So, here I am, sitting on the couch, not able to sleep because of THE SNORING.... *sigh* Anyway, let's jump back to FIFA.
A friend of mine told me about the price of FIFA 14 on the Xbox One being ludicrous, and I remembered seeing something like that on my RSS Feed... Well, curiosity, y'know. I clicked on Amazon, searched for "FIFA 14 Xbox One"... Hmm...
£89.99.
... Give me a second to make some sense here. This particular FIFA is run by EA Sports' new engine, Ignite. Okay. It's for next-gen. Okay. Possibly with Kinect functions... Noted. ... Am I missing something here?
Why in the name of anything that's sane is it so pricey?? I mean, £90? Sure, granted that this isn't the official price, but £90?! *gasp* ... Well, okay, let's just think this through for a second.
This isn't the official price for a next-gen game. But me, being the distrustful kid that I am, believes that there must be a reason as to why Amazon slapped on that price tag. Is this a glint of what is to come? Are future games going to be this pricey? I hope not.
I mean, the tech is essentially the same, in terms of disc storage. We're converging onto blu-ray. Current-gen games cost about £40, unless of course it's something by Square-Enix or you're getting some exclusive stuff. I can't really fathom why it would cost £90. Are next-gen games so heavy in content that we will be seeing the return of multiple-disc-packaging, hence the hike in price? What are we paying for, if the price rises?
Well, if it's not, then thank the heavens. Chances are, Amazon's just pulling our leg. Or, this could be a market survey. Less pre-orders = lower the prices. I don't know. I'm up here without any sleep and I can't form anything coherent. Deal with it.
In any case, I reckon this is not permanent. Still, it scared the crap outta me when I saw that price tag. Damn, I'm getting too old for this shit.
Friday, 31 May 2013
Wednesday, 29 May 2013
The Xbone
This post is a little too late for its content and purposes, but, I needed to get it out.
I was a happy boy when May 21st came round. Sure, I only own a PS3 and have only spent some time playing on the Xbox, but I knew that it would be exciting to see what Microsoft would have in store for all of us. What does the future hold for us? Is Microsoft coming up with something interesting for the Kinect? Any interesting games to be announced?
And then the reveal ended. What, wait, hold on. What happened to the FUTURE? KINECT? GAMES?
Microsoft, you talked about TV and sports so much in a game console reveal that I thought I was watching the wrong thing. Yes, I know what they are trying to do. Yes, there was a Call of Duty segment (doggy don't die D: ). Yes, Forza. Yes, EA. YES I KNOW.
Let me break down some things.
Where the video games?
Sure, they showed us stuff about Forza, plans about EA and some Call of Duty clips. Yes, they looked great graphics-wise. Thing is, I am pretty sure those are pre-rendered cinematic shots. Some bits of Call of Duty are probably from the gameplay, but here's my beef - was it running on the Xbone(I believe we are all entitled to call it that)?
To my understanding, the Xbone has 8GB of DDR3, of which 5GB is dedicated to gaming. Then I caught wind of it possibly needing cloud processing to fully render the game here. Also, backwards compatibility is backwards because making new tech to play old games is stupid? At least Sony gave some sort of apology by having Gaikai trying to figure something out using the cloud. Good job Microsoft.
My point is, the reveal had no show of games being played on the Xbone. "But dude, the PS4 reveal had no console AT ALL! The games were running on PC!" Yeah, a PC with similar architecture and specs as the PS4. The new functions for the console that relate to gaming were shown and demonstrated. This reminds me of the rumbling triggers, why didn't you talk about it Microsoft??
Television?
I don't know about you guys, but I have been selective of what I watch from networks nowadays. It is partially because of me being in the UK, and also because I know what I like. People have the power to be selective and picky nowadays thanks to the Internet.
Why would people want to buy something that's estimated at £500, just so they can watch TV 'better' and play games on a box that can't render everything natively? P-l-e-a-s-e. Having the ability to split your screen and do some other stuff like browsing the net while watching a movie is rather convenient,. However, the fact that you have channel subscriptions, Internet subscription and a television wide enough to make this work suggests that you are rich enough for an actual second-screen.
Don't. Waste. Your. Money. On an over-glorified TV Box that is much more expensive than this.
Always Online... DRM?
Thankfully, Microsoft still had some sense left in them to remove the always online function (which I believe to be a real thing because of the dev kits). However, you are still required to check-in at least once every 24 hours to play your games offline. Why? Well... Because DRM! Gotta make sure you aren't pirating stuff. Oh right, ah, yeah sure, legit... legal... I'm fine with DRM, but your approach man... Microsoft...
Before I go on, I need to note that, to play games on the Xbone, you need to first install the game from the disc and use a code to lock the game to your account. This is because of the Xbone's stupid processing power and DRM. Cool and all that, but this kills off the consoles' advantage.
Say, if I want to loan a game to my friend, my pal, my heng dai... I will have to divulge my account's password so he can log in to my profile to play it. *gulp* ... Sure, I can do that...? Oh wait, when he's playing, what am I gonna do? What now, are we gonna have rosters on who has access to my account then? I can't loan games anymore?
Then, we have this whole second-hand games problem. If you sell off your game to someone, that guy's gonna have to pay an activation fee - the FULL PRICE of the game. OH NOES!! But don't worry, Microsoft's got you covered! If you sell it to a place like GameStop, there won't be second-hand fees to worry about! The publisher will get a cut of the profits! And so will Microsoft... wait, what? So, GameStop earns about 10%, and the 90% goes to the publisher AND Microsoft? Bullshit.
Imagine this, you want to sell off a game. If you plan to do it on your own, you will have to sell it for cheaps, because the activation fee is going to be a huge problem for whoever's buying it. So, sell it to GameStop? Thing is, people don't usually get a good price for games they trade in at GameStop. Considering that they will probably only get 10% in the future, you will then get even lesser than before, and they will charge even more just so they can stay in business. Consumers lose anyway. Microsoft wants to own the pre-owned market. Money-grubbers, the lot of them.
Kinect Mandatory
Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike the Kinect. I actually played some games with people on it before, it was absolutely one of the most fun things I have ever done in my life.
So, why am I thinking it's a problem? Without the Kinect, you can't use the Xbox One, at all. This means, you HAVE to get a Kinect along with your console, so rack up that $$$$. I for one think that it should be supplementary, but I guess if the customers are forced to pay for it, it's fine.
And whatever-else
Well... There are plenty of stuff to talk about, but, ehhhh.
So, Microsoft, why have you taken this path? Why are you so... stupid? So, so, so stupid?
Is this intentional for marketing? Is this your master plan? I am hating you so much right now that I can't bear to think that I will find this funny at the end of the day. I can't, at all.
Still, the Xbone stands a chance at impressing all of us in E3. If its line-ups (the 15 exclusives which never appeared in the reveal, probably because of the horrible dev kits) are one of the most mind-blowing games people have ever seen in their lives, so much so that it makes all this shitstorm pale in comparison to its awesomeness, I can't see how Microsoft will be able to make a comeback.
Looking forward to seeing what Nintendo has in store for the Wii U as well! They won't be joining E3, but they are still doing their own little show. The fight is still on for dominance in next-gen, but Xbone looks pretty much ragged right now.
WELP!
I was a happy boy when May 21st came round. Sure, I only own a PS3 and have only spent some time playing on the Xbox, but I knew that it would be exciting to see what Microsoft would have in store for all of us. What does the future hold for us? Is Microsoft coming up with something interesting for the Kinect? Any interesting games to be announced?
And then the reveal ended. What, wait, hold on. What happened to the FUTURE? KINECT? GAMES?
Microsoft, you talked about TV and sports so much in a game console reveal that I thought I was watching the wrong thing. Yes, I know what they are trying to do. Yes, there was a Call of Duty segment (doggy don't die D: ). Yes, Forza. Yes, EA. YES I KNOW.
Let me break down some things.
Where the video games?
Sure, they showed us stuff about Forza, plans about EA and some Call of Duty clips. Yes, they looked great graphics-wise. Thing is, I am pretty sure those are pre-rendered cinematic shots. Some bits of Call of Duty are probably from the gameplay, but here's my beef - was it running on the Xbone(I believe we are all entitled to call it that)?
To my understanding, the Xbone has 8GB of DDR3, of which 5GB is dedicated to gaming. Then I caught wind of it possibly needing cloud processing to fully render the game here. Also, backwards compatibility is backwards because making new tech to play old games is stupid? At least Sony gave some sort of apology by having Gaikai trying to figure something out using the cloud. Good job Microsoft.
My point is, the reveal had no show of games being played on the Xbone. "But dude, the PS4 reveal had no console AT ALL! The games were running on PC!" Yeah, a PC with similar architecture and specs as the PS4. The new functions for the console that relate to gaming were shown and demonstrated. This reminds me of the rumbling triggers, why didn't you talk about it Microsoft??
Television?
I don't know about you guys, but I have been selective of what I watch from networks nowadays. It is partially because of me being in the UK, and also because I know what I like. People have the power to be selective and picky nowadays thanks to the Internet.
Why would people want to buy something that's estimated at £500, just so they can watch TV 'better' and play games on a box that can't render everything natively? P-l-e-a-s-e. Having the ability to split your screen and do some other stuff like browsing the net while watching a movie is rather convenient,. However, the fact that you have channel subscriptions, Internet subscription and a television wide enough to make this work suggests that you are rich enough for an actual second-screen.
Don't. Waste. Your. Money. On an over-glorified TV Box that is much more expensive than this.
Always Online... DRM?
Thankfully, Microsoft still had some sense left in them to remove the always online function (which I believe to be a real thing because of the dev kits). However, you are still required to check-in at least once every 24 hours to play your games offline. Why? Well... Because DRM! Gotta make sure you aren't pirating stuff. Oh right, ah, yeah sure, legit... legal... I'm fine with DRM, but your approach man... Microsoft...
Before I go on, I need to note that, to play games on the Xbone, you need to first install the game from the disc and use a code to lock the game to your account. This is because of the Xbone's stupid processing power and DRM. Cool and all that, but this kills off the consoles' advantage.
Say, if I want to loan a game to my friend, my pal, my heng dai... I will have to divulge my account's password so he can log in to my profile to play it. *gulp* ... Sure, I can do that...? Oh wait, when he's playing, what am I gonna do? What now, are we gonna have rosters on who has access to my account then? I can't loan games anymore?
Then, we have this whole second-hand games problem. If you sell off your game to someone, that guy's gonna have to pay an activation fee - the FULL PRICE of the game. OH NOES!! But don't worry, Microsoft's got you covered! If you sell it to a place like GameStop, there won't be second-hand fees to worry about! The publisher will get a cut of the profits! And so will Microsoft... wait, what? So, GameStop earns about 10%, and the 90% goes to the publisher AND Microsoft? Bullshit.
Imagine this, you want to sell off a game. If you plan to do it on your own, you will have to sell it for cheaps, because the activation fee is going to be a huge problem for whoever's buying it. So, sell it to GameStop? Thing is, people don't usually get a good price for games they trade in at GameStop. Considering that they will probably only get 10% in the future, you will then get even lesser than before, and they will charge even more just so they can stay in business. Consumers lose anyway. Microsoft wants to own the pre-owned market. Money-grubbers, the lot of them.
Kinect Mandatory
Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike the Kinect. I actually played some games with people on it before, it was absolutely one of the most fun things I have ever done in my life.
So, why am I thinking it's a problem? Without the Kinect, you can't use the Xbox One, at all. This means, you HAVE to get a Kinect along with your console, so rack up that $$$$. I for one think that it should be supplementary, but I guess if the customers are forced to pay for it, it's fine.
And whatever-else
Well... There are plenty of stuff to talk about, but, ehhhh.
So, Microsoft, why have you taken this path? Why are you so... stupid? So, so, so stupid?
Is this intentional for marketing? Is this your master plan? I am hating you so much right now that I can't bear to think that I will find this funny at the end of the day. I can't, at all.
Still, the Xbone stands a chance at impressing all of us in E3. If its line-ups (the 15 exclusives which never appeared in the reveal, probably because of the horrible dev kits) are one of the most mind-blowing games people have ever seen in their lives, so much so that it makes all this shitstorm pale in comparison to its awesomeness, I can't see how Microsoft will be able to make a comeback.
Looking forward to seeing what Nintendo has in store for the Wii U as well! They won't be joining E3, but they are still doing their own little show. The fight is still on for dominance in next-gen, but Xbone looks pretty much ragged right now.
WELP!
Survival Rant!
Shinji Mikami's coming up with The Evil Within. A new Resident Evil's coming out. Both are classified as survival horror. ... Well, I'm a little skeptical about Resident Evil, considering their recent track record.
Anyway, let's get back on track. I had a little talk on the web with someone recently (let's call him Person A for referencing's sake), and to my amazement, he has a "new" definition for the survival genre.
Ready? Here we go... *cough*
Most games are in the survival genre. *WHAAAAAAAAAAA*
Alright, here's the thing. He stresses that most games have the survival element in it, and I can't refute that. Action-adventures, RPGs, FPS'es.... EVERYTHING. The point of the game is to achieve something without dying.
Makes sense, doesn't it?
NOPE, NOT TO ME. And here's my two cents on why.
In deciding a genre, the main components of the game decide where it belongs. If the core of your game is about shooting, it's a shooter. If the core is about action, it's an action game. Though there may be overlapping elements with games from different genres, this does not change its core element.
Take for example Metal Gear Solid. It... :
- is played from a third-person POV, with first-person view available
- uses guns and some form of physical combat
- requires the player to not die and accomplish objectives
- has some form of action elements in it
By the logic of Person A, the game belongs in the 3rd person fighter, FPS, survival-action game, because there are elements of those genres in it, but the game is classified as a stealth-action game. Why?
Metal Gear Solid centres around you stealthily sneaking around enemies and avoiding detection. The game was MADE with the idea in mind that the players will utilise stealth and action sequences to be sneaky. The other elements in it, such as survival, close-quarter combat and shooting are all secondary elements of the game. Yes, the elements exist but they do not make up the core of the game.
Using that train of thought, survival games' core would be about surviving then, right? What is surviving to you? Take that, and make it the core of the game.
Survival to me means enduring hardships and barely making it out alive. The earlier Resident Evils had players put in a situation where ammo is limited, and there are tonnes of enemies out there to kill you. PlagueOfGripes' video makes this point, where ammo restriction forces the players to make decisions on whether to have a short-term benefit or a long-term benefit. The game wants you to feel the pain of surviving, the harshness of the elements that are against you.
Sure, pitting me against a mob numbering in the thousands while I am in possession of a ton of weapons and ammo is still challenging and my survival is challenged, but that probably doesn't happen often enough for the game to be listed in the survival genre. And, if anything, that game is testing my shooting abilities above all else.
I think game developers are mostly not stupid. Surely, they create games and label them in a genre for VERY good reasons. Why would they label, say, a game like Mortal Kombat under the survival genre? Yes, Person A's logic would dictate that it is a game about surviving, and taking his stance, you are saving the world on a global scale too. It totally fits the survival genre then! But the creators of the game intended Mortal Kombat to be ABOUT fighting. It is a fighting game. A. Fighting. Game. Damnit.
Don't get me wrong, I see his logic but I think Person A fails to see the bigger picture here. Games are placed under certain genres because it is intended to appeal in that market. Secondary, minor elements of the games are still there, but these things are not what make the game super appealing, although it may be interesting.
Alright. Rant. Done. WHEW!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)