Which virtual game service will be the first to have Castlevania: Rondo of Blood?

Today GameTap made itself four games more relevant to me: it added four Castlevania games.

Now, granted, these are just the PC iterations of Castlevania, Castlevania II, and Castlevania III, along with Castlevania: Bloodlines for the Genesis, but it's a step in the right direction. Castlevania: Rondo of Blood, famed Japan-only, TurboCD-only precursor of the much-revered Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, is the holy grail for such virtual game services.

The question is: which will get there first?

Given Nintendo's relationship with Konami (in particular, that NES Castlevania was repackaged for the GBA) and GameTap's new contract with same, it appears that Xbox Live Arcade is out of the running. Moreover, the Wii is scheduled to get TurboGrafx 16 games, which makes it the only service known to have (most of) the hardware emulation handled. So I'm guessing if there's a chance of Rondo of Blood making it to the masses, in virtual form, it'll be from Nintendo.

I was surprised and pleased when Nintendo secured the licensed emulated version of Star Wars: The Arcade Game. I'm holding out hope for a similar coup here, although I hope the finished product isn't as disappointing.

And one other thing: comparing XBLA and GameTap shows that multiple services can have the same games. So while the Wii might be first with some exclusive games, I expect that the really popular ones (not owned by Nintendo) will still have a shot at making it to XBLA or GameTap.

--jvm at 13:13

link

Comment [ 5 ]

I was reading Cyrus Farivar's review of Civ IV over at MacWorld, and the following paragraph got me to thinking that we're doing Civ all wrong:

This increase in the 3-D graphics' depth and complexity and the greater complexity of simulation in areas like Civics explain why Civilization IV's system requirements are considerably higher than its predecessor. Some Mac gamers have fumed over the greater requirements, but, at later stages of the game when empires are particularly large, the game can slow down unless you're on a machine that matches or exceeds the game's hefty system requirements. (A G5 or better is mandatory, according to Aspyr.)

Note the concern in this paragraph isn't so much the 3D as the game's strategy. He's talking as much about why the G5 is required as the Radeon 9600 or GeForce FX 5200. And the high sys reqs go cross-platform fairly reasonably, so this doesn't seem to be as heavy a Mac Gaming Tax as usual.

[Note/Update: One reader does not believe there's anything new in Civ 4 worth experiencing beyond the updated graphics. As clarification, I'm implicitly stipulating (now explicitly stipulating) that there's something in that G5-grinding AI that's an improvement to the game. That anyone would purchase Civ 4 solely for the updated graphics confirms my worst fears of The Standard [Civ] Gamer, I'm afraid. If that doesn't make sense, read on...]

If a lack of processing power for the AI's strategy is truly the reason behind much of the high system requirements, and not simply the fancy eye candy, Civ 4 is begging to go client-server to off-load that extra processing time, and it's time Firaxis started charging for access to official Beowulf clusters or something similar to speed things up during the later rounds.

This also reminds me of Combat, and perhaps there could be a tiered release via Combat's lessons. In Combat, the 2600 [and its programmers; to some extent, every platform is a cyborg] didn't [yet] have the kind of power one needed to have a game that free-form -- as let's face it, moving a tank or plane to any pixel of the playfield is much more free than having invaders scroll down slowly from the top of the screen -- also contain intelligent enough AI to provide a challenge without cheating. In the Age of Combat, which I've argued before we're still in, Civ 4 might need to ramp it down and release a game that only allows play against other humans, via LAN or PBEM (play by email, apparently). Voila, from a 1.8 Pentium to something even more manageable. Perhaps we're even talking a G4 again?!

I know, we still need more than Intel integrated graphics (thanks, Rein) just to show the interface, and that concerns me too. Why can't I simply watch smaller or even static images "fighting" if I don't have enough muscle? Is Civ 4 so dependent on its eye candy to attract its flies? I'd like to think not. Heck, I've even played Quake 1 recently in software mode just to remember how bad it was. It is bad -- but if the game's exciting enough, it ain't. That is, give me something I enjoy, and I won't mind crappy visuals.

Unfortunately, not minding crappy visuals apparently makes me, even in Civ, A Nonstandard Gamer. That's too bad, because if Civ gamers can't appreciate their genre without eye candy, well, nobody short of MUDders and angbanders can.

--ruffin at 20:22

link

Comment [ 7 ]

Tomb Raider Controversy

The news about Tomb Raider: 10th Anniversary Edition has been puzzling, to say the least. The latest rumor is that Core and Crystal Dynamics were both making such a game and Core's got 86ed. I've tried to collect all the information I could about the situation and summarize it here, with links. Some tiny speculative observations are made at the end. (Update: A refinement of the conclusions of this article is has been posted.)

The failure of Core-developed Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness in 2003 prompted publisher Eidos to hand control of the franchise to Crystal Dynamics, creators of the Legacy of Kain series of games. Core's role as part of Eidos was to be reevaluated, which some took to mean Core would be sold off. (The sale of Core Design would eventually take place, though not immediately.)

Two years later, in April 2005, Eidos officially announced Tomb Raider: Legend was in development by Crystal Dynamics on several platforms. (Aside: Curmudgeon Gamer review here.) Crystal Dynamics had reportedly replayed and studied all previous Tomb Raider games before beginning work. Eidos also revealed that Toby Gard, one of the original Tomb Raider creators, had been hired as a consultant to guide development.

During this same period, the publisher SCi had just made a bid to buy Eidos. That bid would prove successful, and the stock deal was concluded on 19 May 2005. It might be worth noting that Toby Gard's previous game, Galleon, had been published by SCi.

In June 2005, Bill Gardner was made head of publishing for SCi/Eidos in North America, based in San Fancisco. (Contemporaneous interview with Gardner.) Work presumably continues on Tomb Raider: Legend at Crystal Dynamics, also located in San Francisco. For reference, Core Design is in Derby, UK.

Tomb Raider: 10th Anniversary Edition was mentioned for the first time in an SCi financial report at the end of September 2005. Other than the intended platform, the PSP (PlayStation Portable), no details were given. SCi's intentions were reconfirmed in a January 2006 Annual Report (PDF) which again listed Tomb Raider: 10th Anniversary Edition for the PSP. A late January 2006 press release said simply that they, presumably a developer under SCi, were "developing a special edition of Tomb Raider to celebrate the Tenth Anniversary of Lara Croft".

In early April 2006, a year after its initial announcement, Tomb Raider: Legend was released for Xbox, PlayStation 2, Xbox 360, and Windows. (A PSP version was later released on 21 June 2006.) At E3 in May 2006, a port of Tomb Raider: Legend was announced for the Nintendo GameCube, due for release in late 2006. No announcements were made concerning Tomb Raider: 10th Anniversary Edition.

An email from an unnamed source appeared on Kotaku on 31 May 2006, reporting the following:

Turns out Eidos/SCi are planning on celebrating Lara's 10th birthday by releasing a remake of her original adventure. We are talking improved graphics, new moves, the lot. If there is time, the "new" game will feature a remake of both Tomb Raider and Tomb Raider II: The Dagger of Xian, but right now the developers are focusing on Lara Croft's first adventure.

Note that the developer is never mentioned, only Eidos and SCi. We do not know at this point whether Core or Crystal Dynamics is leading the project.

About a week later, an unfinished trailer for Tomb Raider: Anniversary Edition (note the missing "10th") appeared online, clearly branded by Core. The PSP game shown in the trailer is clearly the original Tomb Raider, albeit with "improved graphics" and "new moves" as suggested by the email Kotaku had published. This led to speculation that Core, not Crystal Dynamics, had been given the job of bringing this game to market.

But there was a twist: whoever released the video also indicated that the game shown had been cancelled by SCi and Eidos.

The very next day, 8 June 2006, a news item appeared on Core's official site saying that, contrary to reports, they had not been closed and were in fact on the verge of making a very exciting announcement. Earlier rumors had indicated that Core's assets had in fact been sold by Eidos/SCi to Rebellion Entertainment.

In the meantime, someone was pressuring sites like Google Video and YouTube to remove the leaked trailer. A later report on 12 June 2006 at Kotaku indicated that the trailer had evoked "ire" from Eidos.

The nature of the leaked trailer was in part revealed on 15 June 2006 when Core updated its news page with this information:

The video of Tomb Raider: 10th Anniversary Edition that appeared on certain sites was an unauthorised release of an internal presentation of a game that was being developed by Core Design until very recently. It was running on PSP and used a Core-developed engine. However, following a recent review this project has been officially cancelled by SCi.

Core was saying a couple of things indirectly: that the game was not based on the Tomb Raider: Legend engine developed by Crystal Dynamics ("Core-developed engine") and that their project had been cancelled. In retrospect, it appears that they were most certainly not saying that Tomb Raider: 10th Anniversary Edition had been cancelled, only their project. In fact, the post at Tomb Raider Chronicles on Core's news said that "sources have suggested Crystal Dynamics will continue to press ahead with a Tomb Raider/Tomb Raider II remake with original Lara Croft architect Toby Gard leading the project".

This seemed to be confirmed the very next day, 16 June 2006, with a brief Eidos press release:

Eidos Confirms 10th Anniversary Edition of Tomb Raider

June 16, 2006 - Eidos Interactive, one of the world's leading publishers and developers of entertainment software, confirms today that they are developing a special '10th Anniversary Edition' of Tomb Raider.

The new game is being developed by Crystal Dynamics, who recently launched Lara Croft Tomb Raider: Legend on Xbox 360, PS2, Xbox, PC and PSP, with versions on Nintendo DS, GBA and GameCube later in 2006.

"Our '10th Anniversary Edition' of Tomb Raider, is a one-off title to celebrate both Lara and Tomb Raider, it will appeal not only to the loyal fans of the Tomb Raider series but will also attract a totally new audience." Said Larry Sparks, Head of Brands Management at Eidos.

Tomb Raider originally launched in 1996 and is still one of the best selling videogame franchises of all time, with over 30 million copies sold.

The special '10th Anniversary Edition' of Tomb Raider will be available on PlayStation 2, PSP and PC.

Unfortunately, the press release could have been more clear about what precisely is being made. Is it indeed a remake of the original? So different that they call it a "new game"?

Clearly, this new title will be developed not by Core but by Crystal Dynamics. Since Core claimed the leaked trailer showed their work, what we've seen cannot represent what Crystal Dynamics is developing.

And the latest twist is another anonymous source, published at Kotaku on 18 June 2006:

The video was done by Core for E3. It was shown at E3 and got people excited. The game was about 50% complete. The video was straight from a PSP engine built by Core - not a PC render or anything. The game could have been completed for Christmas.

Eidos then told Core they didn't want the project, and to cease work on it immediately.

[...]

This week it was revealed that Eidos have sold off Core Designs [to Rebellion] and that Crystal Dynamics have been working on a game of the same name for the past 6 months using their own Tomb Raider: Legend engine. It is believed this announcement was forced out due to the large amount of negative press and forum posts about Eidos after fans discovered they had cancelled the Core Designs project. Eidos is still using the Core video to publicize that Crystal Dynamics are working on a similar game. Core did not know about the Crystal Dynamics project until this week, the same as everyone else.

Compare the Core Tomb Raider 10th Anniversary Edition video to the Tomb Raider: Legend PSP videos and decide which one looks better, runs smoother, and stays truer to the original Tomb Raider franchise.

So what really happened?

For what it's worth, here's my speculation (see points below for some details):

For reasons unknown, Core and Crystal Dynamics were working independently on the same 10th anniversary game. Perhaps Core had been given a green light to try and after the SCi/Eidos merger, no one remembered that detail. Meanwhile, Crystal Dynamics successfully launched Tomb Raider: Legend and was considered by the management, especially in North America, to be the obvious team for the new game.

For maximum effect, SCi/Eidos conspicuously didn't announce anything at E3, and then started some well-chosen leaks afterward. Crystal Dynamics were the first anonymous tip to Kotaku.

Core felt spurned. They knew they were being sold to Rebellion and that Crystal Dynamics had to be working on the same game, because the Kotaku leak mentioned Tomb Raider II, which isn't in their version. (Everything I've seen in the Core-produced trailer is material remade from just the original Tomb Raider -- nothing is shown of Tomb Raider II.) So someone at Core decided to stick it to SCi/Eidos and Crystal Dynamics by giving the public its first taste of a remake -- Core's remake -- along with the ominous and misleading "cancelled" project information.

SCi/Eidos tried to control the damage quietly, but were forced to put out their press release and pressed Core to disavow the trailer release. The last anonymous tip to Kotaku is the most interesting. While it still takes the line that Tomb Raider and Tomb Raider II are being put into the remake, the tone at the end seems to indicate to me that the Core trailer looked very good compared to whatever Crystal Dynamics has put together

If Crystal Dynamics has come up with something that isn't as impressive to fans as the leaked trailer from Core, it will be interesting indeed to see how well it is received. My gut feeling right now is that fans will be disappointed at the comparison.

A few smaller points:

• Core had started preparations for the remake under the previous Eidos management, before the sale to SCi. Perhaps a promise was made to someone at Core that they could have a shot at the remake.
  
  
• The geographic proximity of Gardner, head of publishing, to Crystal Dynamics is suggestive. In his capacity, he probably had a reasonable amount of contact with Crystal Dynamics as they finished up Tomb Raider: Legend. Its subsequent success compared to, say, the utter failure of Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness (by Core Design) would probably give him more confidence in Crystal Dynamics' ability to deliver.
  
  
• One point that truly makes no sense to me is the apparent inexperience with the PSP at Crystal Dynamics. To my knowledge they have not yet developed a PSP game in-house, including Tomb Raider: Legend. The PSP port of Tomb Raider: Legend was done not by Crystal Dynamics but by Buzz Monkey Software, although as with all ports I would expect that there was ample communication between the two teams.
  
  
• It would seem that the PSP game shown in the Core Design trailer was built for the PSP, not a port. One would hope that SCi/Eidos had very good reasons for dismissing the Core Design version, despite this apparent advantage of being PSP-native from the beginning.
  

If you have information to add, or additional observations to make, please feel free to comment.

--jvm at 00:05

link

Comment [ 8 ]

XBLA, GameTap, Wii Virtual Console: not progress

In ten years I think it's possible we will note 2005 as the very best year for getting emulated classic games cheaply and legally. It was the last year that you could buy arcade ROMs from StarROMs and the last year you could buy 115 classic games through various new compilation releases, most discs selling for for $20 and containing about 20 games.

This year we have GameTap trying to survive and pushing out more emulated games across a broad range of systems. Microsoft is making a play for the classic market with its Xbox Live Arcade. And Nintendo will have its Wii Virtual Console with -- reportedly -- at least a hundred emulated games waiting in the wings.

The difference is physical versus virtual: a real disc in your hand compared to a bundle of downloaded bits. In the case of GameTap, it's rental versus virtual purchase. I know it marks me as just another recalcitrant from an older generation, but I'm not ready to give up my discs and other hard media just yet. I've got a little Gollum in me, and my collection is full of precious plastic rings.

For years the system has been tilting in the consumer's favor, with the price per game dropping from over $8 to under $1. Now, with XBLA selling Galaga for $5 in virtual form, the new generation of consumers doesn't appear to even be reaping a real reduction in cost through the elimination of physical media and packaging.

I'll grant that the new a la carte models offer the opportunity to pay only for those games you want, but at the same time I fear that they will also lead to a concentration on only the most popular games.

Back when I used to hit the flea markets nearly every week, I would chat with some of the regular dealers who would dredge the yard sales for games. One guy 15 miles south of Raleigh explained to me why the rare games I craved were priced so cheaply, while the commons I didn't need were several times more expensive: "Everybody wants Frogger or Pac-man. No one but you cares about that other s--t."

He's right, of course: I'm not your average buyer. That's why I loved StarROMs and checked their site semi-regularly for new games to buy. It's why I actually enjoy trying out the obscure games on the various compilations I've collected. And it's why I'm confident that -- for me -- systems like GameTap and XBLA and Wii Virtual Console are a step backward, not forward.

Labels: nintendo

--jvm at 22:42

link

Comment [ 2 ]

Tomb Raider: Legend bits & pieces

I didn't want to clutter the review with too much random debris, so here are more comments:

• Aiming (guns) - When facing a single enemy, the auto-target button should lock onto him. If a player doesn't want to aim at the single enemy they can -- get this -- not use the auto-target button!
  
  
• Aiming (magenetic grapple) - The grapple should not shoot out of Lara's back and connect to a target behind her. Similarly, when part of a puzzle won't be used again (because it literally is all but destroyed) don't make the magnetic grapple connect to it instead of the single remaining piece of puzzle.
  
  
• Bosses - Not a single boss is fun to battle. Obvious Achilles heels + terrible aiming system = crap.
  
  
• Motorcycle driving - Too long with unreliable controls -- these strike me as padding to lengthen the game trivially. Hated by other reviewers, I couldn't bring myself to hate them outright, yet, there is nothing to recommend them either.
  
  
• Environment as weapon - Overblown feature that amounts to fluff. Either do a far better job or put the effort elsewhere.
  
  
• Linearity - The original Tomb Raider had linear puzzle sequences too, but it was typical to find the pieces out of order and then have to figure out which piece goes first, second, and so forth. In Tomb Raider: Legend the next step is always obvious: straight ahead toward the open door or the shining light.
  
  
• Load times - The first level has, by far, the worst load times, sometimes taking 40 seconds to reload. Regardless, they're still 20-30 seconds every time you kill Lara off. You don't realize the critical importance of time rewinding until a Prince of Persia clone like Tomb Raider: Legend tries to do without it.
  
  
• Buggy sound - There are some miscues on dialogue and sound effects that surely could have been fixed with more polish. Given that this version lagged the other versions by many weeks, I'm guessing it was still rushed out as "good enough".
  
  
• Laggy menus - Nothing makes a bad first impression like an unresponsive menu screen the first time you load up a game. Same with loading up the PDA while in the game itself.
  
  
• Urban environments - Just don't. Lara belongs in tombs. Perhaps the British Museum (hinted at for the sequel) will be a good one, but high rise buildings with cubicles are a terrible setting.
  
  
• Camera - Don't aim at the ground in front of Lara so much. Similarly, provide mechanism for setting how far behind Lara the camera sits, especially when in free-look mode.

That's it for now. I'll add more as I think of them.

--jvm at 13:46

link

Comment [ 1 ]

What's missing from this article?

I ended up reading this Eurogamer interview with Mark Rein of Epic via Joystiq and realized something important was missing. Can you spot it?

The answer is that Epic provides middleware for Sony's PlayStation 3 developer's kit (PDF). So that's a potential conflict of interest. Rein might say things are going swell and that we can expect "great results" from not just Epic but other developers as well...because some of those developers just might be using the Unreal Engine. Or he might be perfectly sincere that Sony's doing well by developers, regardless of Epic's stake. Or it might be somewhere between.

Most folks reading that story would never guess that Epic has a stake in the PlayStation 3 developer situation. It's the reporter's responsibility to tell them.

Labels: ps3, sony

--jvm at 11:16

link

Comment [ 7 ]

Tomb Raider: Legend (PSP) review

For almost everyone, Tomb Raider: Legend on the PSP is not worth the money or time. Only dedicated fans who demand a portable version should consider it.

By now, reviews have documented the sticky controls, which I can confirm. After Angel of Darkness, how does one make the same mistake? Most people considering this version should stop right there: you will go crazy finishing several action sequences throughout the PSP version.

The problem on the PSP, however, goes deeper than that. Tomb Raider is about spectacular, dramatic locales, and a number of beautiful environments in Tomb Raider: Legend demonstrate some understanding of this concept. The PlayStation 2 (and Xbox) controls, through a second joystick, allow dynamic manipulation of the camera, making a better view of the world accessible. On the PSP, you really have to work to see anything beautiful. Changing the camera angle requires bringing Lara to a full stop, pressing the square button, and simultaneously moving the analog nub. Most of the time, the automatic camera just shows you the ground for 10 meters in front of Lara, leaving all the fine detail work off-camera.

Worse still, several levels are a simple sequence of corridors that might as well be out of a first-person shooter. The original Tomb Raider was a sequence of very large areas tied together with a handful of small hallways; Tomb Raider: Legend is a long sequence of corridors broken by very few large areas. The large areas of the original game weren't completely accessible immediately, hinting at places that you could reach only after much effort. Legend forsakes that design, leaning too heavily on the linear hall-crawling of the newer Prince of Persia games.

Legend outdoes all its predecessors (that I've played) in characterization and story. Through investigation into her family's past, Lara discovers evidence that Arthurian legends are present in cultures throughout history because actual magic-sword-in-stone artifacts were placed by someone -- or something -- around the globe sometime before recorded history. As Lara goes from site to site, we get to see different sides of Lara's character, culminating with a convincingly ruthless portrayal near the game's conclusion. When Lara sneers "Every breath you take is a gift from me", you believe it.

Ultimately, the game ends with a cliffhanger, leaving open issues that must be resolved in a future game. Some players may be disappointed, but the story development makes me optimistic that they'll continue with a good show the next time 'round. Unless controls and camera improve on the PSP -- something we may well find out when Tomb Raider: 10th Anniversary Edition arrives later this year -- I will probably play the sequel on a PlayStation 2 or 3.

(List of random gripes here.)

--jvm at 23:05

link

Comment [ 0 ]

Madden Football 1988 for Apple //e

For the morbidly curious, here is the title screen for Madden Football 1988 on an Apple //e:
The DOS and Commodore 64 versions in a previous post.

Labels: apple

--jvm at 22:51

link

Comment [ 1 ]

There are good deals, but for the patient, there are steals.

Civilization 3 is an enjoyable game. Can you really tell me that, if you've waited this long and haven't played, that you can't wait another week or two for shipping and plunk down $3 for the game delivered to your door? (You have to search through price/shipping combos to get $3, but it's there right now.)

This is what drives me crazy about pirates who claim they can't afford to drop $50 on a game, so they have a right to download a "trial" version, essentially, to determine if they want to shell out. For games like this -- very popular ones that are overproduced in their initial run -- there's really no reason not to simply wait for the price to approach nothing, which is pretty much where it is now. Even better, if you're contemplating a $50 WinPC game but are apprehensive, why not create a good library of classics instead? Half-Life is $4 (just $10 from Steam). Quake is essentially free. GTA3 is $4 + ship. GTA3:SA is $14. If you can't afford those prices, do what your parents did, young man, GET A JOB. THE BUMS LOST, LEBOWSKI!!!

Give me a break. End vent.

--ruffin at 22:25

link

Comment [ 3 ]

You lost me at that ridiculous first line

This week's Pimp My Videogame Executive at Next-Gen.biz about Steve Stamatiadis of Krome stopped me dead with this incredible first line:

Ty the Tasmanian Tiger is one of gaming's most enduring character franchises.

Say what?

I thought that maybe, just maybe, I've been remiss in my appreciation of Ty the Tasmanian Tiger games. So I checked Wikipedia and Mobygames and they agree: the "enduring franchise" has only had three games (each on the New Millenium Trio -- Xbox, PlayStation 2, and GameCube). It's only been around since 2002, for crying out loud! To top it all off, Metacritic shows average review scores for all of the Ty games between 63 and 71 (out of 100).

Steve Stamatiadis of Krome might be a great guy, but I'm sure not inclined to read a single word more of this journaltisement.

(I reserve the right to finish reading the article anyway in the hope that there's more stuff to make fun of further on.)

Addendum: Perhaps "endearing" instead of "enduring"? That almost makes sense, except that the games have been reviewed so poorly.

--jvm at 10:26

link

Comment [ 4 ]

Finally, PSP Greatest Hits

According to Next-Gen.biz, I can now get a new copy Ape Escape: On the Loose for $19.99 as part of a Greatest Hits system. The other four colon-decorated titles in the program are ATV: Offroad Fury: Blazin' Trails, Hot Shots Golf: Open Tee, Twisted Metal: Head On, and Wipeout Pure.

I've said many times that Hot Shots Golf is great stuff. The other titles don't do much for me. I'm even an avowed Twisted Metal fan, but TM:HO is weak. Wipeout is fine, but I can't really recommend it if you've already played your fill of the previous games.

More games are slated to be added, but nothing terribly interesting to me yet. Maybe the Tony Hawk game, but I need to check reviews to see how well it controls.

One thing that's interesting about Sony's Greatest Hits line is that it doesn't make me want to buy the cheaper games. There are tons of titles in the Greatest Hits program on the PlayStation 2 and I can't bring myself to drop $20 on them. In fact, seeing them for $20 makes me want to find a used game store and hunt down a $10 copy. In a sense, it just pushes my expectation of what I should pay further down the scale.

I do hope that Sony doesn't insist on hideous packaging when they republish the old games with Greatest Hits labeling. I truly despise the garish evil green they used to defile the PSOne Greatest Hits packages. Admittedly, the blood red on the PlayStation 2 Greatest Hits games is better, but I'd rather the marking be a bit more subtle.

--jvm at 14:40

link

Comment [ 7 ]

Madden Football 1988 with scary screenshot

Ran across this disturbing title screen from the DOS version of Madden from 1988 and it made me laugh.

Click for the full horrible effect.



It gets better. Here's the Commodore 64 title screen. Again, just click for horror.



Thanks MobyGames and Lemon64.

--jvm at 10:57

link

Comment [ 1 ]

I'm getting too old for this sh...stuff

I think I just had my Roger Murtaugh moment.

I picked up SSX On Tour for a song a few weeks back and finally got around to cracking the cellophane and popping it into ye olde PlayStation 2. The art style and the music and the sound effects -- the whole schmeer -- hit me like those dreadful MTV and VH1 and E! Hollywood crapfest shows that my sister loves so much. All meaningless flash and senseless style and loud, loud, loud! Don't get me wrong -- I adore my sister -- but we are of two distinct minds on cable surfing tastes.

I managed one downhill race, saved my game, and sighed with relief as the powered down PS2 stopped pumping dreck through the TV speakers. My eyes immediately stopped leaking blood.

The original SSX was the first PlayStation 2 game I enjoyed. (Ridge Racer V was fun for a while, but ultimately a depressing first step.) I have it on good authority from two sources, my brother cgm and friend rufbo, that SSX Tricky is a good evolution of the original. So, it's disappointing to find that SSX On Tour is so wretched. Obviously, I have aged out of the demographic that Electronic Arts wants to exploit.

You think they'll eventually realize there's still money in us old folks and make good games for geezers too?

--jvm at 16:54

link

Comment [ 3 ]

Why a backlog of unsold Xbox 360s?

Microsoft has come out with its numbers on Xbox 360 shipments. (Note: I'll leave Microsoft's projections of future shipment numbers for another day.) I stand by my previous estimate: no more than 4 million systems sold worldwide, realistically probably 3.5 million. That leaves a minimum of 1 million systems shipped to resellers but not sold to consolers. Why the big backlog? I have a theory.

I think Microsoft knows that Sony's going to fall on its face this holiday season. Oh, sure, Sony might sell out but it'll be selling out of many fewer systems than it had hoped to have ready. (Then demand will drop like a stone in January and February of 2007.) When Sony's system is sold out and all those PS3-less parents rationalize that they really wouldn't want to spend $700 on a system plus one game, it'll be an easy leap to drop $500 or $400 on an Xbox 360 with a game. Microsoft is hoping to divert some of that demand to their own system, and if the shelves are full and the warehouses ready to ship in reinforcements, they'll be well-positioned to do so.

There's a wee fly in the ointment, of course: the Nintendo Wii. I doubt that Nintendo will have a severe shortage of systems, since the Wii is basically a GameCube that ate a mushroom and now has a magical controller attached. Not only inexpensive for Nintendo to produce, but probably also inexpensive for parents to buy.

That leaves Mom & Dad asking if they want to drop $500 or $400 on an Xbox 360 or $250 on a Nintendo Wii.

Labels: microsoft, xbox360

--jvm at 23:38

link

Comment [ 3 ]

Did you know there's a buy-two-get-one-free sale at Rhino?

Found myself with an hour of free time and no kids, so I hit the Rhino Games to give the stock a good once-over. As I entered the store, I noticed that the same annoying dude who'd given me the Madden pitch last time was behind the counter. I tried to be invisible, but he saw me anyway and asked if he could help me find anything in particular. I said I was just browsing and avoided eye contact.

As I finished going over all the PSP and PS2 games on the wall, he pointed out this table of clearance priced crap in case I was interested. I wasn't, but he went on to tell me that they'd done a lot of price reductions across the store, so don't hesitate to ask questions.

After going through the GameCube and N64 games, I was thumbing through a bin of Dreamcast games when he told me just how great Dreamcast games were and that they were buy-two-get-one-free. Now, it turns out that they have signs up on just about every shelf announcing that Dreamcast games, along with everything else pre-PlayStation 2, are part of a buy-two-get-one-free sale. I'm sure he just wanted to make sure I knew in case I were illiterate. I thanked him and kept browsing. Despite my attempts to stay clear of him, he found me crouched beside the PSOne games and whispered (you read that right) to me: "buy two, get one free!"

To top it all off, I picked out three cheap PSOne games (to take advantage of this buy-two-get-one-free sale I hear they're having) only to have them tell me that one game case (Spider-man: Enter Electro for the curious) had been on the shelf by mistake and they didn't actually have the game in stock. So I walked out without buying anything.

Argh.

--jvm at 18:45

link

Comment [ 11 ]

Pirates strike again?

Instead of paying the outrageous price for a domestic copy of Bubble Bobble 2 for the NES, I imported a copy for the Famicom. While browsing eBay this week I ran across an auction selling the same game with this image (click it for a larger version):I find myself without a digital camera this week, but I can assure you that this cartridge is different from mine. In particular, my cartridge has a flat top while this one has a rounded top.

Which is the real thing? I'm guessing I got the pirate. The label doesn't say Taito, the label paper is very low quality, and the cartridge case is coming apart.

--jvm at 20:09

link

Comment [ 2 ]

Neversoft president crushes LucasArts VP with bare hands

In the latest installment of Pimp my Videogame Executive over at Next-Gen.biz, we've got Neversoft president Joel Jewett who comes across as a real man's man, sort of like a Clint Eastwood who makes games. Just go compare Jewett's responses to those of Peter Hirschmann of LucasArts from a few weeks ago (curmudgeoned here) and see what you think. If I had to bet on which company's got better "Next-Gen people", I'd go with the steer-roping guy drinking a Miller Lite and watching Gladiator with his beloved wife. I know I'm not that guy, and I never will be, but I bet he'll make a better game than the guy who says he's stressing about E3 every day of the year.

For the lazy, here's one of Jewett's answers:

14. In my professional life, the achievement that I'm most proud of is...

Well, I have always described running Neversoft as applying the same coaching principals used with a football team to a rock band. The achievement would be growing the rock band that is Neversoft into a 150 man team, and keeping it productive and motivated. And don't get me wrong, I have had a lot of help from a lot of great people along the way. Based on the work hard/play hard philosophy, Neversoft has managed to ship 13 games in 12 years, if you include this year's Tony Hawk's Project 8. Our team has been responsible for well over a billion dollars in revenue. That's a one with nine zeros behind it. Yep, I'd say I'm proud of that, and I do keep score.

Compare with Hirschmann of LucasArts:

14. In my professional life, the achievement that I'm most proud of is...
...one that hasn't happened yet.

It's not even a fair fight.

--jvm at 16:55

link

Comment [ 0 ]

Game industry lacks appreciation of ... myspace.com?

I must have missed something because I don't remember this part at all (emphasis added):

We've heard a great deal in the past year about how the game industry is doomed - by high prices, high development costs, overly complex new hardware and an alleged inability to notice cultural darlings such as iPod and MySpace (this last view is laughable naivete, by the by - publishers are obsessed by such things).

What the Hahira is "an inability to notice cultural darlings like MySpace"? Was there some wave of videogame-slash-myspace commentary that swept through the industry while I was sleeping?

--jvm at 16:07

link

Comment [ 6 ]

Where's my Curmudgeon Gamer hat?

I put some Curmudgeon Gamer items up on CafePress. You can browse them at the Curmudgeon Gamer store. I'm getting a hat for myself, shirts for the wife and 3-year-old, and a bib for the tiny one.

Additionally, some items sport a new, shorter URL for this site: cgmr.net

--jvm at 00:35

link

Comment [ 4 ]

Wii takes first place by being second? But will it sell exclusives?

Michael pointed me to this interesting interview at GamesIndustry.biz with corporate communications VP Jeff Brown from Electronic Arts. Brown makes a key observation about the Wii, but raises an interesting question that I don't see him address directly. The observation first, with emphasis added:

Here's another thing that I think trends well for both the business and for consumers: everybody's saying that the Nintendo Wii is so unique that it's going to be the second system people buy, meaning if you own a 360 or a PS3, you'll probably also buy a Nintendo Wii. The funny thing is, some people say that discursively, like it's some sort of dig at Nintendo - and what they don't get is that if you're second on everybody's system, you're first overall.

The logic here reminds me of mathematical discussions of voting methods and fair apportionment whereby someone who almost never gets selected first in a process ends up the big winner overall. Certainly that can happen mathematically, but the question is whether it will happen for real to Nintendo. I'm still skeptical, but I am intrigued by the possibility.

My follow-up question to Brown hinges on what he says next about the Wii's appeal:

If you look at what EA's doing with the Wii... Today we showed off Madden NFL on the 360 and I've seen it on PlayStation 3, and there are some differences between the two but they're largely the same experience. The Wii is a totally different experience, and if you like Madden NFL on 360, you still don't know what it's like on the Wii - it's a completely different experience.

My question is: Will that different experience truly sell cross-platform games like Madden on the Wii?

We've been hearing over and over that the Wii will be the breath of fresh air the industry needs because it offers such a different experience. However, I don't see big companies like EA, whose bread and butter is cross-platform games, being much of a help to Nintendo's Wii.

Sure, Madden may be a different experience on the Wii, but that doesn't a priori translate into huge sales of Madden on the Wii. Your typical owner of both an Xbox 360 and a Wii may care more about familiarity with the controller (for doing well against friends or in tournaments, e.g.) than whether the Wii's controller adds some gimmicks. Even if the Wii gains a reputation for being as good as a standard Xbox 360 controller, it still faces outside factors like Xbox Live functionality. Will an Xbox Live user want to give up his contact list just to play Madden on the Wii? (These strike me as questions Ruffin, the resident Madden player, could address better.)

While the Wii may well be #1, or a very close second, in hardware sales, I suspect that people will stick with Microsoft or Sony for big-name cross-platform games like Madden. That is, the new experiences that the Wii offers will sell primarily games designed with the Wii's controller in mind, not cross-platform games. Is EA promising to do more than just make a special version of its games for the Wii? Will it commit to making Wii-exclusive games?

The measure for success for Nintendo may well be whether they manage to entice everyone to make such exclusive games, or if all the must-have software on a Nintendo system will, again, be first party.

---

Labels: microsoft, nintendo, ps3, sony, xbox360

--jvm at 11:18

link

Comment [ 1 ]

Tomb Raider dresses up switch-pulling with Tesla device

This post moved.

--jvm at 01:03

link

Comment [ 1 ]

Curmudgeon Gamer guide to Sony's public statements

I think I've broken Sony's encryption code. Look at what they say, and think the opposite.

Like when Phil Harrison says:

I don't think we're arrogant.

Looks straightforward, but here's what it translates as:

We are arrogant.

It's not a perfect negation, but that's just Sony being modest. Which means, of course, that they're being immodest.

When Kaz Hirai says:

Every time we go down a path, we look behind and [Microsoft are] right there - we just can't shake these guys. I wish that they would come up with some strategies of their own, but they seem to be going down the path of everything we do.

This one translates as:

Every time they go down a path, we look ahead and [Microsoft are] right there - we just can't stop following these guys. I wish that we could come up with some strategies of our own, but we seem to be going down the path of everything they do.

When you see it written out that way, it suddenly makes so much more sense, doesn't it?

Or this one, again Kaz Hirai:

The totality of what we bring to the table makes it a good value for consumers.

Translated:

The utter dearth we bring to the table makes it a terrible value for consumers.

I'm sure you get the picture, so I won't go on. Hope this helps.

PostScript: I just want to say that I respect CNN Money's Chris Morris for giving videogame forums their proper place, namely featured in a big news item. From the PlayStation 3 price announcement story above:

"My wallet just cried," wrote one gamer, who calls himself 'DingoStoleMyBaby' on Shacknews.com.

I just can't stop snickering to think that that got read by Sony investors worldwide.

--jvm at 12:40

link

Comment [ 3 ]

Game journalists are like unicorns, developers whine

When I read the first sentence of this post at Press The Buttons

Apparently, if GameDaily BIZ is to be believed, video game developers hate video game journalists.

I thought "Where is the proof that video game journalists exist?" Leaving that question for Mulder aside, the underlying article that MattG links to is here at GameDaily, titled "What Game Developers Hate About Videogame Reviewers". It gives a list of complaints that developers level against these supposed "video game journalists". These two got my goat:

• "Developers hate game reviewers that only play their games for a few hours" -- Get real, developer dude. If you didn't give the player something worth playing in the first hour (I'd usually say 20 minutes, but I'm feeling generous), is it really worth finishing? Shouldn't the reviewer just stop there and say "Screw it!" and tell the readers not to waste their money?
  


• "Developers hate game reviewers who have no idea what it takes to make a game" -- Cry me a river. If the game is a turd even after you spent big bucks making it, don't blame the press for not fully appreciating the sheer scale of your waste.
  

Sheesh.

--jvm at 11:11

link

Comment [ 7 ]

Stealth is good for you, in moderation

Update: As noted in the comments, the Next-Gen.biz post I was quoting left out some context: It was supposed to be a humorous discussion and the target was games that use stealth needlessly, not all stealth. More here at the Simon Byron's site, The Triforce.

---

Do you know who Simon Byron is? I don't, but I know he's wrong about stealth in games in this Next-Gen.biz article on Three Game Design Evils. Not completely wrong, but still wrong. To start with, he's somewhat right here:

For me [the Great Game Design Evil is] stealth. I can't stand it. It's all about patiently lurking and avoiding detection. It's so sinister and creepy; like the sort of thing a pervert does. But ever since Metal Gear Solid it's everywhere. You can hardly find a game without some stealth level.

The last part is right on: not every game needs a stealth section. It fits in certain game types, and even then you have to do it skillfully.

This, on the other hand, is wrong:

But when you think about games, do you remember the bit where you blew away a load of guys with a rocket launcher, or do you remember the bit where you sat quietly in a dark room? Games should be about fantasy and action - if I want to hide in a cupboard I can do that anytime.

It seems to me that only a very peculiar individual would want to spend on-screen time sitting still or creeping around.

When stealth is implemented badly, it is very, very bad. But when it's done right, it's brilliant. In fact, two of my top gaming memories have to do with stealth.

The most memorable battle in all of Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater was the battle against The End, which is all about stalking and evading. Staying quiet and hidden is essential, and patience pays off. I lost my first battle against him when I thought I had him in the area in front of me but he had actually circled around and was standing just a couple of feet behind me. Only the dog-through-the-window of Resident Evil made me jump more than when he zapped me that time. During our second battle, I learned from my mistakes and made much better use of the environment and my available equipment. Even then, it took well over an hour of tense, focused combat.

While MGS3 was designed to give the player a chance to play that battle, the other memorable stealth encounter I've had was in an impromptu 1-on-1 Action Quake 2 match. We were playing this night-time map in a grassy field, stuck to just pistol gunplay, and hunted each other silently. We were very closely matched, each getting in some choice kills, and barely said a word for a tense 30 minutes. When the map changed, the spell was broken and we exchanged ggs and moved on.

Sure, I remember the big set pieces of MGS3 and hectic "staying alive" melee of AQ2, but those parts don't stand out as much against the backdrop of all the other action games I've played. What stands out to me are the quiet moments as I strive to get a clean shot on a wily enemy, fearful that I've exposed my noggin to a fatal snipe.

--jvm at 10:25

link

Comment [ 4 ]

Curmudgeon Gamer logo update

Update: JohnH mentioned a trace function in his Adobe program and Inkscape has something similar. Who knew this was so easy? Here you go:
Click for a huge version.

Now admit it...you want a hat too!

Original post, with awful by-hand recreation follows.

I was considering making myself a Curmudgeon Gamer cap but the original logo I made back in 2002 was a low resolution PNG that doesn't translate well using something like CafePress. So I took a few minutes in OpenOffice Draw to make a vectorized version of the logo. Below is a export from that. Suggestions?

I may try something like Inkscape where I can adjust brush width and try to capture some of the shape of the original.

--jvm at 12:22

link

Comment [ 1 ]

Warren Spector lays it out for us, begs for videogame musical

Next-Gen.biz has a whole pile of contextless Warren Spector quotes. It's like a Rorschach test of words starring a videogame designer.

I can't tell whether to be insulted or not:

You can't imagine what you can't imagine. There's a reason some of us make games, and others of us play them. We have to give them something they can't imagine themselves.

But can I imagine that he can imagine things I can't imagine? Or something like that.

On the other hand, this seems spot on:

If you go to E3 and you're not depressed, you're really not paying attention. I mean, three-thousand identical, noisy, crappy... With, like, five good ones you have to spend three days seeking.

Reading as much as I could about E3 2006, I finished with an interest in Rule of Rose and Metal Gear Solid 4 and...um, that's it. No, wait, Ace Combat X. I think five was too optimistic. Then again, he also wants a videogame musical.

Raise your hand if you'd like more context for this one:

Is this guy really standing up here, saying we're going the way of Vaudeville? Yeah, I am

Ok, so vaudeville disappeared but some of the stars made the leap to other media. Is that what he's saying? And are the other media things like TV and movies, or is he talking about a new media we haven't seen yet.

I hate musicals. Apparently Spector doesn't:

Nobody's making musical games. I want a musical. I want singing and dancing.

Makes me think of Fight Club: "the all-singing, all-dancing crap of the world."

--jvm at 11:03

link

Comment [ 2 ]

"Nothing" is more popular than PlayStation 3!

Technically it's "neither the Wii nor the PlayStation 3 are more appealing", but the headline I picked is catchier. You can see Japanese consumer and retailer reaction to the Wii and PlayStation 3 in this Next-Gen.biz piece. The response from retailers was:

Of retailers, here are the consoles they find most appealing:

65.9%: Wii
18.8%: neither
15.3%: PS3

No matter how you slice it, not looking good for the PlayStation 3.

Labels: ps3, sony

--jvm at 11:42

link

Comment [ 9 ]

The horror of platform exclusive bonus features

Update: Ok, I finally managed to get a bit more coherent on this point. Well, at least that's my hope.

Look, who benefits by splitting the bonuses across the different platforms? I don't see a benefit to anyone, even the publisher. 99% of consumers won't know the difference, first off. Those who do might, like me, be angered at not getting something which could have been trivially included. And those who aren't angry, who own both platforms and know the difference and might buy both versions of the collection...they've got to be a fraction of a tenth of a percent of the market.

So really...why does this make sense, even from the publisher's point of view?

Original rant follows...

Taito Legends 2 for the Xbox is not the same as Taito Legends 2 for the PlayStation 2. While they both share a core set of emulated classic games, each has platform exclusive titles:

Xbox exclusives: Bubble Symphony, Cadash, Pop 'n Pop, Rayforce
PlayStation 2 exclusives: Balloon Bomber, G Darius, Ray Storm, Syvalion

I'd love to have Bubble Symphony, it's being released on a collection, but only as a platform exclusive? What kind of insanity is that?

This kind of exclusivity burns me up. The only reason I got Namco Museum 50th Anniversary for the PlayStation 2 was to have Galaga '88, a game inexplicably absent from the PSP Namco Battle Collection. On the other hand, I'd like to have Namco Battle Collection so I can pick up Dig Dug II and a few other titles.

Along similar lines, you can get the original Prince of Persia as a bonus in Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time for the PlayStation 2. But if you want to play Prince of Persia 2 (and I do), you can only get that as a bonus item in the Xbox version of Sands of Time. The kicker is that the Xbox apparently got both classic games, while the PlayStation 2 got only the first. Argh!

Yes, I realize Namco's evil plans worked. Sucker that I am, I bought the PS2 version of Namco Museum 50th Anniversary and I will eventually buy Battle Collection for my PSP. Fate would have it that I own both systems. But I am not buying an Xbox just to get Bubble Symphony. In either case it is a stupid idea to break the bonus games up, and I hate both companies for doing it.

This is why I really wanted StarROMs to succeed. Shopping for just the games I want, instead of buying a mixed bag to get the gems, was such a better model for me.

--jvm at 11:33

link

Comment [ 4 ]

4 million Xbox 360s sold, still not meeting expectations

According to sales figures, it appears Microsoft sold about 2 million Xbox 360 systems in the United States through 30 June 2006 and around 4 million systems worldwide. Previously Microsoft had stated it expected worldwide shipments (as opposed to sales) between 4.5 and 5.5 million Xbox 360s during that time period, and at one point set a goal of 10 million sales in the first 12 months. My take is that this is mostly bad news for Microsoft.

First, the domestic Xbox 360 sales data, courtesy of Dav2k on NeoGAF and Next-Gen.biz:

A bit of history: More than half of all sales of the original Xbox were domestic. Given that, let's be generous and say that 2 million Xbox 360s have been sold inside the U.S. and the same number outside. At best, then, Microsoft has sold 4 million systems worldwide since the Xbox 360 launch in November 2005.

Provided they've actually hit the low end shipping goal (not the same as sales, of course), Microsoft has a whole month's inventory sitting on store shelves or in warehouses. If they hit the high end of their shipping goal, then they have 1.5 million Xbox 360s just sitting around, which seems rather a lot of stock taking up space.

The upside for Microsoft, if there is one, is that if they keep the current sales pace, and they also sell one Xbox 360 outside the U.S. for every one they sell inside the U.S., then they'll add 500,000 or so new owners each month. At that rate, by the end of October they will have a 6 million system advantage when Sony finally launches the PlayStation 3. (Again, that's a best-case scenario, so I expect Microsoft will fall a bit short of that goal.) It will be interesting to see if the PlayStation 3 or the Wii can catch up over the long haul.

The real mystery to me is why everyone got the Xbox 360 sales so wrong. Most reports have been upbeat, especially after Microsoft overcame the shortages that plagued the first couple of months after the launch. But we should be far beyond that point now, and shelves should have plenty of stock.

Microsoft appeared to think its sales would pick up in the April-to-June period, and they didn't. If the 4 million worldwide sales number is right, and I think it's actually a little high, then that means that analyst expectations of 6 million sales (not just shipped systems) by this point were far too optimisitic. That same analyst's prediction of 10-12 million system sales by the end of 2006 seems equally dubious at this point, although at the time his report lent credence to Microsoft's expectation of selling 10 million Xbox 360s in the first 12 to 16 months after launch.

Normal folks like me aren't going to have hard information on why the Xbox 360 hasn't sold as well as people expected. While summer is an historically slack sales season, I wonder how much of an effect the Nintendo and Sony announcements at E3 had. Certainly the Wii and the PlayStation 3 aren't going to strangle the Xbox 360 like the PlayStation 2 did the Dreamcast. However, I wouldn't be one bit surprised if more than a few people opted to hold out until this winter when prices, games, and supplies are better known.

Labels: microsoft, xbox360

--jvm at 19:35

link

Comment [ 4 ]

The link above goes to a lawyer's very cogent explanation of why most geeks yakking about the law is even more disconnected from reality than it seems. I recommend reading the comments too, where an Anonymous User points out the flipside:

[The reason engineers have problems with the law is] that we have problems with the illogical nature of much law and the tendency of lawyers and lawmakers to think they can legislate physical and mathematical reality....EULA's are no different... some judges may say I agree to it if I open the package but physics says I can't have read and agreed to what I haven't yet seen.

My naïve summary of the article is:

• The law isn't just what's written down -- it's an ongoing process of rules that are only enforced insofar as a judge thinks they're reasonable;
• As a result, the law isn't particularly rational, but
• Mostly, don't sweat that EULA stuff -- the reasonable terms would hold up in court, and the unreasonable ones wouldn't.

Which is fine, as far as it goes. But the engineer's annoyance that the law doesn't seem to respect the bounds of logic isn't merely aesthetic. I think it's fundamentally moral.

People that anguish over EULAs want to do the right thing, but don't like what the EULA is asserting as the right thing. Some people advocate avoiding the problem -- live on Open Source, or only software that offers license terms you're happy with. In a sense, this is a "take them at their word" approach -- a company selling software licenses with EULAs is announcing its intentions (about guarantees, about limited liability, about what it wants to dictate to you), and if you don't like those intentions, don't do business with them.

Or one can take the "they don't really mean it" approach -- this means disregarding the EULA. Sure, it says I can't resell the software, but they haven't come down on EB's "pre-owned" section, have they? How are they to know if I'm playing on an emulator or if I'm making bootlegs? This attitude can depend on the who more than the what -- I might not be willing to buy Microsoft's stuff under such onerous terms, because I don't trust them, but be willing to overlook a tough-sounding EULA from a "good guy" like ...oh, anyone but Microsoft. (Except Blizzard. Or Electronic Arts. Or...) Similarly, EULAs on console games might not bother you the same as PC software, or click-through vs. shrinkwrap. This is the tricky region where a lot of the arguments over EULAs come up -- where people are doing something the EULA forbids, but feel justified because they can get away with it, or because they think the EULA's not legal, or because they have a sense of what they should be allowed to do. To the "take them at their word" people, all of these are splitting hairs -- you put yourself in the moral dilemma when you bought the software and violated the terms of the EULA, and everything else is just trying to justify it to yourself.

Of course, mostly there's the "It doesn't bother me" approach -- I don't really expect the software to melt my machine, so what do I care if they refuse to be held liable? I'm not really going to make any copies of my PS2 games, so what's the problem if they tell me I can't? I might think I ought to be allowed to do that, but since I'm not going to, it's just an academic argument, which isn't enough to keep me from buying the game, EULA and all.

The problem is that EULAs (and most other legalese a nonlawyer runs into) isn't an unbiased statement of the law. Rather, it's a company lawyer trying to convince you that the law is what they say it is. Recall the old "Any rebroadcast without the written permission of [insert sporting franchise] is prohibited by law" blurb at the end of the game? It's a blatant lie, on many levels. That's not what the law says -- it's what they want you to believe the law says, in order to maximize their profits.

If it were up to me, I'd make it a condition of practicing law that you have to make statements that you believe represent the law as it is, not as your client would like it to be. But it wouldn't solve the problem. Because the law is flexible and evolving, and because it's not just a matter of "what the law says", but how a judge would rule, a lawyer writing that rebroadcast prohibition doesn't know whether a given rebroadcast would be prohibited or not. And, since they're representing a client, they have to take their client's side -- that [in a completely undefined hypothetical case of a rebroadcast] it would be prohibited, meaning they could successfully sue over it.

So, when I've ranted myself out about the average person not being able to determine whether something is legal or not, and the legalese propaganda poured into our ears by EULAs, copyright claims, etc., what is the thing that still annoys me?

It's that this EULA thing is a novel concept for a situation that doesn't _need_ a novel concept. Software companies are trying to have it both ways -- they want me to "buy their software", but they don't actually want to sell it to me. That's what a EULA is -- a statement that I'm not buying the software, just "licensing" certain uses of it. Rather than act like every other merchant in every other field, and accept the centuries of legal precedent and understanding about liability, merchantability, resaleability, etc. that comes along with buying and selling things, software companies want to dictate terms where they "sell" you software, but only to do what they want you to do, and by the way, they're not responsible for it working, or breaking, or destroying your stuff. (I am often reminded of the SNL toy "Bag of Broken Glass". Is that really what they think they're selling me?)

There's a world of reasonableness in the law -- and the EULA is an attempt to get around it, by replacing commerce law with the wild playground of contract law. Which is appropriately wild -- people should be able to make enforceable agreements between each other, under almost any crazy terms they like. But when you sell me a hammer, I expect it to pound nails into wood. And not explode. And when I'm done with it, I can give or sell it to someone else. Is it really too much to ask?



Here's a T Shirt.
You can get it at Zazzle, if you want.

--Bob at 11:01

link

Comment [ 1 ]

40 incompatible games is still too many

Bob nearly calls me a shill, but does push me to post on this article which comments on PlayStation 3 backward compatibility that's been making the rounds. I first saw it on PS3blog but it's been covered elsewhere by now. Here's the key bit:

Sony is very concerned about quality and backward compatibility. They want to get this right. They tested game after game after game. When there were about 40 Playstation 1 games that didn't work properly, that didn't pass their criteria for quality.

So I checked that font of all knowledge, Wikipedia, and came up with its list of PSOne games incompatible with the PlayStation 2. Turns out there are just about 40 such games, if you own the new slim version of the PlayStation 2. Of those 40, I own seven, which is seven too many. I have often considered grabbing a late-model PSOne just to have a compatible system around.

Seriously, I find it difficult to believe that Sony cares enough about backward compatibility to make the PlayStation 3 more compatible than the PlayStation 2.

If they pull it off, however, then that'll be one big point in favor of grabbing a PlayStation 3 sooner rather than later.

Labels: ps3, sony

--jvm at 10:05

link

Comment [ 5 ]

How can Sony rehabilitate the PS3 public image?

The blasted PlayStation 3 isn't even out yet, but you can't go to ten random videogame blogs and not find someone bashing it, or Sony execs, for something. I find myself wondering: What can Sony possibly do to turn things around, gain some positive momentum?

All of you about to shout "Lower the price!" please...don't. We know already.

I obviously can't speak for everyone else, but here are a few things that would make me sit up and take notice. These aren't in any particular order...

• Explain PlayStation Network Platform immediately: Xbox 360 players have access to a much-improved Xbox Live service along with Xbox Live Arcade, and I envy them. Sony needs to tell me how PlayStation Network Platform is going to be as good -- if not better -- than Xbox Live.
  
  Matching Xbox Live feature-for-feature and then cranking it up to 11 would be a start. Coming up with something I want that Microsoft hasn't already thought of would be even better. As I've said before, if Sony can't get this right, they're screwed.
  
  
• Explain how backward compatibility will work: I'm one of the few people for whom this matters deeply. Will it be hardware or software? Will it improve with updates, as we've seen on the Xbox 360? Tell me the truth about your expectations, and be specific about which games will probably not work.
  
  
• Explain the game pricing model: I do not want to buy a $70 game to go with my $600 PlayStation 3. Tiered pricing I can stand, but if everything is going to shoot for a $70 price tag just to cash in on the initial rush, irrespective of quality, then I am not interested.
  
  
• Other than Metal Gear Solid 4, name one guaranteed exclusive that I want: We already know that I'm going to get MGS4, but that's just one game. Except for Defender 2000 on the Atari Jaguar and Typing of the Dead on the Dreamcast, I'm not that willing to buy a console for a single exclusive game.
  
  You've already lost your exclusivity on Grand Theft Auto 4, so you can't trot that one out anymore. You lost your Resident Evil exclusivity a long time ago. It does appear you've got Silent Hill and Ace Combat exclusives this generation (with the exception of Silent Hill 2 on the Xbox), but I've not heard any promises of those games on the PlayStation 3.
  
  So, tell me something truly exclusive that I really want to have.
  
  (If you're looking for ideas, how about a true, 2D console sequel to Castlevania: Sympony of the Night with HD-quality graphics and a soundtrack that makes me weep...)
  
  
• If Blu-ray fails, how is the PlayStation 3 still going to be special? Consistently Sony reps are saying that the PlayStation 3 is so very much more than a console, thus is truly worth the steep price of admission. Presumably, HD output and Blu-ray are key features in that regard.
  
  If, heaven forbid, Blu-ray pulls a Betamax, just what will remain to make me feel like this hardware is much more than the average game console? Cut the marketing crap and the buzzwords and just tell me: What sets the PlayStation 3 apart from the Xbox 360 if Blu-ray isn't in the picture?

Ok, that's my list off the top of my head. Anyone else?

Labels: ps3, sony

--jvm at 01:38

link

Comment [ 9 ]

Pinball Hall of Fame eviscerates Pinball of the Dead

I like playing The Pinball of the Dead on my GameBoy Advance, but Pinball Hall of Fame: The Gottlieb Collection on my PSP has changed my pinball-playing life. The difference is reality...or some adequate simulation thereof.

Play The Pinball of the Dead for an hour and you'll start to notice that there are only so many ways you can hit the ball around. For lack of a better word, the game's simulation is too granular. The lack of variation and randomness reduces the game to the status of toy.

By comparison, I don't think I've ever smacked a ball with a flipper in Pinball Hall of Fame and thought "Oh, yeah, I've seen that exact move before." This isn't the say the game is unpredictable. In fact, the game reliably simulates flipping the ball in mostly predictable ways, but there is just enough variation and randomness to make it interesting.

This richer simulation strikes me as much closer to reality and far, far more entertaining. And as a result, The Pinball of the Dead feels downright dead.

The only time I've played a real pinball machine with any consistency was when a graduate student colleague used to invite me each week to lunch at a pizza parlour and game room. We played his favorite table, The Addams Family, for probably 30 minutes. He was a good player and a helpful guide as I slowly grew in skill.

This game room also had The House of the Dead, and while my friend would get in one last game of pinball, I'd often use the skills I'd honed on my Saturn to shoot a few zombies. After a few lunches like that, my friend asked if House of the Dead always used the same pattern for enemies. I said that it did, to which he responded that that sounded profoundly boring. I believe he saw attempting to control the small unpredictability in pinball as a true challenge compared to the easily learned patterns in House of the Dead.

So it's perhaps appropriate that, years later, a true simulation of pinball has ruined The Pinball of the Dead for me. As happened at that pizza parlour across from the university, a little unpredictability adds just the right ingredient to make a game truly interesting.

--jvm at 00:42

link

Comment [ 0 ]

As if I didn't have enough to remember in the game already:

Different types of gems have different basic properties, and a gem's cut also determines the effect this gem will have. Jewelcrafters can learn several types of cuts for each kind of gem: the Azure Moonstone, for example, can be cut into a lustrous, stormy, solid, or sparkling Azure Moonstone, and each one of these cuts offers different bonuses when used in a socketable item. Placing cut gems into an item's sockets will add the bonuses of these gems to those of the item, allowing players to customize their equipment to better suit their individual play style or the different roles their class can fulfill.

It's hard enough just to figure out what fire resistant gear to wear while farming for materials to make more fire resistant gear. Now you have to remember which chestpiece with which combination of gems combined with which helm (combined with which combination of gems) combined with... ARGH.

Can it be long before there's an undergraduate class in World of Warcraft gear? If Blizzard let the goods be traded openly, for dough, we'd probably not be that far out. Hrm, speaking of, I'd better log Thopas Columbia back into Second Life to get my 50 Lindens.

--ruffin at 09:20

link

Comment [ 2 ]

Gimme mini-Classic

My iBook's hard drive is small enough that I decided to forego running Classic. I wanted to play Civilization (the original), however, so, yes, I grabbed a Mac emulator for my Mac. Much, much smaller than OS 9.2.2, and runs Civ1 very well.

Well, why stop there? Why can't Apple release a mini-Classic just big enough to let me play games? Oh, I know I'm dreaming, but heck, you can blog about anything, you know? Now if the emus would just catch up enough for me to play Dark Vengence, Madden, and SiN. (Yes, I realize I'd do better to start learning DOSBox. Didn't I just say this was a blog?)

Labels: apple

--ruffin at 18:59

link

Comment [ 0 ]

Another sign of the demise of immovable, indestructible rock worlds

Lara's magnetic grapple in Tomb Raider: Legend is a nifty little device. However, like a lot of game gimmicks it appeared to be useful only for grabbing special objects and enemies.

Then last night my poor aim made it latch onto a light stand in an underground excavation site and, before I realized it, I had pulled it off a ledge. It bounced on the ground below and sat on its side. Nothing special happened: this is just a tiny detail, not part of a puzzle. The game simply understands that the light stand can attract a magnet and even be moved by the force of the grapple.

Yet, it does mean that someone somewhere said "You know, she should be able to pull metal things that aren't part of a puzzle." After years of playing Quake and all the derivative 3D worlds it spawned with environments that might as well be made of immovable, indestructible rock -- rocks that sometimes look like fragile plants or thin panes of glass -- I'm glad we're finally getting to the point where I can't assume that background props are static and lifeless. It means I can't take for granted what's important and what's not. Now, if the simulation of collisions and magnetism and (one can hope) destructibility and deformation could lead to new ways to play games, that'd be even better.

All that from a missed grapple. It's true: you can blog about anything, if you put your mind to it.

--jvm at 16:53

link

Comment [ 3 ]

LucasArts VP of product development = 100% safe!

Good gravy, what is this? Can this VP of product development from LucasArts think up anything that's not already 100% guaranteed not to offend or surprise? Check his responses to these questions...

1. I'm currently working on...
...projects being made by the best people in the business.

Subtle props for co-workers and bosses: check.

2. My favorite part of the working day is...
...when I get to play something fun.

Whiffed this one. Correct answer was: "...when I get to play something fun made by LucasArts!!1!".

3. The three brands that I most adore are...
...Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and Pixar.

Translation: My team, my team, not a competitor. Safe...very safe.

4. When I was 12 years old I most loved to...
...think about what it would be like to talk to a girl.

At 12 years old all you were still thinking about talking? Still...very safe in case the parents are reading.

5. On an average Saturday afternoon I...
...am stressing about E3. (Applicable 365 days a year.)

Hey, boss! Look! I'm on Next-Gen.biz! And I'm focused like a laser on E3! And I still stand by my promise: We will not be outdone by Majesco next year!

8. The piece of music that moves me most is...
...Track 14 of the Medal of Honor soundtrack.

That might be great music, I suppose. On the other hand, I hear the dogfood at LucasArts is awesome!

9. The game I wish I'd created is...
Honestly, the creative process is as such I'm hopefully never too envious of someone else's good idea. However, the games that have had the biggest influences on me are Binary System's Starflight, Sid Meier's Pirates, Parsoft's Hellcats Over the Pacific, and LucasArts' original Jedi Knight. I also subscribe to the theory that Mario 64 is the greatest videogame of all time.

So, nothing in the past [counts on fingers] decade of which to be envious. Or, perhaps the message here is that everything he wished he'd created in the past ten years ... he actually did create! All LucasArts employees take note, as I think this might be in your next job review meeting.

10. The sort of movie I like to watch is...
...the kind that makes you forget about everything else while you're experiencing it. Same applies to games, books, and pizza.

Movies, games, books, pizza. Makes sense.

11. On the beach, I like to read...
I'm afraid of the beach.

This must have got cut off. It was supposed to say "I'm afraid of the beach because it means I'm not in my office making great games for LucasArts." Most likely a cut-and-paste error.

Oh, I just can't go on.

Look, this feature is called "Next-gen people". If these kinds of super-safe answers are indicative of the type of personality leading us into the next-generation of games, then we're doomed. Doomed, I tell you!

--jvm at 10:14

link

Comment [ 5 ]

July Carnival of Grumpy Gamers

Ron "Monkey Island" Gilbert, a.k.a. Grumpy Gamer is hosting the July Carnival of Gamers. Some interesting posts there, like this one that still doesn't understand that scarcity is a natural part of the system (I'd reply with this about the need for illegal ROMs or this about games that can't be bought) and this one about Shadow of the Colossus that makes me want to know if he's got to the disappointing ending yet (his post is from 2005; my SotC post here).

I submitted like four posts from June's bounty and suggested that Grumpy Gamer use his editorial power to pick from none-to-all as worthy of being listed. Two made it: this one by Ruffin and this one by me. I know that's not in the rules for the carnival, but I favor editorial filtering. If the current carnival poster doesn't like your post, resubmit next month. If it gets rejected several times, perhaps there's a reason.

I realize a carnival starting out may want to get as many posts as it can, but at some point you have to take a cleaver and cut the fat.

If I get cut, I won't take it personally. I certainly won't stop posting. The writing's become a reward in and of itself, and comments from regulars and passing readers are a great bonus. Not getting into the carnival wouldn't change any of that.

Besides, there are far too many games to play and write about. Worrying about getting picked just takes time away from actually maintaining a blog.

Labels: ps3

--jvm at 23:29

link

Comment [ 3 ]

Tomb Raider, you fools... not Urban Raider

In the original Tomb Raider, Lara Croft rode to the top of a skyscraper on a cut elevator cable, broke into the Natla Industries offices on the top floor, and found clues that led her to her next exotic destination. In Tomb Raider: Legend, Lara jumps from one skyscraper to another on a motorcycle, from that one to yet another on a zipline, infiltrates a Yakuza penthouse, and battles the boss under a glass dome on the roof.

The former: easy and fun. The latter: trying and unsatsifying.

The difference is that Lara's urban adventure in the original game was a stylish 2 minute cut-scene while this new game makes it into a plodding venture that took me over an hour to complete.

Ultimately, I don't think it's the urban environment's design that kills the fun. Rather, it's that Lara just doesn't appear to belong in that setting. Starting with Tomb Raider 2 these kinds of adventures have been a standard part of the series, but to date it hasn't been handled in a way that didn't strain my suspension of disbelief.

In a traditional tomb raiding setting I can accept artificial boundaries. Underground caves, mountaintop fortresses, even underwater shipwrecks are all naturally contained settings. But on the streets of Paris in Angel of Darkness or in the bizarre opera house of Tomb Raider 2, the expectations of a more familiar reality make it difficult for me to believe that Lara has to get from one building to the next on a makeshift zipline or through a field of broken glass through some contrived climbing and jumping exercises.

If the Tokyo level in Tomb Raider: Legend had been handled in a cool cutscene, or been replaced with a non-shooting sneaking mission, I might have been happier. As it is, I'd rather Crystal Dynamics look back at the original game, as they said they did when making Legend, and realize that one of the coolest moments of the early game was watching a movie of Lara -- as opposed to playing as Lara -- in a city and scaling a skyscraper.

--jvm at 12:23

link

Comment [ 1 ]

Tomb Raider boss sucks (and other tidbits)

As I said last summer, Sands of Time was what Tomb Raider should have become. Apparently, Crystal Dynamics was on the same page and ripped ideas from Prince of Persia without shame for Tomb Raider: Legend. Now, I don't remember them, but it seems that Prince of Persia: Sands of Time had bosses, other than the final one. That I don't remember them, except the important final battle, strikes me as a mark in favor of how they were handled. In classic Tomb Raider, there were also bosses, but each was a distinct challenge and memorable without being a burden.

Regrettably, Tomb Raider: Legend shows that Crystal Dynamics can make a memorable boss precisely because it isn't fun.

The first boss battle takes place in a confusing environment with terrible camera control. The best strategy is to rush the boss with guns a-blazin' with little regard for health. If you miss a key-but-hidden part of the environment, you'll languish as you die time after time. In a nutshell: I hated it.

The promised other tidbits:

• Stuttering and dodgy sound lead me to believe that the PSP port was still rushed out the door at the end, as I had feared. Let's hope Crystal Dynamics optimizes heavily for the PSP when they do their 10th Anniversary game. (Note: Buzz Monkey did the PSP port of Tomb Raider: Legend. Makes me wonder just how much internal expertise Crystal Dynamics has with the PSP version of their engine...)
  
• How do you know that Lara can't/shouldn't reach some part of the environment? The texture is super low resolution. So if a ledge is tempting but the texture looks like something on a Voodoo 2, forget it. (May only apply to PSP version.)
• Lara's hip-wagging walk in a sexy party outfit is just shy of the nasty slink of a Vice City woman.
• If nothing else was learned from Angel of Darkness, they at least realized that Lara is a character crying out for a good story. So far so good.
  

--jvm at 17:21

link

Comment [ 3 ]

San Andreas outrage: not the coffee, but the software license

Have you actually read the license for Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas for the PlayStation 2?

It's an open secret that publishers and developers would love to do away with used game sales. Retailers and many consumers, of course, favor the availability of used games. The big stink a few weeks ago when a report surfaced that Sony would restrict used PlayStation 3 game sales demonstrated clearly how seriously both sides feel.

But what about the licenses that are already attached to videogame software? If taken seriously, I wonder if they might not already restrict what consumers can do in ways they don't realize.

So, again: Have you actually read the license for Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas for the PlayStation 2?

Here are the first four paragraphs of that license, for completeness. Judging from the language, this reproduction itself is probably a violation of the license. I've highlighted the parts of interest to me, for easier reading.

LIMITED SOFTWARE WARRANTY AND LICENSE AGREEMENT

YOUR USE OF THIS SOFTWARE IS SUBJECT TO THIS LIMITED SOFTWARE WARRANTY AND LICENSE AGREEMENT (THE" AGREEMENT") AND THE TERMS SET FORTH BELOW. THE "SOFTWARE" INCLUDES ALL SOFTWARE INCLUDED WITH THIS AGREEMENT, THE ACCOMPANYING MANUAL(S), PACKAGING AND OTHER WRITTEN, ELECTRONIC OR ON-LINE MATERIALS OR DOCUMENTATION, AND ANY AND ALL COPIES OF SUCH SOFTWARE AND ITS MATERIALS. BY OPENING THE SOFTWARE, INSTALLING, AND/OR USING THE SOFTWARE AND ANY OTHER MATERIALS INCLUDED WITH THE SOFTWARE, YOU HEREBY ACCEPT THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE WITH ROCKSTAR GAMES, INC. ("LICENSOR").

LICENSE: Subject to this Agreement and its terms and conditions, LICENSOR hereby grants you the non-exclusive, non-transferable, limited right and license to use one copy of the Software for your personal use on a single home or portable computer. The Software is being licensed to you and you hereby acknowledge that no title or ownership in the Software is being transferred or assigned and this Agreement should not be construed as a sale of any rights in the Software. All rights not specifically granted under this Agreement are reserved by LICENSOR and, as applicable, its licensors.

OWNERSHIP: LICENSOR retains all rights, title and interest to this Software, including, but not limited to, all copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, trade names, proprietary rights, patents, titles, computer codes, audiovisual effects, themes, characters, character names, stories, dialog, settings, artwork, sounds effects [sic], musical works, and moral rights. The Software is protected by United States copyright law and applicable copyright laws and treaties throughout the world. The Software may not be copied, reproduced or distributed in any manner or medium, in whole or in part, without prior written consent from LICENSOR. Any persons copying, reproducing or distributing all or any part of the Software in any manner or medium, will be willfully violating the copyright laws and may be subject to civil and criminal penalties. Be advised that Copyright violations are subject to penalties of up to $100,000 per violation. The Software contains certain licensed materials and LICENSOR's licensors may protect their rights in the event of any violation of this Agreement.

LICENSE CONDITIONS

You agree not to:
Commercially exploit the Software; Distribute, lease, license, sell, rent or otherwise transfer or assign this Software, or any copies of this Software, without the express prior written consent of LICENSOR; Make copies of the software or any part thereof, except for back up or archival purposes; Except as otherwise specifically provided by the Software or this Agreement, use or install the Software (or permit others to do same) on a network, for on-line use, or on more than one computer, computer terminal, or workstation at the same time; Copy the Software onto a hard drive or other storage device and must run the software from the included CD-ROM (although the Software may automatically copy a portion of itself onto your hard drive during installation in order to run more efficiently); use or copy the Software at a computer gaming center or any other location-based site; provided, that LICENSOR may offer you a separate site license agreement to make the Software available for commercial use; Reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble or otherwise modify the Software, in whole or in part; Remove or modify any proprietary notices or labels contained on or within the Software; and transport, export, or re-export (directly or indirectly) into any country forbidden to receive such Software by any U.S. export laws or accompanying regulations or otherwise violate such laws or regulations, that may be amended from time to time.

To summarize:

By opening the game, you've agreed to the terms of this license you couldn't read beforehand. You can only use it on a computer (uh...PlayStation 2) and you can't copy any little bit of it without obtaining prior written consent. If you screw up, you could be subject to big scary fines! You have also agreed not to sell the software, not to make anything more than a backup copy, not to copy any bit to a hard drive, not use it at a gaming cafe, and not to modify it.

I really don't like licenses I can't read beforehand. They're despicable. And a license that doesn't even sound like it's written for the software I've bought (didn't we just find out a PlayStation isn't a computer?) surely doesn't instill much confidence in the legal eagles putting it together. Does this license override my fair use rights? Or could Rockstar really fine me big moolah for, say, a screenshot? Not that they would, I suppose, but I'm not terribly comfortable with them forcing a situation where I give up fair use rights.

If I'm not allowed to sell the software, does that mean I can't sell my used copy of San Andreas? Or is this some other meaning of sell the software that isn't the usual meaning that we normals use?

And it appears that using San Andreas with something like the HD Loader is illegal, since you can't copy any of the game onto a hard drive. Understandable, I suppose, but why rule out gaming cafes? Seems like a pretty natural way to get people interested in buying their own copy of the game.

Finally, isn't that last bit about no modifications contrary to the tradition of previous GTA games? I thought modification was not just permitted, but downright encouraged. Why have a license that clearly prohibits it? Granted, this is my Hot-Coffee-enabled PlayStation 2 copy, but I bet the Windows version says something similar in the license.

Anyway, next time you want to get angry at Sony for what they might do, perhaps just read an existing game's license to get an idea of what publishers are already doing.

--jvm at 23:11

link

Comment [ 3 ]