2009 Game Awards

Here they are at last. My game awards for 2009. So sit back, relax, grab some peach fresca, and enjoy. As always, remember my creed: everything I write is subjective. I don't intend to make any objective claims. These awards were chosen by me because I felt they exhibited the category the best. I thought long and hard about these, and even had to sacrifice gaming favorites to make the choices. So, without further banter, let's get started.

BEST STORY
Winner: Assassin's Creed II
Hands down the winner. Assassin's Creed introduced one of the most intriguing and mysterious stories yet. It's sequel brings this full force, with twists, turns, and even a little romance. The amazing story of Desmond starts off with a bang. The story behind the story makes every little thing in this game worth while. But ACII does not win because of the amazing story of Desmond, but that of his ancestor, Ezio Auditore da Firenze. Ezio's story is one of the best. It is a story of manhood, betrayal, revenge, and best of all, one hell of a badass story. Every mission in the game pertains to Ezio's story and his motives, and the game never goes away from the motivations and actions of Ezio. Ezio's story is one of the best, and can only be done with a video game. The experience you gain from this story affects you like so few games in the past. ACII's story sits up there with amazing stories like Mass Effect, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, and Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic.
Runners-Up: Modern Warfare 2, Halo 3: ODST, Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, Batman: Arkham Asylum

BEST MULTIPLAYER
Winner: Modern Warfare 2
No contention in this category. Infinity Ward simply knows how to make an amazing multiplayer experience. Call of Duty 4 brought the first glimpse of truly amazing and addicting multiplayer. Infinity Ward upped the ante for the second game, and multiplayer is amazing. Simply put, it's just fun. Multiplayer shouldn't be complicated like Rainbow Six games, and it shouldn't be dull, like Uno. They need to have the perfect balance of everything to make people have fun. MW2 does this and some more. The progressive levelling keeps players addicted and motivated. The great weapons and perks keep players motivated and gives them reasons to play. The great and much improved matchmaking keeps people from leaving. In particular, MW2 has done something that not many multiplayer games can say they do: it's glitch-proof. There were a terrible amount of glitches and bugs in MW2 since it's release, but the number of players online has not gone down at all. In fact, it's gone up. Only a truly well done multiplayer could pull this off.
Runners-Up: Halo 3: ODST, Left 4 Dead 2

BEST GRAPHICS
Winner: Assassin's Creed II and Uncharted 2
Yes, I couldn't pick one. Both these games just deserve the award too much. ACII is amazing for many reasons, but the graphics bring it all together. The sheer detail of everything is amazing. Entire cities like Venice and Florence were recreated in detail, and nothing was missed. Nothing. Everything is perfect, and with the scope and sheer size of ACII, this is such a great graphical feat. Uncharted 2 succeeds in these ways too, but in a different way. Uncharted 2 never skips, glitches, or stops. It keeps going, and with the nature of this game, it has to. The high action and the setpieces are super detailed and for once in a game, they are beautiful. The E3 demo showed Nathan Drake looking out into the distance at the mountains, and for a moment, it looked real. And not the stupid, "lifelike" real. The type of real that is beautiful, and not seen in a game much. For these reasons both games had to get this award.
Runners-Up: Modern Warfare 2

BEST ALL-AROUND EXPERIENCE
Winner: Halo 3: ODST
This was a hard one to award. In my opinion, most games are great all-around experiences. But there is always one that is just a great experience in everything. Halo 3: ODST does this the best. The singleplayer is true Halo, giving a great story and great replayability with audio logs and of course Legendary difficulty. Halo also gives 2 player co-op in the singleplayer, which is a great plus. Halo 3: ODST also gives Firefight, which is nothing but fun, and a great excursion from the normal Halo multiplayer. But the thing that tops it all is that second disc. It's that multiplayer disc with the entirety of multiplayer Halo 3 that makes this the best bang for your buck. Every single map, every single mode, and every single oppurtunity of Halo 3 multiplayer without having to get Halo 3. There are so many things in this package that make it worth while.
Runners-Up: Modern Warfare 2, Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, Brutal Legend

MOST SUCCESSFUL
Winner: Modern Warfare 2
Come on. Was this really a competition? Many games did well this year. Assassin's Creed hit almost 2 million copies. Borderlands hit about 1.3 million. Modern Warfare 2 didn't do well. It did absolutely amazing. 6 million copies in 1 week. Some games don't make that in their entire lifetime. That is a crazy amount of games sold. Modern Warfare 2's numbers show it's success, true, but that's not it. Because money doesn't mean success. It means money. Success is when that money is worth it. MW2 was hyped up like never before. For heavens sake, it had a veteran package with night-vision goggles. But for once, the hype was alright. Because it lived up to it. Not many things can claim that all the hype was lived up to. Modern Warfare 2 satisfies everything it promises. Infinity Ward wanted it's players to make their $59.99 worth while, and that's exactly what they did. This game shows promise too, with DLC on the way that is sure to sell hotcakes.
Runners-Up: Batman: Arkham Asylum, Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, Super Mario Bros. Wii

BEST GAME NO ONE PLAYED
Winner: Red Faction: Geurilla
Okay, I'll admit it. I didn't play this either. I've looked at it quite a bit when I go shopping for games, but more times than not I'm picking up Assassin's Creed II or Modern Warfare 2. Like many games, it just gets overwhelmed by other games. Taking a closer look though, maybe I should have played it. Red Faction: Guerilla got really good reviews, in the nines. It's engine is amazing. Everything is destructible, and not in the cheasy Mercenaries way. The physics of all objects behave accordingly. So if you do hit something and break it, it will break realistically. If you explode something, everything is still there, but it's just in different places according to the explosion. It also has jetpacks, and a full explorable Mars. I don't know about you, but this actually sounds intriguing. Why did no one play this game? Who knows. I've been asking myself that too. That is, when I'm not playing ACII or MW2.
Runners-Up: MadWorld, Ghostbusters: The Game, Prototype

MOST POTENTIAL
Winner: Batman: Arkham Asylum
They did it. They finally did it. They made a good superhero game. Not just a good one. A phenomenal game, comparable in quality to non-superhero games. Batman: AA was just amazing. It brings so many new and long wanted things to the super-hero game genre. It brings fluid combat that makes you feel like the superhero. It bring a great story penned by actual people in the comics and animation industry that know what they are doing. More than that, it brings people that know the character down to the core. It brings familiar faces back from previous iterations of the character to bring familiarity. It doesn't carbon copy the comics, instead in favor for an original story with characters of the universe. Batman: AA brings so much potential to so many games. Future games need to learn some lessons from this game. There is no excuse for a poor superhero game anymore after this game. This game brings more potential to a failed genre than any other game has, in my opinion, in history. It's successes are amazing, and developers not have the potential to make really great games...
Runners-Up: Brutal Legend, Demon's Souls, MadWorld, Modern Warfare 2

BIGGEST SURPRISE
Winner: Batman: Arkham Asylum
...and this is exactly why it is the most surprising game too. It should fail. Being a gamer for a while now, no one would disagree. So much scepticism and doubt was put in this game. It was set to fail in so many ways. People played the other Batman games. It appeared that no one could make a good game. I mean, they had a long time to do so. Batman's been around since the 40's. Every oppurtunity to make a good superhero game was taken and it was abused. No, tortured. No, mamed and killed. But Rocksteady did it. They strived to make a good game. They took risks. They disregarded the scepticism. The said "screw you" to the masses. They wanted to make a good game. You know why? They had the same feelings as all the other gamers. They were tired of a bad superhero game. They were tired of bad experiences with the characters they love the most. Batman: AA is just surprising that it is doing well. No one could have thought it would have been this good. But it is. Job well done, Rocksteady. Job well done.
Runners-Up: Demon's Souls, Bayonetta, Borderlands

COOLEST WEAPON IN A GAME
Winner: Every weapon in Borderlands
Yup. You heard me. A game that has the balls to make millions of different weapons in one game deserves an award like this. Bordelands is truly an amazing game for many reasons, but the fact that every weapon you pick up is completely different from the other is just a new and amazing feeling. How many times in a game have you prized that one weapon that you have? Well, Borderlands throws this idea out the window. Everytime a cool weapon comes your way in this game it's replaced by an even cooler one. This means that every time you shoot the gun it's a different experience. One moment you may have a long range shotgun. The next you might have a combat rifle that shoots explosive rounds. And you could even have a sniper rifle that has corosive rounds, where headshots melt off your enemies face! More than just one cool weapon, Borderlands' millions serve as a great example of power in numbers.
Runners-Up: double blade/Assassin's Creed II, Clementine/Brutal Legend, remote control batarang/Batman: Arkham Asylum, pistol/Halo 3: ODST

BEST CHARACTER IN A GAME
Winner: Ezio Auditore da Firenze in Assassin's Creed II
More than any other character this year in a video game, Ezio Auditore epitomizes the greatness of a video game character. His tale of woe and triumph in the face of danger is one of the best. Every moment playing as Ezio is a treasured one. Ezio's story is powerful not because he is an assassin, or that he looks badass with the double blades (which he does). It's because he's a rookie. He's just a simple Italian noble who loses something important and falls into a situation he has to deal with. It's because he has to learn to become an assassin, rather than just being one. This makes the immersion into the story better than anything else, because the player must do this to. Most importantly, Ezio is relateable. Everyone has felt loss, pain, and having to deal with hardship. Everyone has had to rise to the occassion, get out of their comfort zone, and do things for the greater good. It's this very human connection that makes Ezio much better than any video game character. Ezio feels like a character in a story, not a video game character in a video game. He shows just how far video games have come, and just how much further they can go.
Runners-Up: Soap MacTavish/Modern Warfare 2, Batman/Batman: Arkham Asylum, Nathan Drake/Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, Sgt. Buck/Halo 3: ODST

BEST VILLIAN IN A VIDEO GAME
The Joker in Batman: Arkham Asylum
No one instills the fear and awestruck that Mark Hamill's Joker does. His maniacal, shreaking laughter and his tall glooming structure creates fear like no other. Getting Mark Hamill to voice Joker in Batman: Arkham Asylum was one of the best decisions Rocksteady made. The Joker in the game is the true villain. Constantly, he is the one element of evil. This is precisely because Rocksteady did so well with putting you in the shoes of Batman. It is only natural that Batman's archenemy would feel so realistic. The Joker in the game is perfect with any and all interpretations of the character. He is gritty, insane, and murderous, all topped off with his crude and often harsh humor that makes him Joker. Being stuck on Arkham Island because of the Joker gives you the real anger towards the character. Seeing all that he has done to take you down makes him a bigger threat than most villains. But to get down to the core of why this character is so great, just watch some of the old animated series. Mark Hamill makes this character shine in any medium.
Runners-Up: Rodrigo Borgia (Pope Alexander VI)/Assassin's Creed II, Harley Quinn/Batman: Arkham Asylum, The Infection/Left 4 Dead 2, Teyrn Loghain/Dragon Age: Origins.

BEST OVERALL MUSIC AND SCORE
Winner: Halo 3: ODST
Once again Marty, you make Halo singleplayer worth it. Halo games always feel like big action movies, and this is largely because of Martin O'Donnell's score for each game. The horns, the trumpets, and the drums create that memorable tune. Face it: you could recognize the Halo theme a mile away. But something different was done for Halo 3: ODST. To fit the more "noire" feel of the game, Marty went a little different for this game's score. He included trumpet solos and long orchestral solos. He created music that made you feel alone, much like the Rookie is on Mombasa. He created music with a bit of a tech feel, that fit perfectly with the new VISR tech of the ODST's. He just created the perfect score that fit the game. Anyone that has played this game knows that the singleplayer is amazing in part to the amazing sound and feeling created by this sound. I have no doubt in saying that this is the best score I have heard in a game in a while.
Runners-Up: Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, Left 4 Dead 2, Modern Warfare 2, Brutal Legend

MOST ANTICIPATED GAME OF 2010
Winner: Mass Effect 2
Who doesn't want this game? Mass Effect was perhaps the greatest console RPG in the last 5 years. It certainly is the greatest on the 360 platform, and it is the greatest RPG in my opinion that BioWare has ever made, which is saying something. A sequel is a no-brainer for most anticipated game. The epic story of Shepard fighting for humanity's survival is a great one, and it seems to be in full force for Mass Effect 2. With new characters, a new ship, and possibly a new Shepard, this game looks amazing. And why not? It's your story. If you did play Mass Effect, your character through that epic will be the one in the next epic. No sequel has even attempted to do what Mass Effect 2 is doing. All the choices you made in the first are in the second, and possibly for the first time, gamers can truly experience real consequences of their actions, and not be able to just reverse it. This, my friends, is one to mark on your calendars. But hey, you won't have to wait long, will you? It's only a month away.
Runners-Up: BioShock 2, Final Fantasy XIII, Red Dead Redemption, Halo: Reach

MOST OVERHYPED GAME
Winner: Wii Sports Resort
Wii Sports is fun. I know that, and so does everyone else. Nintendo these days, however, likes to soak everything for it's worth. Its failed attempts this year at giving its fanbase any substance in terms of hardcore games has resulted in the ultimate first-party casual games getting a crap load of hype. Wii Sports Resort got too much hype. Monumental games like Halo 3 and Uncharted 2 didn't get the hype this game got, and they sold ten times as much. The straw broke for me when Wii Sports Resort has an entire beach put in the middle of times square. Nintendo decided to advertise by making people have fun at the beach, but not have to go to the beach. Wii Sports Resort just shows how much the casual games can sometimes kill advertising for the rest of the games.
Runners-Up: Modern Warfare 2, Halo 3: ODST, Left 4 Dead 2, Resident Evil 5

BEST GAMEPLAY
Winner: Borderlands and Batman: Arkham Asylum
Yes, another tie, but this one is also for good reasons. Borderlands is really the first of its kind. It combines the best elements of MMO's and puts it into a singleplayer shooter. Gearbox wanted to tout this game as the first FPSRPG, and although this is true to an extent, the game comes out as more of an offline MMO console shooter. Which is great. Borderlands is fun and unique. It combines the fun of leveling up, whether it be by questing or grinding, with the grit of a console shooter. Batman: AA also wins because it is also the first of its kind. It is the first game to truly immerse you as Batman. Everything you would expect from Batman is given to you. The combat is fluid and easy to do, but difficult to master, much like Batman's combat. The ability to silently take down enemies in at least 20 plus different ways is great and shows Batman's element of surprise and variety. The use of gadgets wisely and not as a gimmick shows the reasons Batman uses gadgets for his benefit in a situation, not as an easy way out. Both games really shine as unique gameplay games.
Runners-Up: Modern Warfare 2, Assassin's Creed II, Demon's Souls

MOST REPLAYABILITY
Winner: Modern Warfare 2
I could go on and talk about how Modern Warfare 2's multiplayer creates the perfect system to keep playing, but I don't want to focus on that. Although this helps it's replayability, the reason MW2 wins this is not just for multiplayer. It's for Spec Ops and singleplayer. Here's why. Singleplayer was fixed. No more infinite respawns. This means new strategies, new environments, and a whole different feeling to playing singleplayer. I remember what a bitch Veteran difficulty on COD: World at War was. The infinitely spawning Japanese were annoying, and if I hadn't already been 80% of the way there, I probably would have given up. It just wasn't fun. Now, Veteran difficulty is fun. It's replayability is higher, just because it's now how it should be. Enemies aren't more, there just tougher and smarter. Spec Ops also brings replayability in co-op. In today's gaming world, co-op has become a major way of increasing playtime. The 69 stars you can get from all these challenges motivates a person for that extra time. MW2 has multiplayer. Amazing multiplayer. But just like all the games in this post, it does more. And it does that "more" well enough to warrant hundreds more hours of play.
Runners-Up: Assassin's Creed II, Borderlands, Wii Sports Resort, Super Mario Bros. Wii

BEST DEVELOPER OF THE YEAR
Winner: Ubisoft Montreal
I have to tell you, I had trouble decided who to pick for this award. Developers really came into full force this year. Names like Bungie and Naughty Dog really showed talent like never before this year. But when it comes down to it, Ubisoft Montreal did more than all of these studios combined. You see, the amount of detail and dedication they put into Assassin's Creed II is amazing. First off, over 400 people worked on this game, a record for any game. Second, almost an entire year was dedicated to taking pictures, observation, and surveying Italy to get everything right. This resulted in perfect recreations of most buildings in Florence, Tuscany, Venice, Forli, and San Gimignano. That is downright amazing, and not even a bit of coding was done yet. The studio created extreme detail in the game, right down to historical accuracy and even historical members. I mean, come on. They put Machiavelli, Pope Alexander VI, Leonardo DaVinci, Caterina Sforza, Lorenzo de' Medici, and the Pazzi family in one game. There is no competition here. Ubisoft Montreal put more dedication and hard work into this game than any other developer I have ever known. Phenomenal job.
Runners-Up: Bungie, Naughty Dog, Double Fine, Infinity Ward

BEST GAME I DIDN'T PLAY
Winner: Uncharted 2: Among Thieves
I really, really, REALLY want to play this game. It sounds so good. A game I would instantly buy if I had a Playstation 3. This game looks and sounds like real quality, and I wish I could judge it better if I had played it. Naughty Dog is a great developer, and the story of Uncharted 2 looks very similar to Assassin's Creed II. Uncharted got great reviews, but Naughty Dog took the extra step and made a great sequel. Uncharted 2 gets this because it just shows how much one can be envious about games. I love games, not just Xbox 360 games. And even though I have not yet gotten the chance to play this game, I can see that it deserves credit. The quality of the game can be seen without really playing it, and those who have played it can attest to it's true value. Hopefully I will get to play it one of these days, but until then, it remains in my opinion the best game I couldn't get the chance to enjoy.
Runners-Up: Brutal Legend, MadWorld, inFamous, Demon's Souls

WORST GAME OF THE YEAR
Winner: Tony Hawk: Ride
I feel so bad about the Tony Hawk franchise. Much like many skateboarders I have seen watching the X-Games, it tries to go over that big bowl in the middle of the park, and either overshoots it or undershoots it, resulting in several fractures. Tony Hawk: Ride was a failure. The board was not sensitive. It did not work. The game was not fun. All things that a game should not be. Ride has a good idea. Create a skateboard peripheral that would make the player ride a skateboard and react realistically. But this is only a good idea if the board WORKS. A game based on a board that doesn't work ends up not working as a whole. The Tony Hawk franchise use to be good, but it jsut can't catch up with the times. It needs to get back to what made it good: arcade style skateboarding. It isn't about realistic skating. If it was I'd like Skate a lot more. It was about doing crazy stunts you know can't be done in real life. It was about collecting all the tokens to spell "SKATE". Tony Hawk: Ride was a step backward for a franchise that desperately needed a huge step forward. And, just like the skateboarders again, if they don't catch up, gain some speed, and actually know how to execute that jump over the bowl, they will crash and burn.
Runners-Up: Rogue Warrior, Wanted: Weapons of Fate, Velvet Assassin, Lord of the Rings: Conquest

WII GAME OF THE YEAR
Winner: MadWorld
Now why would I pick a game like MadWorld instead of a game like Super Mario Bros. Wii or Wii Sports Resort? It's precisely because this is the game the Wii needs and the game the Wii can be the strongest in. MadWorld is the best of the Wii packaged into a hardcore game. And did I mention that it's a third-party game, not made by Nintendo? It's unfortunate that this game did not do well with sales. Games like this for the Wii prove that the Wii does have the ability to appease the hardcore in some way. MadWorld is a gritty and bloody mess, akin to something like the baby of Gears of War and a noire film. It's unique style and design makes it stand out amongst all of Wii games. MadWorld also succeeds in its appropriate use of the wiimote. Too many games try to push the motion control, and make it a center of the game. This is where they fail with the hardcore. MadWorld was made to be a good game, and uses the wiimote in the right ways. It's use of motion is great, and never gimmicky, which even Nintendo themselves are guilty of. Simply put, MadWorld is what most Wii games should be.
Runners-Up: Super Mario Bros. Wii, Wii Sports Resort, Dead Space Extraction

PLAYSTATION 3 GAME OF THE YEAR
Winner: Uncharted 2: Among Thieves
No competition at all here. Sony did a lot this year. They basically rereleased the PS3, with a new price, and new hardware, and tons of new games, all things they lacked when they initially launched the PS3. Sony placed their console in a great place this year, mostly due to the great amount of games. But no game stands out more as a shining light for Sony than that of Uncharted 2: Among Thieves. Uncharted 2 is a fantastic game in its own right, but placing it with the PS3 was the best decision for everyone. The PS3 was missing a trump card, something the PS2 had plenty of back in the day. There is always that one or two games that can sell not only the game but the console. Microsoft has it with Halo, Nintendo with Mario and Zelda. Sony, in this generation, hadn't found it yet. Uncharted 2 brings it in full force. The high quality and production value of Uncharted 2 makes it perfect for the PS3. Naughty Dog has made a winner in this Game of the Year winning game. It's amazing reviews and its real promise deliver for not just Naughty Dog, but for Sony. This game shows the comeback of Sony, and the real oppurtunities for gamers in the future.
Runners-Up: Killzone 2, inFamous, Demon's Souls, God of War Collection

XBOX 360 GAME OF THE YEAR
Winner: Modern Warfare 2
Xbox 360 is made up of three things: high quality gaming, online community, and multiplayer. Many games have given Microsoft these things in leaps and bounds, the most noticeable that of Halo 3. No game this year lived up to the core of the Xbox than that of MW2. It's the perfect game for the console. MW2 is of the highest quality, with extreme action, entertaining singleplayer and multiplayer, and a framerate that never, EVER drops. Microsoft is dedicated to bringing the highest quality gaming to the 360, which is what is brought here. MW2 is perfect for the Live community, too. Live is built for parties of people playing a great game and enjoying every moment, and MW2 brings that too. Finally, the high value and quality of MW2's multiplayer fits like a glove with Live. the persistent leveling, the weapon system, and the matchmaking are just what the Live community loves and is used to. And don't trust me with this. Just look at the numbers. Of the 6 million copies sold, about 4.5 million of that was on 360. Gamers didn't just love MW2. They loved it on the 360. It was the game of the year for Microsoft, just by the fact that it made them a crap load of money, and it made the community, as Microsoft always does, very happy.
Runners-Up: Assassin's Creed II, Halo 3: ODST, Left 4 Dead 2, Brutal Legend

There you go. I hope you enjoyed my awards. Don't worry though if you did, because I'm not done yet. I still have game of the year, which I will dedicate a complete post to. Who is the game of the year you ask? Well, I guess I can tell you.

GAME OF THE YEAR: Assassin's Creed II

Tune in for the full post on this amazing game at the end of the week. Have a happy new year.

Are you ready for 2010?

Just an update for the next week, for your benefit, of course. My first gaming awards should be up this week. I wanted to give you all the chance to voice your opinions on who you think should win these awards,so I'm posting the categories early...

Xbox 360 Game of the Year
Playstation 3 Game of the Year
Wii Game of the Year
Best Story
Best Multiplayer
Best Graphics
Best All-Around Package
Most Successful
Best Game No One Played
Best Game with the Most Potential
Biggest Surprise
Most Overhyped Game
Best Gameplay
Most Replayability
Worst Game of the Year
Coolest Weapon in a Game
Best Character in a Game
Best Villain in a Game

...and of course, Game of the Year, which will have it's own post. Like I said, I would love to know who you guys think should win these things, so feel free to give your winners in a reply on this post. Hey, if I get good lists, I might do a special response post.

Secondly, I have plenty of reviews pending since I was able to get many games this Christmas. Look for reviews for Assassin's Creed II, Dragon Age: Origins, Borderlands, Dead Space, and Star Wars: The Force Unleashed in the next couple months as I finish them. Also, I'm sure Mass Effect 2 and BioShock 2 will make their way in the review list as they also release in the next 2 months.

Thirdly, I would love to hear more about what you guys liked and didn't like about my posts in 2009. As I head into 2010, I want to make my blog the best it can be, and that can only be done with your responses. Please let me know what you like, what could be better, and what should go.

Lastly, I'd like to pass on to you a new feature that will be coming soon. I have the great oppurtunity to try many games quite a bit, but many games I try I do not buy, and therefore I do not review them. I will be implementing a sort of preview post starting in 2010. These posts will be first impression posts on game demos or games that I have the oppurtunity to try. I think this will be a great oppurtunity to give a great response on game demos.

Enjoy the Holidays.

UPDATE: I have decided to add these categories to my awards list. Feel free to comment again.

Best overall music and score
Best Marketing Campaign
Most Anticipated Game of 2010
Best Developer
Best Publisher
Best Game I Didn't Get to Play

Adressing the Masses 2

Yup. It's that time to respond to comments. As always, thanks so much for commenting. You make blogging fun and worth it. Let's get to it.

A note was made about shooting games on the first Adressing the Masses post:

"Acrade/shooting games may seem violent but it actually enhances strategic concentration. A better way of venting without harming anyone but the computer screen."

First off, the blog had nothing to do with this, so I have no idea why this person left this comment. But to comment on it, I agree and disagree. Shooting games are violent. They don't seem violent. They are. But this isn't necessarily a bad thing. Games require a certain amount of violence to be appealing and realistic. Secondly, this person is right that video games do improve concentration. Video games have also been shown in studies to improve peripheral vision and hand-eye coordination. Finally, I find that venting with a shooter is not very smart. In my opinion, it isn't a good idea to vent with violence as all the agression one may have can turn into more agression. Good venting games are puzzle and thinking games. These settle you down, and get your brain working so you can think rationally.

A comment was made about my post on MMO's and World of Warcraft:

"A note about WoW: Yes, it has monopolized the MMO market. But that's not a bad thing. Blizzard adores their fans and is constantly updating the game for the players' enjoyment."

I disagree. Monopolization in video games is extremely bad for the market. By taking such supremacy in this area, it is near impossible for other developers who might have good ideas to enter into the market. Video games are all about new innovations, new ideas, and (capitalism FTW) competition. This is true at all times, even for the MMO market. Now, I disagree also that WoW has monopolized the market. There is room for another MMO, as long as it isn't like WoW. A unique and different MMO has as much chance of succeeding as WoW. And in regards to Blizzard caring for thier fans, I agree all the way. This shouldn't hinder other companies though; this just sets for them a great example for the future.

Lots of comments were made about my post about the lack of quality in sports games.

"I hear you, but only the sports games produced by 2K and EA [are bad]. The realistic ones suck. And be careful when you say sports because things like racing and skateboarding fall into that, and there are plenty skate games that are fun."

And in response to that:

"Those are fun, however, they keep puking out remakes sometimes and they get stale."

A very valid statement. Technically, games such as skating and racing fall under sports, but I tend to not consider them sports games because they stand out on their own. Racing games are an entire crowd themselves, and yes, there are many racing games that are good. Skating games also stand out as a seperate crowd, although they are recently becoming more and more like the rest of sports games. God knows the Tony Hawk series is in trouble, and EA will keep popping out Skate sequels for years to come. And of course, their are exceptions to what I am saying. The old sports games were extremely fun, and unique games like the old Blitz series of games were really fun.

Someone also commented on the use of motion control, ala Tony Hawk: Ride.

"I think the only way to bring innovation to the genre is by using motion control, but at that point you might as well go out and play sports anyway."

I think motion control is great and innovative, and it could be a way to rejuvinate some sports games. Natal was shown playing Burnout Paradise, and that looked amazing. It must be done correctly however. Tony Hawk: Ride showed the enormous room for error in this field.

A very cool comment on my BioWare post.

"Stop making me want an xbox...RPG's FTW!!!!"

I agree. RPG's are FTW. By the way, have you played Mass Effect?

Lots of comments on my post about sequels and the effects of singleplayer and multiplayer by moving to a sequel.

"In a nutshell, single player stuff isn't replaced with a new game in a series. However, multiplayer does move on. I don't hear many people playing Halo 2 or Gears of War for multiplayer."

Agree with most of that. Singleplayer stuff tends to be unique to each game, as I said in the post. Multiplayer in most instances is a replacement factor, but some multiplayer things just are so good that they are worth going back once in a while. And believe me. There are still people on Halo 2. I even checked. There were about 6,000 people on in the last 24 hours.

I loved this comment on the post.

"Early final fantasies are the best...please prove me wrong."

Okay. By early I think you mean I-VI, before 3D. VII introduced an amazing convoluted story of corruption, love, betrayal, death, and destiny. It presented a single relateable hero, Cloud, rather than multiple people you really can't get attached to. It introduced 3D of course, and it was one of the first games ever to have such a long and epic narrative. VIII would also repeat this with a solo protagonist, and it also introduced voiceovers, and staple of not only all of the future Final Fantasies, but of RPG's. IX would bring the same, plus a new artstyle. X was the first game on the legendary PS2, and has one of the best sales records of any game in history. It also brought a solo protagonist, and broughts themes not heard of in early FF's, like passion, which is an emotion unable to be expressed in 8-bit. X2 was the first spinoff of the Final Fantasies, and it widened it's perspective by introducing new gameplay, like rhythm games. XI made Final Fantasy into an MMO, and it had record breaking sales. XII was super innovative, with previously unseen levels of facial expression in the graphics, and the elimination of random encounters in favor of seeing every enemy in the field. Finally, XIII will introduce a new combat system combining action with menu based combat, and it will have groundbreaking visuals never before seen in a video game. How's that?

A comment on my review of Modern Warfare 2:

"I would post a witty comment...but hey, it's MW2 and I don't really give a shit what others think. No offense. :D"

None taken. Good for you though. That's what reading gaming stuff is all about. Liking the content, but not really giving a shit one way or another. XD

A comment on my VGA post.

"Flower. Pfft. Splosion man should have gotten the award..."

Agreed. I thought Splosion Man was awesome. Of course, I haven't played Flower, so it might be that good. Still, that guy deserved that award...

Finally, a very long comment (which I love) on my 2009 year in review:

"I agree that Sony had the best year. It may not appear that way on paper..."

I don't know. The paper actually looks kind of convincing. After the price drop the PS3 oversold the Xbox 360 for the first time ever. Although it went back to number 3 the next month, the sales numbers were triple that of previous months. And this loss was probably due to everyone buying MW2 with a 360 in November.

"Nintendo needs to get back to their roots. They did good with bringing back Mario, but they need to bring other things like Zelda, Metroid, Star Fox..."

I agree somewhat. Nintendo is knowne for the flagship titles, and these are the games people buy. It just consoles can't survive with just these games. Third party games account for the majority of sales on a console, not first party. They need to start having innovative and exciting third party titles too.

"Delays suck but I think that some are necessary...For all we know, the extra time that Batman had could have made it from an okay game to a great game."

Actually, I am fairly positive Batman: Arkham Asylum was finished by June. All reviewers had finished copies. The delay was made to maximize profits by putting it at the end of summer rather than the beginning, which probably was a good idea. Still, I understand your point and it is definitely true. But a game like Alpha Protocol which had been delayed 4 times already is loosing interest. There is only so much time you can grab before you lose the crowd.

That's all for now. Keep on commenting, it's what keeps me going!

A look back.

At the end of the year already? That went fast. Well, not the summer. That was the worst gaming drought I have ever experienced. Anyway, the end of the year is a great time to look back at the accomplishments of 2009, and the shortcomings. 2009 was definitely an interesting gaming year, filled with some of the best games ever and some of the worst. The industry moved forward in many ways this year. So what did I feel were the real ups and downs?

First off, hats off for Sony. These guys started to worry me. The first two years of the PS3 were not the best, mostly due to the extreme price of the PS3 and the lack of games. Well Sony did something that not even the US government can do most of the time, and that is to fix everything in a span of a year (BAM! Political joke!). Sony dropped the price of the PS3 to an affordable price, and they finally are starting to get the attention from their great machine they should have gotten initially. They also brought a great showing of games this year, including a game of the year in Uncharted 2. Hands down, Sony had the best year this year. The games, the machine, the advertising, and the overall atmosphere of the PS3 make it a competitive entity in the console war.

Don't get me wrong though. Microsoft had a great year too. A great way to describe Microsoft in 2009 is the phrase "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Microsoft knows what they are doing. They have a great and growing crowd in Xbox Live, and they have found a sweet spot for themselves. Every month the NPD report always has the Xbox version of multiplatform titles selling more than the PS3 one. In fact, the Xbox 360 version of Modern Warfare 2 sold twice and a half as much as the PS3 version. Xbox Live is a behemoth of a gaming community, and with Twitter, Facebook, Last.fm, and Netflix, Microsoft is making the Xbox more than a gaming console. Microsoft also introduced Natal this year. Microsoft with Natal is going to take a shot at motion control next year, and they made clear this year that they are focused on support for this thing. With over 11 companies backing it, Natal should be interesting. Microsoft is a dominant force among gaming, even after 3 years. I guess a head start does help...

2009 was not as good for Nintendo however, at least in terms of games. This year proved that Nintendo is having trouble with the hardcore, a group they cannot afford to leave behind. Nintendo grabbed almost all of the casual crowd with the Wii, mostly because Wii Sports bowling is the funnest shit ever. Unfortunately, both Sony and Microsoft are grabbing the hardcore by the dozen. The Wii did not satisfy the hardcore gamer this year. Great titles like The Conduit and MadWorld tried to appeal, but it was just too late. All the hardcore went to Modern Warfare, Halo, and Uncharted. Nintendo has probably realized this by now, and is poised to make a comeback in 2010. They had a late winner in Super Smash Bros. Wii, and hopefully they can finally maintain a consistent hardcore game schedule. Hopefully.

2009 also plagued the world with a dangerous word: DELAY. Countless games originally planned for release got pushed to 2010. This is for one reason, and one reason only. Modern Warfare 2 was scary for game developers. The hype was incredible, and preorder sales were ridiculous. Companies that were pushing new IP's like Bayonetta or Dark Void pushed titles back. And guess what? That probably was smart. Modern Warfare sold over 6 million copies on the first week in the US. That is an insane number. You can see that games that did come near MW2, such as Assassin's Creed II and Left 4 Dead 2 took a bit of a beating. Although they sold incredible well themselves, they probably would have sold more at a different time. Still, the loss of really good games at the end of the year is sad. Many titles have actually been pushed to the beginning of 2010, which means 2010 should be a very crowded year. Still, if 2009 taught us anything, it's that games should be spread more generously across the year. The extreme lack of summer games this year was disappointing, and shows how developers should take advantage of this empty time frame to put a game out or two.

Finally, 2009 brought us some really great games. Although I won't say my game of the year until my awards (look for them in the next 2 weeks), many games stood out. Modern Warfare 2 is amazing, and is a game everyone should have. And I don't just mean multiplayer. I think I actually enjoy singleplayer more, especially with all the damn glitches in multiplayer. Although I haven't played them yet, great games like Assassin's Creed II and Uncharted 2 show the real beauty and the real art form that can come from video games. Co-Op took front and center this year too, with small multiplayer games like Halo 3: ODST, Borderlands, and Left 4 Dead 2. These games prove that a small group of friends will always triumph over the random idiots online. 2009 also brought the first amazing comic book game, Batman: Arkham Asylum. This is truly an accomplisment for all video games, and if you haven't played this game, shame on you. You're missing out. Even some gems came from the independent sector, like Splosion Man and Trials HD. Overall, a solid year for video games. The bar has been set really high for 2010. Here's hoping they deliver.

VGA's

Yup. It was that time of the year again. Time for the video game awards. Last night was a great awards show, and many thing were awesome, dissapointing, and surprising. Before I get into the nitty gritty, let me say that this year's was way better than the years before. Unfortunately, the presence of Snoop Dogg still kept it from being the best, but overall a great show. Anyway, let's get to it.

The Awards
A great set of awards were given out last night. It's nice to see that most games got an award somewhere, and that the truly great games were recognized for their greatness. All 5 of the game of the year nominees won awards, including Batman: Arkham Asylum, whose developers Rocksteady won best developer of the year. Modern Warfare 2 grabbed best multiplayer game and best shooter, as is well deserved. Assassin's Creed II beat out Brutal Legend and Uncharted 2 for best Action/Adventure game, an award that shows Ubisoft's true dedication to the genre. Left 4 Dead 2 also managed to grab best Xbox 360 game. And of course, Uncharted 2 was the winner of the night. Winning best graphics, best PS3 game, and game of the year, the night proved that Uncharted 2 is truly a media masterpiece, deserving of all it's recognition. Other games managed to get some great rewards too, with Super Mario Bros. Wii getting best Wii game, Brutal Legend voice actor and frontman Jack Black getting best voice actor, and many others. Overall, there were many winners of the night, and not many losers. I have no complaints about the winners, as they all pretty much deserve what they got, although I would have liked Borderlands to get an award. Game of the year was undoubtedly going to be Uncharted 2. The response and the high quality that Naughty Dog contributed to this game deserved it. Overall, a great show. But how about those announcements?

The announcements
This was definitely the highlights of the night. The new games announced here were, crediting my friend, a "mini-E3". The night most certainly started off with a bang, with the ominous voice of Mark Hamill "gassing" the audience. A new teaser appeared, showing what appeared to be an announcement of a sequel to Batman: Arkham Asylum. The teaser was one of the best parts of the show in my opinion. A sequel is much wanted, and well recieved. As I am sure conjecture of the teaser trailer will be a subject of a future blog, I won't go much into detail. But the teaser did seem to imply going into Gotham City, a job that can only be done correctly by the geniuses at Rocksteady. Activision would also show off the next-gen iteration of True Crime. The trailer showed the game taking place in Hong Kong, as an undercover detective with the Triad. It showed hand to hand combat with a dozen or so people, so it will be interesting to see where this goes. The sequel to The Force Unleashed was shown, and boy was it well recieved. As soon as the Apprentice's face showed up, the crowd erupted. A great announcement. The new Tron game was shown. This game could go either way, in my opinion. As long as it is treated as a seperate game, it could be cool. But connect it with the movie and you start having problems. Harmonix brought an early rumor to confirmation with the showing of Green Day: Rock Band. Keeping with the trend of The Beatles: Rock Band, Harmonix is going to make a fully featured band game of Green Day. If they keep with the truth and dedication that they did with The Beatles, this game should be good. With the added functionality of importing the songs into Rock Band (a major complaint people had with The Beatles: Rock Band), it should be good.
Modern warfare seems to be the new trend, as two games showed off last night. The next Medal of Honor shows the series going to Afghanistan. I don't know what to think about this. The trailer looked exactly like Call of Duty, which probably isn't a coincidence. It isn't that it didn't look good; the trailer showed a great variety of stuff. It just looked like a carbon copy, and Medal of Honor will only survive if it is different. Let's hope that the fact that DICE is making multiplayer pays off. 2K surprised everyone with the announcement of the revival of an old Playstation series, Spec Ops. The new game, Spec Ops: The Line, showed fighters in a post-apocalyptic Dubai. It showed cover as an important aspect of gameplay, and 2K stated that the player will be presented with gigantic choices which will affect hundreds of lives. It looked awesome, and being made by 2K, it should look that way. I can't wait to hear more.
Finally, the first footage of Halo: Reach was shown. First off, I was a bit dissapointed. The trailer didn't really show any gameplay, which is what I think everyone wanted. It wasn't bad, it just wasn't what I thought. Besides this, however, the trailer was pretty good. One thing of interest is the fact that the trailer was running in engine, and it looks like a nice upgrade in graphics from the Halo 3. The characters looked pretty awesome, and it looked and feeled exactly like Bungie. Which is a good thing.

That's all for now. Great announcements, and I am sure we will see most of them next E3. How much you wanna bet Green Day shows up at the Xbox 360 conference?

Modern Warfare 2

Yes, once again I have decided to change the format of my reviews. Why, you ask? Simply put, it's because I want them to be shorter, sweeter, and better. My reviews have become way too long, past the point of interest. I have come to the realization that I don't want to review the entire game like a magazine or website. I obviously like the game. That's why I bought it. I want to provide things that I found interesting, and the things reviews usually don't give you. And hey, if you want the official review, go to IGN or Kotaku or someone else. I want to give the insightful first hand experience type of reviews that go with a blog. So without further ado, here is my review for Modern Warfare 2.

___________________________________________________

Modern Warfare 2 will undoubtedly get nominated for every video game award out there. It is the culmination of everything hardcore FPS. Infinity Ward has given everything for this game, and the rewards are immeasureable. It shines in its single player experience, with more set-pieces and action than a Bourne movie. The great story and great universe of Modern Warfare has continued in the sequel, and its better than ever. The multiplayer is the most fantastic multiplayer experience to date in Call of Duty and some could say all of FPS's. The sheer addictiveness and fun of the first is here in full force in the sequel. With some great additions and fixes for flaws of the first game, this is where replayability is an understatement. Finally, Modern Warfare 2 jumps on the bandwagon of co-op. Special Ops mode is a spectacular addition, and combines the great fun of multiplayer with the action of singleplayer. All in all, Modern Warfare 2 is spectacular. Hands down, this is a game everyone must play. It is that phenominal.

What I liked:

-Singleplayer's evolution: The singleplayer feels more than just a sequel. It feels like a natural change. New features and the lore of the world feel exactly as they should. Simply put, it feels like it's 5 years later in the story, which it is. Characters and the world situation feel elevated as they should, and the story always feels like a real world transition from incident to national crisis.

-Weapon Differentiability: Singleplayer weapons are always different. Some may have red dot sights attached, while others have heartbeat sensors. This is great as it adds more realism, and it's awesome to have a different weapon every time.

-No more infinite respawns: Easily my favorite part. The levels are so much better without infinite enemy respawns. It is possible to clear a level now. But the way levels are built and the numerous set-pieces, the game still feels like Call of Duty without respawns. You still push forward, even though you know you don't have to. Even better is how enemies are smarter, and depending on the level will try and flank you, which is a great tactical thing to think about.

-Strategies for the win: Every level requires you to think, which is something that some games lack quite a bit. Modern Warfare 2 requires you to change your tactics in every level. A place like the close alleys of Rio will require a completely different tactic than that of the mountains of Kazakhstan. This is great, and it adds a whole different level of difficulty and mastery than any other game.

-WoW-like multiplayer bar: Your level can be seen in multiplayer games by a leveling bar at the bottom of the screen. It's very mcuh like the WoW XP bar, but now you can see your progress and how much you need to get to the next rank. It's not only a great indication of rank, but it actually tends to make you play harder if you want to get past a rank.

-Locations: I love how MW2 goes all over the world. From a gulag in Russia to a favela in Rio de Jenairo, the changing locales add a great feeling to singleplayer and in the multiplayer maps. It makes MW2 feel less like a war game and more like a international crisis game, which is what it is. You feel more like a black ops operative in each level than a soldier, even in the levels when you are a soldier.

-Task Force 141: Great addition in the story. Instead of making it a country thing, the creation of an international task force made up of Army Rangers, SAS, SEALs, and other national militaries makes the story that much better. Feeling like you are part of a secret task force that is used when the shit hits the fan is awesome.

-Customization: Multiplayer customization is better than ever. Weapons are amazing, and have the best attachments like holographic sights and FMJ. The addition of titles and emblems makes each player different, which is always great in multiplayer.

-Spec Ops Mode: Everything about this mode is amazing. Each level requires complete co-operative tactics. The levels are fun, they are varied, and they just fit well in the game. Spec Ops is a great mode, and hopefully will be an area Infinity Ward will put some DLC in.

What I disliked:

-No casual approachability: Not a big complaint at all, but you need to know what you are doing to play this game. This game is a harcore game down to the core. Casuals won't like this game, and won't feel welcome unless they have had experience with FPS's or Modern Warfare in the past. Then again, casuals only like the Wii anyway, don't they...

-Necessity to play COD4: You will be somewhat lost if you haven't played the first Modern Warfare. The game assumes that you know the story already, and leads off from this knowledge pretty quickly in the campaign. This is somewhat of an okay assumption because everyone playing MW2 probably played MW1, but it still would have been nice to have somewhat more of a summarization.

-Xbox LIVE party-chat disabled: In some playlists, party chat is disabled, and this is my number one complaint with this game. Although I understand the need for team communication, party chat is a great thing, and almost a necessity these days in XBL multiplayer games. I don't want to listen to an 8 year old on my team say "Let's Pwn Some Noobs, Guys!". Although not all playlists are like this, it would have been nice to still be able to talk in a party.

-You. Will. Die.: Just like the first game, the multiplayer in this game is NOT forgiving. You will die many, many times. This could turn off some, but just like the first it is important to note than this game is not a run and gun game. Tactics and smarts will often triumph over being able to pull the trigger. Knowing where people go in maps and how to best eliminate them is key to surviving this game.

-Ghost's voice: I know the same man that voiced Gaz voiced Ghost, and I like them both. But Ghost sounds WAY too much like Gaz. The man didn't even change his voice up. I loved Gaz in the first one, but he died. I shouldn't hear him again. Not a major complaint mind you, but the voice actor should learn how to differentiate his characters.

Final Comments

I love this game. This is definitely going to be a game I will play in the next 2 years on a pretty consistent basis, much like Halo 3. It is such a high quality game. I loved the singleplayer. It is one of the best FPS singleplayer games ever, and it proves even more that the FPS genre can have great storytelling, too. The multiplayer is, of course, amazing. Infinity Ward outdid themselves with this game, and I can't wait for DLC.

I'll Never Forget You, Call of Duty 4

A small opinion piece for this weekend. A big concern that comes along with every sequel is the issue of replacement. Does the presense of a sequel or next entry in a series mean that the previous game will be left in the dust? This is a valid concern. Games that we have grown to love getting replaced can sometimes be quite the upsetting thing. But I am here to tell you something: YOUR GAMES ARE NOT BEING REPLACED.

This issue used to be a big problem, and if this issue would have popped into my mind 7 years ago, I would have said get used to getting games replaced. It used to be that the sequel to a game was just that: a replacement. With every new game came an absolutely new experience, one that was so much better than the previous that the latter replaced the former. Take, for example, Medal of Honor. Allied Assault was one of the best PC games every created. It was one of the first shooters to have a narrative unfold while playing. This would become a staple in not only later iterations of the Medal of Honor franchise, but an industry standard in terms of war based first person shooters. Unfortunately, the next iteration replaced it. It had better multiplayer, a new singleplayer, better graphics. It overshadowed it by miles. So the great game Allied Assault was not played much anymore. Up until around the later half of the PS2 era of games did this trend of replacing stop. So, what happened?

It has a lot to do with how the game industry has evolved. At the beginning of the real game industry, the 1980's, development and innovation was emerging extremely fast. This is why in the span of only 6 years did we start seeing games like Super Mario Brothers and The Legend of Zelda, groundbreaking in their times. The industry wanted new things, and it wanted it quickly. Over the years, however, this idea of new game after new game slowed down. It started to become new game "in the series". Just like the movie industry, sequels make a lot of money in the game industry. The demand for new series was more important. But just like the previous demand, it too slowed down. Now skip to the current generation. We have hit the peak in many things technologically. Graphics are at their peak. Sound is at its peak. There just isn't much in the way of new tech. So things have slowed down.

Something of great importance these days is that of storytelling. It just isn't enough to make a game with a protagonist shooting a rifle. You need immersion in the story. You need gigantic setpieces. You need control over decisions and actions and playstyle. These are new things in the game industry. These trends weren't around in the time of Medal of Honor. This, therefore, gave the idea of replacement much more room. People didn't mind that the sequel replaced the old one. The new one was better, stronger, and far more likely to be time-consuming. And while these aspects of sequels exist today in a way, they aren't the same. Sequels are more likely to bring new stories, more innovation, and new ways to play.

So, what does this mean to your old games? First, in terms of singleplayer games, they won't ever go away. A great saying of one of my former teachers is that a good book "is meant to be read more than once". This remains true for any type of medium, including video games. There is a reason playing Tetris or Pac-Man is entertaining even today. THEY ARE GOOD GAMES. Good games don't go away, ever. So for those who fear that the story and gameplay of games like BioShock, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, Assassin's Creed will fade away, don't be afraid. They will always be acknowledged as great, genre defining games. And they will be replayed, not replaced. New iterations in the series just aim to provide you the great game you played before in a better way, not a way of replacement. For those of you who fear your multiplayer games are going to go away, it is a little bit more shaky. Multiplayer is in a different place in the industry. We are just hitting the peak of innovation for multiplayer. There are still plenty of things to be done in this area, and therefore some games will replace multiplayer parts of games. I am sorry to say this, but many people will be lost from Modern Warfare due to Modern Warfare 2. It won't ever go away, but it won't be the same. These games will always be alive in multiplayer, just not to the extent when they were more popular. And just like singleplayer, if the multiplayer is good, it won't go away. Just ask StarCraft and Halo 2. People still play those, and will continue to play those.

So sit down and take it easy. And one more thing: if something is being replaced, it isn't necessarily a bad thing. New things are good. So just accept some of them. I don't see anyone complaining about Halo 3 multiplayer "replacing" Halo 2 multiplayer. At this point in gaming, you can accept that if something is replaced,it's worth it. :)

BioWare: Masters of the RPG

Here it is, folks. The last of the posts you voted on. And this one is on one of my favorite developers on the planet: BioWare. These guys are undoubtedly the masters of making RPGs. They know how to make a good RPG in any form. Every game I have played from BioWare (and I've played quite a bit of them, namely KOTOR, Jade Empire, and Mass Effect) is perfect in execution. Why is this? Why is it that in any form or setting, BioWare knows how to make a good role playing game?


The answer comes in a couple of ways, the first of which is sheer talent. BioWare is talented. Some of the brightest and most creative minds come from this company. Only through having several highly intelligent developers can games be put out on the market and still sell well everytime. The devs at BioWare just know how to make a game great. The best way to put it is that they come off as more of an artistic arm than a developer arm. They are creative in thinking, and this comes out in development. The best example of this creativity is the vast amount of new things they have done in their games. The conversational system, first shown in KOTOR, was a brilliant technique to impliment in an RPG and was the first of it's kind. They would develop this further in Mass Effect, where the true cleverness and versatility of multiple conversation answers is shown. BioWare has just the right creativity to come up with these workable ideas. Beyond this is the scope they always seem to put themselves in. They have yet to create a game that was less expansive and ambitious than the project before it. Every game presents a new look, and new story, a new area, and a bigger scope. Only people with massive creativity could pull this off. Think of J.R.R. Tolkien: it took him years and thousands of notes, records, and research to create the land of Middle Earth. In less than 15 years, the team at BioWare has created at least 3 different stories and legends comparable to LOTR. They have created an entire space drama in Mass Effect, and a complete pre-Star Wars mythos within this span of years. Impressive, to say the least.


Another answer is that of their dedication to story. BioWare is much different than most developers in this sense. They first think of a good story, then build a game around it. BioWare prioritizes having a good story before they even pick up a controller. Plainly stated, they know the importance of having a story to tell. BioWare WILL NOT make a game if the story isn't there. This is why their RPGs are always masterpieces. The story and intricacies are known before the game is even developed. This means clarity in development around a common idea. This means an importance on fitting to the story and staying within those important boundaries. Overall, this means that BioWare can make a great RPG and have all of the devs create their ideas with something to focus on. BioWare takes it a step further, though. In all of their games, it is more than just making an amazing story; it is placing you in that story. The player must experience the story, make the choices, and face the consequences. BioWare is and will always be the creator of real character choice. BioWare has always made it a priority to serve the choice of the player. If the player wants to punch that stupid reporter in Mass Effect for asking a stupid question, they can. This is the player's story. That is why their RPGs are so immersive. Not only is this story amazingly diverse and intrinsical, it is the player's.


The final answer is the most abstract. BioWare succeeds in something it doesn't do. BioWare has never made a game for the casual gamer. They haven't made any game to please newcomers. They haven't created a story that is aimed for younger audiences. They haven't even made an effort to grab this type of crowd. And because of this, they do grab that type of crowd. BioWare creates games for a great and immersive story set in gigantic worlds. They know what gamers like. They know what makes a good tale. And they know who they need to pay attention to. BioWare, unlike a majority of developers these days, doesn't really care much about appealing to a bigger crowd. They just want to make the gamer's RPG. If it ain't broken, don't fix it. They know the crowd is out there, and they want to make the best RPG that people know and love and want to buy. And because of this, their games sell like hotcakes. They don't make sacrifices for the sake of motion control. They don't take out a part of the game because it may be too mature. They just do the best they can possible, and they leave it at that. Think if it like a movie theatre. At any given time, you'll have chick flicks, animated movies, horror movies, and big-budget movies in the theatre. All appeal to different crowds. But if one of them is known to be a good movie, is getting amazing reviews, and making crap-loads of money, a majority of people in those other crowds will go see this movie. This is why BioWare games work. People just know the game will be good and high quality, and therefore buy the game. And newcomers are always welcome. BioWare doesn't lessen it standards for new ways to control or ESRB crankiness. BioWare doesn't adjust to these things; they adjust to BioWare.


Simply put, BioWare is one in a million. This company is simply amazing. Their attention to a great story and a great game is unparalleled. If you have never played a BioWare game, shame on you. You are missing out on some of the best storytelling of the last couple decades. BioWare is the pinnacle of creativity and care for gaming. Only a company of this calibur can excite gamers at just an announcement of a new game. Here's hoping that all of BioWare's future endeavors remain the high quality endeavors they are known for. I for one am extremely excited for Mass Effect 2. And you should be too.

A Nice Group

A post I have been wanting to write for a while is one featuring some of the great developers and designers of the gaming world. It is hard to find just one person to focus on in the gaming industry. Every game involves several people collaborating to make the best game they can make. It is in no way a single effort. But some people have showed by their hard work, determination, success, and a bit of luck, that they are the face of the development industry. These people are the best in their fields. They have created things and put forth ideas that have changed gaming. It is hard to pick five of these. If I could I would write a post of fifty developers, because they all deserve recognition. These five are just the tip of the iceberg in a room full of geniuses. So let's get started, shall we?

SHIGERU MIYAMOTO

There is no denying the supremacy and magnitude of this man in the last twenty years. Shigeru Miyamoto was and is vital to the history and development of video games. His ideas and leadership have set an example for all video game developers. Specifically, Nintendo would not be the company they are today without him. Miyamoto created the flagship games for Nintendo. Not one or two. All of them. Starting with Donkey Kong in 1981, Miyamoto created a fun and creative plumber named Mario. 1985 would bring another legendary game called Super Mario Bros.. The rest is history. Miyamoto created an enduring property for Nintendo in Mario. To this day, Mario is the number one most recognizable character in gaming. Miyamoto would also create similar enduring properties such as Zelda in 1986 and Pokemon in 1996. His contributions to Nintendo cannot be counted. Miyamoto is the greatest example of creativity. No man has ever brought so many properties into this world and had so much success with all of them. His ability to craft great characters and great stories is amazing. Recently, he has pioneered his original properties into the next generation, with the Super Mario Galaxy series and a new Legend of Zelda on the horizon. Simply put, Miyamoto should be on every list of best developers.

DAN PALADIN

Mr. Paladin should be given a medal. If there was ever a leader in the independent movement in video games, it would be him. His creativity and unique art style and his ability to create amazing games with his indie development company The Behemoth show his real commitment to a different type of game. Paladin has pioneered the way for independent development in the video game industry. Most successful games take years to make and use hundreds of people. The Behemoth's first game was a flash game on a self-run website. The fun and the uniqueness of the game would not go unnoticed though, and Alien Hominid, as it was known, would go for a full retail release, where it would send Paladin and The Behemoth at the top of the indie scene. Paladin's art style and commitment to a great game is awesome. The hope he provides to indie developers is important. He, more than anyone, has proven that anything can be successful with enough hard work and a great idea.

HIDEO KOJIMA
Kojima has done many things for the game industry, but no other person can make a claim to true narrative like he can. Kojima is the pioneer of story in video games. During his entry into the video game industry, real credible narrative only came in the form of cinema. Kojima should know this. He originally wanted to be a film director. But when he saw the oppurtunity to make that film in a video game, he took it. Kojima would create Metal Gear in 1987. This would be the only game of its kind to have a movie-like narrative. Kojima would continue to make several sequels to Metal Gear, where his attention to story and his power to narrate would be noticed. Today he continues to strive for great stories in games, with a new Castlevania and two new Metal Gear games.

CLIFF BLESZINSKI

If you were to create the perfect compliment to the eastern ways of gaming development, Cliff would be it. Clif added something that was needed in a gaming world that was dominated by Japanese leaders. He brought the tenacity and edge of western development. Cliff is a different type of developer. He is professional yet weird. He is there to do a job yet he has tons of fun. Bleszinski has done what many wish they could do: whatever they want. He has been very successful in the video game industry with his attitude of nothing left out. This is no better shown than in his flagship game series Gears of War. His focus on grittiness and seriousness is shown in the games. Cliff has created an industry bubble of uniqueness not only in the game but out of the game. He brings personality in real life just as he does in his games. This is important because it shows the real character and reputation that the industry needs. Cliff is exciting, intelligent, and different from any other developer.

JADE RAYMOND

Now, why would I put Jade Raymond on this list? I'll tell you why. She is a woman in an industry dominated by men. It is always great to see a woman strive in this industry. Jade Raymond has done way more than strive. Raymond initially found success in The Sims Online. She was a producer for the somewhat successful game. Ubisoft would soon notice her unique ideas and her real attention to well crafted games. She would soon become the lead producer on Assassin's Creed, Ubisoft's flagship title for the next generation. Jade would be put into the spotlight, showing off an amazing game. With AC's success, Jade would become known as one of the most successful women in the video game industry. So successful that in the recent months she has been promoted to President of the new Ubisoft Toronto studios. Jade Raymond is just the beginning of a changing demographic in gaming. No longer is gaming just for 16 year old boys. It is a sophisticated industry with room for all viewpoints. Jade Raymond is a perfect example of this.

I hope you will go and read more about these great developers in the industry. Like I said, I would put more if I could. These five are just five I picked that I thought represented my feelings on the way the industry could and should be represented. If you know of any other developers that you think should be on here, don't be afraid to comment. And if you disagree with my choices, don't be afraid either. Have a great Sunday.

This Isn't Your Father's C++

Face it: gamers are suckers for new things. They love the new and best creation. No one loves the Subaru of gaming. It may be reliable, but it sucks in terms of flashiness. No, gamers are more for the jaguars and the lambourghinis of the world. Developers know this, and the constantly are trying to find new ways of making their games the best and most intriguing they can be. Development has always had its share of "techniques" if you could call them that. There are certain trends and repetitions in the industry that seem to always be a source of that flashiness and popularity. Most of the time the new trends developers try to do crash and burn. This can range from majorly oversized chest areas and inventory wheels. But some of the time developers do find that golden ticket of a technique. They find an implementation that works, and they share it with others, effectively creating a "development technique". Over the last 5 years many more of these have come into play. Once again, most are absolute crap; but some have shown signs of absolute mastery. 5 techniques specifically have changed the face of gaming.

TECHNIQUE #1: Westernization
The power of the west has finally trumped the east. For so long genres such as RPG and RTS have been dominated by the Japanese and Koreans. Eastern development ways and trends dominated so much of the gaming scene since the early 90's. The new millenium saw a subtle shift in this trend, however. You see, western and eastern development are very much day and night. Western development always focused more on an all around experience with great gameplay, great integration, and a great story. Eastern development always focused more on specializing one of these things. In the eras of the PS1 and PS2, Eastern development fit. The power of the machines could only keep up with one of these things. Eastern development found a nice spot in terms of gameplay and graphical capacity, and decided to focus on the unique stories and setpieces that can only come from the east. Games such as Final Fantasy VII and the Tekken series brought the eastern flair to the world. This is what people liked, and what people wanted at the time. But as the graphical and gameplay possibilities began to be experimented upon, western development began to become much more intriguing. These were down to Earth stories, created with the idea of mass appeal. The scales were shifting, and when the new Xbox and Playstation hit the world, the balance of power, especially in terms of RPGs, changed. Western development began much more popular. Techniques such as gigantic development crews and a less linear way of development replaced the old ways of small development numbers paired with a very concrete development scheme. No better example is present than that of Mass Effect. This was one of the first western RPGs to majorly outsell and outlast any Japanese RPGs. The industry looks like it is comfortable now with westernization too. Many successful devs have stated that they are shifting their development philosophies, most recognizably Hideo Kojima, who will be implementing a western development cycle for Metal Gear: Rising.

TECHNIQUE #2: Realism
Another complete shift in game philosophy is realism. Going back several years from the present most developers were focused on a very fantasy and fictitous development realm. They were focused on pushing the envelope in terms of believability. This wasn't a bad thing by any means. Some great games were created because they pushed it in terms of realistic presentation. But just as gamers grew up and had more mature and realistic minds, so did the games they played. Developers recently have shown a trend in making games much more realistic. This is mainly for two reasons. The first is the most obvious: the technical barrier. 10 years ago technology only allowed for so much. There were no tools to create realistic physics or create a believable environment. The best skill to have at the time was to use the tools you had to push the envelope into something completely awesome. You couldn't rely on the technology to give you your perfect vision. If anyone knows this, it would be Tim Shaffer. Some of his greatest games, such as Grim Fandango, were great in vision but flawed due to the low technological capabilities. As tech became better games could do more in the realistic realm. Realistic physics and damager are possible now. Mouths and eyes can be moved to mimic a real person and add detail and personality. These things helped shape a new way of development. Devs don't have to compromise a vision. They can push the limits without the limits breaking. Tim Schaffer can now make a game that fits with his vision (Brutal Legend). Another less obvious reason for more realism is demand. What used to be fun to do isn't anymore. Terrible physics and blocky graphics were acceptable at one time because the scope and the fun of the game made it okay. It was excuseable because there was no way to fix it. Now, real physics is possible. Graphical capabilities are at there highest. There is no excuse for these things. They aren't fun.

TECHNIQUE #3: Guided Free-Roaming
It is as if gamers were pregnant. Early on devs were focused so much on created a linear experience. If you consider some of the best games of the 90's, they are a lot of platformers. This fit for the times. People loved a great experience that led you on a path. Take it to the beginning of the 21st century, free-roam became a very popular trend. This is in part to the major fame and success of the Grand Theft Auto games. These games posed a new way to play a game. No goals. No paths. You choose. This was intriguing. It was amazingly clever. It was awesome. But it got old after a while. Gamers have begun to crave a controlled experience more and more and more. They want that great story and immersiveness. They also wanted choice and freedom, too. Early on it seemed as if these two could never mix. But devs found a way, and games that combine these two things are vast and abound now. This might be from a free-roam game with moral choices. Developers such as Bethesda with Fallout 3 created a gigantic free-roam post-apocalyptic Washington D.C., but they also created a set story (an immersive one at that). They gave the player very tough moral choices, one that affected the story, giving it a linear feel in that respect. This could also be a linear game with openness built in. Games like BioShock have a very set story, but things such as customization in weaponry, plasmids, and equipment and the several hours that can be invested in finding Big Daddies and audio tapes open up the experience. Devs have found a sweet spot. They played around with the chemistry set quite a bit over the years, and they finally found a nice way of making rock candy.

TECHNIQUE #4: More people, less work
This is a plaguing problem with gaming. To make a game it takes many, many hours to make it. Early on in the industry people were working 20 hours a day for at least a year to push a game out into the market, having no idea whether it would do well or not. They were, for lack of a better word, overworked. This is a trend that is dangerous to the gaming industry. Too much commitment to work and not enough liesure time hurts the common worker in any situation. Most people can recall the issue of overworking with EA in the last 7 years. EA has been accused many times of overworking their employees unjustly to push a game out on time. This resulted in a major controversy. Developers have finally realized something: they are a company, and they hire people to work for them. They realize that as the developers now grow older, newcomers will come into the industry. They want to create a good working environment, not one of too much work. So many developers have done a smart thing: hire more people. Through this decision, many side-effect have occured, good ones at that. First, more workers is always good. It allows more flexibility in development cycles. Secondly, more workers has lead to more ambition. Ubisoft Montreal has hired over 400 people for Assassin's Creed II. The ambition for the game is enormous, and instead of tackling the game with 100 people, they spread the workload evenly and well. Lastly, this growth in the number of devs has led to more companies. As veteran devs make room for young developers, they have begun to form there own studios, such as 343 Industries made up of old Bungie employees. Don't get me wrong: gaming is still very constraining in terms of time. But the fact that devs have at least some room for there personal lives is a great.

TECHNIQUE #5: The console is the way
This one is hard for me to fathom. Gaming started on the PC. It was the great ability of the PC community that formed gaming today. Unfortunately, PC no longer has the power it once had. PC used to be a major SKU for developers. Every game that was getting made for a console would be made for the PC. No questions asked. This is in part because porting PC games to a console was extremely easy. The original Xbox (and even the Xbox 360, to an extent) was a glorified PC beneath its chassis. Porting a PC game to it was a piece of cake, and was just more money in the developer's and publisher's pocket. But the new console generation has brought a dilemma to the PC. Consoles are outlasting the PC in almost every way. Graphical capabilities are easier to obtain on the consoles. High quality graphics on the 360 and the PS3 can be compared to top of the line PCs. Most people don't have top of the line PCs, and will gladly fork money over for consoles that have these than constantly purchase high end components for their PCs. Accessibility is much more on the consoles. It is easier to play a game on the consoles than it is on the PC. Even internet, a feature always triumphed by the PC, is being bested by consoles. Face the facts: console games now sell much better than PC games. Developers will prioritize consoles games first, because they make more money. Many devs have even stopped PC development all together. PC isn't gone by any means, but consoles have much more power in sales, and just like a smart company should, developers have flocked towards consoles.

No matter what happens because of these techniques, game developers always have one thing in mind: create the best game they can. They want you to buy their game. They want to make a worth while experience for you. Don't ever think that these new techniques and trends in gaming are to exploit the gamer. These are all changes for the better in my opinion, and they are techniques which I believe will stay for a while. Like it or not, dev trends are changing.