its got a pretty important place, as its something anyone can get together on, and just shoot the breeze.

On top of that, My tauren warrior is sexy and I love him.

Labels: MMO, PC, Rant, World Of Warcraft

Author: DW | Comments: | Leave Your Response?

Condemned 2 Review

Wednesday, 16 April 2008

I wanted to write a blog about Rainbow Six Vegas 2's story mode today, hoping to have gotten it finished on realistic difficulty, but my co-op partner never showed up.


So, i'm going to talk alittle bit about Condemned 2.
The single player keeps dragging me in and keeping me up long into the night, and i'm finding it a refreshing change from my usual diet of straight up FPS games.

The first Condemned was a pretty average game that i got with my 360 I enjoyed it quite alot, and thought it showed alot of promise, despite a few little flaws which in my opinion, stopped it from being an outstanding game.

My main problem with the first Condemned was the overly basic combat. You picked up the nearest bit of wood and hit the nearest enemy with it till they died. Occasionally, you got a firearm, in which case you shot the nearest enemy with it until they died. then you went back to your trusty bit of wood. this is not the case in condemned 2, here theres a wide variety of melee attacks, combo's and the added ability to throw your weapon ,which makes the games combat far more then a simple "hammer the right trigger" affair.

And then there was the forensics. In the first game, they were widely flaunted as a big aspect of the game, but by and large, this boiled down to getting a glowy blue UV light, and shining it over the wall. In the second, this too has been improved, with multiple choice questions at the crime scene.

I have a vague issue with games asking me to analyse blood splatters and exit wounds like a modern day sherlock. But the side effect of this is that i think i'm REALLY fucking clever when i manage to pull it off. so, nice touch Sega.


So far, so good right? Its taken the original condemned, polished it up, sent it on its way for its place as Undervalued gem of 2008.

this was, until they started talking about an ancient mythical cult. Now, correct me if im wrong, but i didnt notice an ancient mythical cult in Condemned 1. what i had, was a city full of mental homeless people, and a serial killer, who was probably a little mental himself, and this culminated in a rather scary chase round a farmhouse. Then you battled some crazy metal guy in your own head, and pulled his jaw off. I went O_o at this point, but then the game was over, and i went back to play Ghost recon, Job well done.

Now, in condemned 2, again the city is filled with nutcases. this is fine. However, theres also a mythical cult of people who control sound, and your main character becomes what is basically a motherfucking Ghetto blaster.

Yeah, someone at Sega's gonna get fired for that. This pisses me off, because, condemned was pretty solidly rooted in realism until the point i had to defeat suicide-bomber doll's, and then the whole experience took the wrong turn to Batshitcrazy-land.

I'd recommend renting this game, it is alot of fun, its just a shame the last third of the storyline turned into utter dogshit.

I'd give it a pretty solid 8/10. but im starting to get a little tired of Sega whispering promises in my ear and then palming me off with a watered down version of the awesome.

Labels: 8/10, Condemned2, Rant, Review, Xbox360

Author: DW | Comments: | Leave Your Response?