Living in a 16-bit World

Getting Back in to the Sega Master System

2011-11-25T21:47:00.002-04:00

On a recent trip to the retro game store, I acquired a Power Base Converter for the Genesis. Along with it, I got boxed copies of Aztec Adventure, Kung-Fu Kid, and Quartet. I had a blast playing these titles again, and it really gave me the urge to get back into collecting for the Master System. Sega's 8-bit console was the first one I seriously began to collect for, and I'd forgotten just how great the games were.

So over the past few weeks, I've been buying games little by little. I recently got Action Fighter and Time Soldiers from a great fellow over on the Digital Press boards. Action Fighter is a Spy Hunter clone, and a pretty good one at that. I love the Sega truck that powers up your weapons! Time Soldiers is a port of the arcade game, and while it's pretty faithful, it's just too hard.

In fact, that's what's starting to come back to me now - just how hard MS games are! I can remember my frustration at many of them, some of which I conquered and some that I didn't, but damn if I didn't try. Maybe now I'll actually be able to find all 5 scrolls in The Ninja and reach the princess or get to the end of Miracle Warriors.

eBay has been good to me for finding games, as has the Sega-16 forum. A recent trade has netted me a set of (boxed!) 3D glasses with Space Harrier 3D, Maze Hunter 3D, and Missile Defense 3D - all complete with boxes and manuals. I also just bought complete copies of Spellcaster and Black Belt, so my little collection is starting to come to life!

I'll try and post some impressions of these games as I get them, but if I don't come back soon, you'll know what I;ve been doing!

Carzy Little Thing Called Life...

2011-04-20T13:00:00.006-04:00

Wow, it's been a while, hasn't it? I normally don't take so long to post, but it's been an uphill battle keeping this blog alive. I originally intended it to be an outlet for my opinions on non-Genesis gaming (Sega-16 suffices for that), but the time needed to write the comprehensive posts I prefer just isn't there.

The best way then, is to post smaller thoughts, capsules of information that will simultaneously serve as my outlet and keep this poor little blog alive. This seems like as good an opportunity to start as any, so here goes...

Jeez, looking at my last post about Game Room makes me genuinely sad. How could Microsoft have failed at what was an awesome idea? Why would it let Game Room wither and die? After how callously it pulled the plug on 1 vs. 100, one would expect it to let Game Room die with a little more dignity, but I guess it was not meant to be. Lesson learned: stay FAR away from MS "events" on Xbox Live, lest ye be burned!

On a more positive note, I went to Neo Japan Games, a great retro shop on the far side of the island, and I came back with some choice items:

Genesis

- Battletoads (loose)
- Cyborg Justice (complete)
- Garfield: Caught in the Act (cart and box)
- Heavy Nova (cart and box)
- Mazin' Saga: Mutant Fighter (cart and box)

32X

- Kolibri (loose)

SNES

- X-Men: Mutant Apocalypse (loose)

Saturn

- Croc (complete)
- Dark Legends (complete)
- Virtua Racing (complete)
- World Series Baseball (complete)

... and best of all, this bad boy:

I also picked up a few Genesis doubles, which I promptly gave away and kept the boxes (for refitting the collection). I got an extra Genesis Virtua Racing whose box fits my naked Game Genie cart perfectly. I printed out a custom insert and voila! Instant Game Genie clamshell!

The whole deal came out to about $137, which I paid for with some trade-in. Of everything I bought, I'm especially happy with the Arcade Racer. Now I can play Virtua Racing, Daytona, and Sega Rally in style!

Microsoft Game Room: Wasted Potential?

2010-07-28T19:12:00.012-04:00

I admit it; I initially loved Game Room. I loved the concept (still do), the cute little arcade cabs, the medals and achievements, and the high score challenges. I've been into it since launch day, and I currently have around 27 games or so. I play it daily (just beat my Super Breakout score today. 201 points!), and I really, really wish more people were into it.

Why are people leaving? The problem lies not in the design or the concept. No, if you want to blame anyone for the tepid interest Game Room has generated over the few short months since it was launched, blame Microsoft itself. Slowly but surely, the company has done just about everything to ensure that as few people as possible care about what could otherwise be an awesome concept. Blame MS for the slow releases, including games with specialized controllers that are now nearly unplayable, the actual dearth of arcade games in each pack (the first batch of games from next week's Game Pack 8 contains only 4 2600 titles and one Intellivision game), the annoying pauses while playing, the lack of more game companies, the generic Konami cabs, etc. The list goes on and on, and while people are either forgetting they downloaded GR or are deleting it altogether, MS has been mostly silent. Even though the official Facebook page has finally been getting updates, and the website is now current, but the Xbox 360 dash never reports a thing, and Major Nelson probably doesn't even know Game Room exists.

I think I'm one of only a handful of people on the forums I frequent who actually use Game Room, and I fully understand the lack of interest. When MS boasted back in March that there would be a thousand games, people got excited. They imagined Capcom, Namco, Data East, and a slew of other arcade stalwarts offering up their best wares for 240 points. What'd we get? Atari 2600 and Intellivision games.

Here we are, more than three months later, and the rumors of other companies joining Game Room are still just that, rumors. I've heard that the release list only encompasses games from the Atari and Activision anthologies and Intellivision Lives!. Indeed, if you look at those lists, all the games currently offered or slated for release in GR are on them. They've seemingly run out of Atari arcade games (where is Food Fight?), and Konami has vanished from the list despite still having titles like Jackal, Circus Charlie, Gradius, and Devastators available. Given this week's list, pickings are slim, and nothing more has been announced.

That's what pisses me off the most. MS has dropped the ball completely with Game Room. There has been zero advertising, and it took them 4 months just to update the showcase arcade! I would love to be able to play Universal, Midway, Taito, and other company libraries here, and the damn thing was made for it! Head over to the Facebook page, and the complaints are all the same: where are the other companies? Why are there so few arcade games being released? The GR staff is again, mostly silent on these issues.

I would really love to pour my MS points into Game Room, but as it is, MS has done a really bad job with it. I'll continue to purchase the occasional arcade release that interests me, and I'll play those games I've already bought, but unless something major comes along, count me as one of those who is rapidly losing interest. Get with it MS; we're waiting.

Buying Used Sucks Sometimes

2010-07-01T12:14:00.003-04:00

I try to take advantage of every preowned offer that comes my way, be it through Gamestop or any other store that's willing to shave a few bucks off its price. I mostly get good deals, and I won't buy a game unless it's complete and in good condition. The boxes might not be shiny new, but hey, you have to find ways to save money in this economy.

Sometimes, however, things don't work out. Yesterday, I found a used copy of Lego Indiana Jones 2 for the Xbox 360. It was only $15 after discount, so I picked it up. After three "unreadable disc" errors, I packed it back up for a return trip to the store. It was the only used copy they had, so I'll just pay the extra $5 and buy it new. Two trips to the store for a $20 game that's everywhere at that price. *Sigh*

I'm on YouTube!

2010-01-07T22:54:00.003-04:00

I finally got a decent digital camera, and I've been experimenting with posting videos on Youtube. The first one I did was a digital tour of my game room, and the second one was about my Saturn collection. I'm thinking of doing one last video on my Sega CD collection before calling it a night in terms of experimentation.

What I'd really like to do are short video reviews about specific Genesis games. Discussion about the box art and manual would be included, as well as gameplay footage. I just have to figure out how best to work the camera (Peter Jackson, I ain't).

Anyway, it's nice to be able to finally join the YouTube era, and at least this way I have another forum for sharing my love of Genesis games.

Welcome 2010

2010-01-05T21:00:00.004-04:00

The new year has arrived, which means I have a lot of things to which I can look forward. I plan to start my doctorate degree soon, but it shouldn't hurt my commitment to Sega-16, which is something I cannot see myself not doing. The site's 5 and 1/2 now, and there's still just so much that I still want to write about.

I at least started the new year off on a good note for Sega-16. I finally got around to creating a Youtube channel, where I plan to post some videos of the different games in my Genesis collection. I just got a new digital camera and decided to test it out today by making a video tour of my game room.

Another thing that I intend to accomplish is beating 40 games this year. I completed 39 last year, and I really would like to beat that number. I played so many awesome games this year, and the amount coming in 2010 is staggering. I just hope my wallet can take it!

Oh, and I do hope to blog more, schedule permitting.

My Love/Hate Relationship with Demon's Souls

2009-10-27T13:19:00.012-04:00

I picked this game up practically on a whim. The only knowledge I had of it was what my best friend told me off and on, and while that seems like a completely insane way to decide the fate of $60, I figured I could trust his judgment. When I found out that Demon's Souls comes from the makers of the Kings Field series, I started to warm up a bit more, as I loved those games on the Playstation.

I bought my copy on launch day (the sales girl at Gamestop had no idea what it was. Typical) and headed home for play. Sixty hours later, I can't put the damn thing down. This is precisely why I got my Playstation 3: to offer me deep and engaging experiences that I can't find on other consoles. Ah, the benefit of owning more than one machine! Here was an action/RPG that had incredible graphics, great gameplay, a long quest, lots of awesome boss battles, and tons of dungeons to explore. It sounds great, doesn't it?

For the most part, it is. Demon's Souls is a great game that is very rewarding for those who decide to stick with it. The problem is that the initial learning curve is larger than any other game I've played this generation, and the way the whole game works takes some getting used to. Those who stumble into this expecting a traditional RPG set up are going to be disappointed, and they're going to be pretty confused for the first few hours.

For example, players obtain souls when they kill enemies, and these are used for everything you can imagine. There is no money in this game, so you're using souls to buy weapons, spells, the works. You also use these souls to level up, and by "level up" I mean " enhance your abilities." There is no general level per se, and the game offers no experience points at all. Want an archer? Better raise that dexterity. Like casting spells? Work on intelligence. This system lets you create a totally unique character, but it can be a major pain in the ass sometimes. For instance, I started with a temple knight, and I chose to work on improving his magic. Late in the game I found an awesome White Bow, but my dexterity was six levels too low. I spent an hour grinding just to be able to use it. Inconvenient? Yes, but damn was it worth it.

The whole game seems designed to test your patience and determination. Should you die in a level, you're sent back to the beginning, and all the enemies are revived. Yep, you have to do the whole thing all over again. Moreover, all the souls you collected are taken from you, and you have to trek all the way back to where you died to reclaim them. Should you be slain along the way, you lose them permanently. Oh, and did I mention that the game has no pause feature? Yeah, all your curing and equipping is done in real time, so if you're not prepared for a particular battle, you're going to get killed really fast. Fortunately, all the items you found and the doors you opened remain, so you don't have to worry about losing that awesome sword you found just before a skeleton skewered you with a single blow.

That's the allure of Demon's Souls. This game kicks your ass, takes your name and address, and then goes to your house and kicks the ass of everyone in your entire family. It's hard, damn hard, but it's not impossible. That being said, I can certainly see some people getting turned off by it. I know I've already seen a fair share of used copies at Gamestop! The sense of accomplishment you get from killing one of the powerful bosses is immense, and that sense of "I need to explore just a bit farther" keeps pushing you onward.

All this goodness doesn't mean that the game is free of flaws, however. In fact, there are a few things that are downright unforgivable. The no pause thing is a pain in the ass, but being able to only equip two weapons on the left and right hands sucks. Why let me carry all these cool things if I can't use them quickly? I'm forced to go with magic and a shield on the left and a sword and bow on the right. But what if I want to use a talisman to cure myself or cast a miracle (there are both miracles and spells)? I'm screwed, that's what. Also, how come I have more rings than Mr.T but can only equip two? What about my other eight fingers?

Another thing that I don't like is the lock-on feature. It's useless for bows (which thankfully have zoom, that makes shooting easier), and it craps out when you don't want it to or sticks around when you want it to turn off. This can be a serious problem if an enemy leaps at you or closes in. The camera can go nuts in these situations, and the lock-on means you can't get away quickly enough to avoid death.

And you will die, young adventurer. You will die, and often. Being in soul form means you have less energy, but it also means that other players can't invade your game. That's right. Since Demon's Souls is online all the time, you can see the phantoms of other players all around you. Should you be revived by defeating a boss or using a special stone, those other players can invade your game as Black Phantoms. I've heard people say that they like this because it keeps you on your toes and makes things more exciting, but personally, I hate it. I've had two instances where I was exploring a stage, and some idiot invaded my game and killed me. That meant I had to go all the way back to the beginning and do it all again. It was neither exciting nor invigorating. Granted, you can unplug your PS3's ethernet cord and play in peace, but then you don't see the messages of other players and their phantoms, which are useful for figuring out how to tackle specific enemies.

As major as they might sound, none of these problems is game-breaking, and Demon's Souls is just too good to pass up because of them. This is an RPG worthy of both your cash and time, and if you like castles, dragons, and dungeons, this simply must be in your game library.

Batman: Arkham Asylum = Game of the Year

2009-09-01T15:50:00.019-04:00

Unlike some of his other Justice League friends (Aquaman, LOL), Batman actually has a history of decent games under his utility belt. The classic NES title and SNES Batman Returns immediately come to mind, as does Batman: The Video Game for the Genesis. From there on, it's been largely hit-and-miss, with a few nuggets of quality standing out. Overall, the quality of the games in the relatively large library, larger than that of most super heroes, is perhaps the main reason why I'm more willing to give him the benefit of the doubt each time a new title is released. I've played and enjoyed most of them - I even enjoyed Rise of Shin Tsu - so Arkham Asylum had to be a decent game, right?

Wrong. Arkham Asylum is not only a great game, it's perhaps the best one released in 2009 so far. Little-known developer Rocksteady Studios has created far and above the best action game of the year; it's made the semanal Batman title and set the bar for super hero games. How it did this is probably a lesson in simplicity itself, a lesson perhaps so simple that it has manage to elude developers for so long. Hidden in plain sight, as they say.

Last year, I wrote a Double Take article on the excellent Spider-Man vs. the Kingpin for the Sega Genesis. To me, the biggest attraction that game had, as well as what made it such a good super hero game in the first place, was the fact that it was developed from the ground up specifically around its star. Most hero games are simply action or beat-'em-up titles with a license slapped on to boost sales. With SvtK, Sega went the route all these games should take from the start: it developed the game around the star, making it unplayable with anyone else.

Arkham Asylum does this in spades. Sure, Batman is seemingly nothing more than a muscular dude in tights who kicks major ass. Gaming is not lacking in this department, but that's not all that makes Batman who he is. Anyone can beat up thugs, but not everyone has the combination of talents and gadgets that make the Dark Knight essential to this narrative. In other words, the game simply wouldn't be the same - or as fun - had the hero been Superman or anyone else.

Rocksteady combed through everything that makes Batman such an icon. His ability to instill fear in criminals, his incredible athletic ability, and most of all, his unmatched detective skills. The Caped Crusader's keen intellect and problem-solving ability is pivotal to the game's progression, and there are dozens of side riddles (guess who from!) that need them as well. What makes it all so incredible is that you the player are the one using those (i.e. your) skills, which brings the level of connection to character to a level never before seen.

This connection goes beyond just the plot and is actually central to the gameplay itself. A tap of the left bumper brings up Detective Mode, which turns everything a light shade of blue and allows otherwise overlooked things to come to light by turning them bronze. Moreover, certain clues, such as DNA trails, are only visible this way. A down side is that you'll spend most of the game seeing everything in blue, but that's because you're scouring every corner of the ancient and decrepit Asylum to find a trophy or riddle you missed. And air ducts. Lots and lots of air ducts.

Add to it all the jaw-dropping visuals, butter-smooth gameplay, upgradeable abilities and gadgets, and some awesome voice work (Mark Hamill as Joker, Kevin Conroy as Batman, and Arleen Sorkin as Harley Quinn!), and you have what is simply the best comic game ever made. It all comes together so well that you're even able to forgive the weak plot. Suffice it to say that the Joker takes over Arkham in order to release an army of mutant monsters. Bane, Killer Croc, Poison Ivy, and a few others are on the loose and need taking down before Batman can tackle the Clown Prince of Crime himself. It's not very deep, but the acting is superb, and Arkham is just so massive that you'll forget the storyline completely.

Arkham's huge size is a major plus, as the several buildings that sprawl across the compound will need to be revisited several times to access new areas and find new data on the inhabitants. The whole game itself is quite long for an action title, and there are even unlockable challenge areas to finish off after you're done with the main quest. They even have online leaderboards!

Simply put, Batman: Arkham Asylum is the game to own this year. I bought the Xbox 360 version, though I've heard conflicting reports that the Playstation 3 version looks better. That one also has exclusive Joker challenge levels that can be downloaded for free from the Playstation Store. I got mine at Gamestop, so I at least have the Scarecrow's challenges to play. Whichver version you choose, you simply cannot go wrong. This is the game you show to anyone who knocks this generation of consoles. It doesn't get any better than this...

... unless we get a sequel!

Houston: We Have Policenauts!

2009-08-30T22:41:00.002-04:00

My god, this was so much easier than I had thought. After a good friend of mine hooked me up with a pre-patched file, it was a simple task of extracting the file and burning both ISOs to two CDs. I popped the first disc into my modded PSone (for imports; I don't pirate), and it booted just fine. I can now play Policenauts in English.

The voice overs are still in Japanese, but who cares when you have beautiful English subtitles? I can't comment yet on the overall quality of the translation, as I've been busy with other games and haven't sat down with it completely, but this week that will change. I've been staring at my Japanese copy of the game for years, and now I can finally enjoy it!

Those who don't have a modded console can play the game just fine via emulator, and while it's not on actual hardware, it's better than never being able to enjoy Policenauts at all. You can find the patch at The Policenauts Translation Project, so grab it and enjoy all the hard work these good folks put into this translation.

Policenauts! In English!

2009-08-23T22:33:00.008-04:00

It only took a bit more than a decade, but Konami's spiritual successor to the classic Snatcher is finally available in English via a fan-made patch courtesy of the good folks over at Policenauts.net. Since Konami itself obviously couldn't be bothered to give the game the props it deserves and make it available to English-speaking audiences, some diehard fans thankfully took it upon themselves to translate Hideo Kojima's overlooked two-disc classic.

The only problem I find with the whole scenario is the actual patching process. I've never been very good at such things, and this kind of endeavor intimidates me quite a bit. My quest to finally play Ys IV on my Turbo Duo took me an entire night to complete, and the first time I soft modded my Xbox took almost as long. Hacking, modding, and patching are things best left to others with more skills.

Thankfully, a good friend of mine already patched his and set me up with a pre-patched copy that is currently being downloaded. Hopefully, this should set me on the right path, and I will soon be enjoying this great game in English!

More news when the downloadand install is complete!

A Look at Sega.com from 1997

2009-08-02T23:52:00.002-04:00

Web Archive is an incredible site and virtually the only one trying to preserve the websites of yesteryear for posterity. Recently, someone over at the Digital Press forums looked up Sega's site from 1997. It's there almost in its entirety, and it has some really cool images! Check it out here.

Laziness Wins Again, It Would Seem...

2009-04-24T21:48:00.003-04:00

Whoah, three months since my last post! I guess no matter how hard one tries to maintain a blog, time is always the winner. I really want to keep this thing going, and I won't go into the lame "real life messed me up" spiel. Suffice it to say that Sega-16 is really keeping me busy, but that's a good thing, right? I've been meaning to write for it more - or at least as much as a job and two children will let me, so my distraction there isn't entirely without merit.

And what writing I have been doing! My latest article will be up in two weeks, and it sheds some interesting relevations on the whole Sonic The Hedgehog 3/Michael Jackson urban legend. It's a lengthy piece, and it features new quotes from former Sega alumni that were given specifically for this article, including a new one from former SOA head Tom Kalinske.

I guess that no matter how much time I try to devote to other hobbies (like blogging), Sega-16 will always be the thing that takes the lion's share of my online time. I'll just try to share it here with the two of you that actually read - or used to read - this thing!

Getting Your Money's Worth

2009-01-27T21:50:00.009-04:00

Recently, I purchased The Maw for Xbox Live Arcade. The demo was quite charming, and I was eager to have a new game to play on the platformer-starved Xbox 360. From first glance, one could tell that The Maw had some exceptional production values, and the characters were endearing and attractive. Eagerly, I paid my 800 MS points ($10) and got to playing. Three hours later, I had beaten the game with 100% completion and all but one of the achievements.

Needless to say, I felt cheated.

I know the whole "games are expensive to make!" argument. I hear it every time someone complains of a game being too short, easy, etc. I could probably stomach such talk when it involves some forty-hour epic that enthralls you for hours each time you play. The Maw, sadly, is the exact opposite. Its paltry eight levels can be beaten with 100% completion in under three hours, and once you finish the game, there's no reason at all to go back. None of the stages are particularly clever in design, and there are no secrets, extra items, or anything of the sort to find. You literally see EVERYTHING on your first playthrough. Even the achievements (save one that requires you to play at four separate times in a day) can all be done in one sitting. Hardly worth the purchase price.

Even worse, developer Twisted Pixel has now announced that it will be selling three additional levels via Xbox Live for a hundred points each. This gives the impression that almost a third of the game was left behind to inflate the replay value of what would otherwise be a "play once and toss" affair. Such nickel-and-dime tactics really annoy me, and I won't b buying the levels, achievements included or not.

So what excuse is there now? The game is short, not particularly deep or involving, and a third of it was withheld to be sold separately. Should I just throw up my arms and say "what do you expect for $10?" No, I should be annoyed that the demo, which was so enticing and enjoyable, failed to show a game that was all flash and no substance. The latter, it would seem, comes for an extra price.

If a developer can't afford to release a game, perhaps it's best that nothing should be released at all. I don't want to be sold part of a game now and then have to buy the rest little by little. Why not just sell the whole thing for $15, like Castle Crashers (a much better value and game overall)? I really liked The Maw, and my anger mostly stems from being denied more of it for the price. Platformers are traditionally not as deep as most other genres, and a lack of length can outright kill one after the initial novelty has worn off.

Interviewed during the game's development, Mike Henry of Twisted Pixels commented on what distinguishes The Maw from other games. "The big thing we wanted to push with it was personality. So, I would say that even over and above the actual mechanics of the game and all that, we wanted to make sure it was a memorable experience for the players because they got attached to the characters, and they wanted to know more about the characters, and would be sad when the game was over because they don’t get to continue the adventure with the characters anymore."

He was right, in a sense. I did get attached to the characters and was sad when the game ended. Unfortunately, that was because the game was over by the time I really got to like them.

ACHIEVEMENT UNLOCKED: Japan Sucks

2009-01-13T21:36:00.004-04:00

This past holiday season was spent playing - and beating - Infinite Undiscovery, a cookie-cutter JRPG that was fun, if you still like that sort of game. Since I've been playing them so long, I can still enjoy the clichéd and boring characters, random battles, tedious grinding, and stale plot. The Xbox 360 has received some choice selections over the past year or so, but lately I've found myself wondering just how much longer I can stand the genre.

Dragon Quest VIII was a great game, filled with awesome visuals and a huge and interesting world. With that in mind, I dove head-first into Blue Dragon, and I still haven't been able to wash the taste from my mouth. The game itself wasn't that bad, but the achievement distribution was simply horrible. Now, I'm something of an achievement whore (check my gamercard on the right!), and I find them to be neat little ways to entice me to get as much out of a game as possible. That is, when they're done right. Some games, like the recently-beaten Assassin's Creed, had them well distributed, in ways that didn't force players too hard to find them but that weren't obtuse either. Blue Dragon threw all that completely out the window and offered achievements that were downright stupid. For example, you beat the game with your characters at around level 62, but the game has achievements for leveling up each character to level 99. Why? Why on Earth would I spend hours grinding over 30 more levels for a 15 point achievement, especially when it has no bearing on the game itself?

Eternal Sonata, another JRPG and one with perhaps the most obnoxious character designs I've ever seen (I hate you Beat, HATE YOU!), is just as guilty. There are music sheets to be collected, and some don't appear until your second playthrough. WTF? I have to play the whole game from scratch a second time just to get some dumb papers? Why?

Most recently, Infinite Undiscovery hit the stupid ball out of the park. An awesomee game with some bland character designs, it too has a multiple playthrough achievement, but even Eternal Sonata has to stand back and say "DAMN!" at just how stupid it is. Check this out: you have to play through the whole game THREE times to get a special boss in a dungeon that's half a dozen levels long with no save. And the achievement for beating her?

Worth a single point. Yep, 1 measly point.

There are other moronic grinding achievements as well, but this one just takes the cake. I beat the game and did maybe one or two more before quitting, and I'll never go back to finish up the achievements in any of these games. With Lost Odyssey sitting on my shelf, waiting for some playtime, I'm loathe to check its achievement list for fear of being assaulted with yet more stupidity.

It's now well known that Japan is about a decade behind the West in game design. Must it lag in achievement distribution too?

Kickin' ASSassin's Creed

2009-01-11T17:13:00.004-04:00

I bought this one a while ago pretty cheap, and it's been sitting on my shelf, mired in my Pile of Shame (more like Heap 'O Humiliation) for months. After finally beating Infinite Undiscovery, I decided to tackle it, and I must admit, this game is awesome. The combat is a little hit-or-miss (ha!), but the ambiance is spot-on, and the cities are simply gorgeous and alive. Seriously, I think Grand Theft Auto IV is the only other game I've seen that has been able to bring a major metropolis to life so truly realized. Everything is just stunning, and each of the three cities have a life of their own. There's also no end to the fun of tossing guards off of rooftops!

I'm almost done (just some flag achievements left to mop up), and I can say that I eagerly await the sequel. Ubi Soft has a habit of releasing some great-but-glitchy games, and Assassin's Creed is par for the course, but rest assured that I will definitely wet my blade with the blood of the guilty once more when the sequel finally comes out.

In other news, I recently started freelancing for The Next Level, an enthusiast site much like GotNext was, but much older and larger in size. Chris "bahn" Scantleberry enticed me to write again by dangling under my nose the sweet carrot that is Saints Row 2, as well as the latest Spyro game for the kiddies. Check out the review to see why you should definitely pick up Volition Inc.'s latest and greatest game.

Xbox 360 = On Fire

2008-11-12T12:46:00.005-04:00

Not literally, mind you, although with the sorry state of Microsoft's hardware these days, one actually catching fire wouldn't be much of a stretch. No, I'm referring to its incredible lineup of software that has dragged me away from my blog for most of the past two months. Look at that - a single entry in the entire month of October! I guess it's not surprising, as games like Rock Band 2, Mega Man 9, Castle Crashers, and Fable II all have my undivided attention whenever I get the chance to boot the system up. Many of the games I'm playing are multi-platform, of course, but my 360 gets the love due to its seamless online capabilities and achievements.

November seems to be continuing the trend too, with Gears of War 2 and Fallout 3. The former is an awesome sequel that ups the amount of players for online co-op from two to five and adds an awesome horde (read: survival) mode. The latter? Well, lets just imagine Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion in a post-apocalyptic Washington DC. I've poured over fifty hours into this one already, and alternating between it and Gears 2 (whose campaign I completed with a friend in an all-nighter), I'm set for the rest of the month.

Oh, did I mention that I've received a review copy of Legend of Wukong from Super Fighter Team, which gives Sega-16 the world's first review of it? Heh, another game to add to my play list, and an RPG at that!

So if you don't see me as much, it's because I'm doing what most game writers should be doing: playing games.

Happy 20th Birthday, Sega Genesis!

2008-10-27T08:36:00.008-04:00

This Wednesday, we celebrate the 20th anniversary of that greatest of consoles, the Sega Genesis. It's been a long road full of great games and big pot holes, but the Genesis fan base is still alive and kicking.

More so than those other 16-bit consoles, the Genesis is still at the forefront of gaming news as well, thanks to the efforts of some talented and dedicated fans. Two decades after its initial release in Japan, Sega's most successful hardware is still quite alive and well. For example, this December Genesis owners get not one, but two new games in the forms of Legend of Wukong from Super Fighter Team (the fine folks who brought us Beggar Prince) and Pier Solar & the Great Architects from Watermelon Development. It's incredible that we're anticipating two new titles for a console that was officially discontinued by Sega a decade ago. Who said all good things had to come to an end?

Yes, the Genesis is still going strong, and Sega-16 is going to be right there to celebrate its big day. That's why we've prepared something special for our readers this week! In addition to our regular dual review updates on Monday and Thursday, we have three features and a video archive update for them as well! This is what we have on tap:

Double Take: Altered Beast: The one that started it all, Altered Beast was a title that played a pivotal role in the early success of the Genesis. Though many gamers today are quick to dismiss its easy and repetitive gameplay, the first 16-bit cartridge did much more than offer Genesis owners a free game with their new consoles; it proved that the next generation in gaming had truly arrived.
Stories from the Book of Genesis: Good Night Victoria: There's nothing more loyal than a model 1 Genesis, and losing one is always a sad thing. Follow one gamer's experience with his from its birth to its final resting place in this heartwarming tale of a console that gave until the bitter end. It's a a tear-jerker!
Reader Roundtable: Launch Edition: What a better way to wrap up the week than by letting our own readers and forum members chime in with their own launch experiences? Everyone remembers where they were the day they got their Genesis - it's a day you never forget, like when JFK was killed or 9/11. Yes, the day that big, black box came home is one you never forget, and our readers will tell us what that special day was like!

If that's not enough, we'll have almost a half dozen new video spots for your perusal in the Video Archive, adding to our already impressive collection of well over a hundred videos. This is a week to remember friends, so check back daily. Heck, why not just leave your PC on all week?

Rock Band 2 Get!

2008-09-17T08:56:00.006-04:00

I loved the original Rock Band. I even bought the drums! What I didn't like was that the World Tour mode was only available in multi-player. I can't have people over constantly to play, and my daughter still doesn't know how to play the game (she bangs the hell out of those drum sticks though), so I'm left with a lot of time to play on my own. In order to complete the tour, I had to plug in a second a controller and sing and play guitar simultaneously. This was pretty easy - when you knew the song. Nothing was more frustrating than doing three songs out of a set of four, only to have that fourth song be some eight minute nightmare from the '70s that I'd never heard before. Eventually, I passed the tour, but there's no way I can finish all the venues, because I simply cannot sing and play guitar together on hard.

Thankfully, Harmonix made the tour online in the sequel. Now, I can play bass the whole way through, or even jump around on drums and guitar whenever I get the urge. For points, I can always hit up someone on my friends list to play with me. My band, The Also-Rans, is currently third on my list, with over 600,000 fans. Soon, immortality will be mine!

I love this game, plain and simple. All my downloadable content from the first is useable here, and for a paltry $5, you can rip all the songs from the original disc to your hard drive and use them. How awesome is that? I'm not buying the new drum kit, but I think I might invest in a new guitar. My Guitar Hero II one has a loose whammy bar, and it sucks to have the thing drop down and hit you in your hand while you're playing.

So if you see me online and want to jam, just send me an invite and we can rock the house!

Thoughts on Uncharted: Drake's Fortune

2008-08-31T17:46:00.011-04:00

One of my primary reasons for getting a Playstation 3 was to play Naughty Dog's Uncharted: Drake's Fortune. It seemed like a great blending of Tomb Raider and Kill.Switch, with lots of action and adverturing. As it turns out, it does indeed live up to its potential.

I'm a little late to the game with this one, I know. I only got my PS3 about a month ago, so I still have a lot of catching up to do. Uncharted doesn't seem to be a long game (I've heard that it's quite short, actually), so this is my game for the weekend. The recent patch for trophy support is nice, and I can now pursue my trophy whoring with confidence!

The first thing that hit me was just how great Uncharted looks. This game is absolutely gorgeous, and I'm playing on an SDTV. I can only imagine how good it looks in HD, and I'll soon find out once my check from GamesTM ever gets here so I can buy one. The environments are beautiful, and the water effects are spectacular (Drake's soaked look when wet is great). Naughty Dog provided PS3 owners with a great showcase of the console's power with this one. I especially loved the Spanish fort area. Puerto Rico is chock-full of those, and it was great to see such wonderful architecture used in a video game!

I have only a few issues with the gameplay, which while great, could be a bit tighter. The cover system is a bit cumbersome sometimes, and moving from a high to a crouching position in a single movement isn't as smooth as it should be. Shooting from the hip is more trouble than it's worth too, especially when headshots are as easy as they are fun. Fisticuffs are awkward at times, but I hardly ever found myself in the need to punch someone when ammunition was so plentiful.

I haven't finished the game yet, but I can honestly say that it made my Playstation 3 purchase worth it. This is exactly the type of game I like, and it's got a great story and awesome visuals to go with the solid gameplay. If you've got Sony's latest console and still don't have Uncharted, I strongly urge you to pick it up.

Wii Out

2008-08-30T22:39:00.017-04:00

It's gone. Sold. Out of my life. I no longer own a Wii.

And you know what? I don't miss it. I know there are a handful of games I enjoyed, and that there are a few others out there that I might like, but I just don't have the interest in Nintendo's latest license to print money. This year's E3 was enough to show me that the company no longer has my tastes in mind, and it's since moved on to another audience entirely. That's fine, as I know every company is in this business to make money. Nintendo's got a good thing going, and it's going to milk the hell out of it.

By the same token, I too have a right to search other options, and that's exactly what I did. The same day I sold my entire Wii package (with the exception of Super Mario Galaxy), I waltzed over to Wal-Mart and bought a Playstation 3. I was lucky enough to snag one of the Metal Gear Solid 4 bundles, so I got a backwards-compatible console with the Dual Shock 3 controller, and it all came with a great game to boot. A few days later, Mario was gone in trade-in, and I now own Motorstorm and Uncharted: Drake's Fortune. A pretty good start, if I do say so myself.

It all comes down to personal taste. The Playstation 3 doesn't have a ton of games I want right now, but it has more potential for me than the Wii does. I now have a Blu-Ray player and a console that has some excellent titles in the pipeline, and the Playstation Store has a ton of goodies that I'll be trying out. Super Stardust HD is awesome (not as good as Geometry Wars Evolved 2, but awesome nonetheless), and the current library has a few titles that should keep me busy for a while, so the console is going to get its share of play time.

The Wii, on the other hand, seems to be made with my five year-old daughter in mind, and virtually nothing announced interests me at all. Mad, Mad World looks great, but that's just a single game for the next twelve months, and none of the music, gardening, teeth-cleaning games Nintendo's announced move me in the slightest. The weak future schedule only reaffirms my belief that the Wii is not made for me, so I've opted for a console that is.

Many people love the Wii, and that's fine. The library has to appeal to someone, suppose, but it certainly does nothing for me. Reggie's pompous announcement that Animal Crossing is all the "core" gaming I'll ever need proves that Nintendo and I have parted ways. Moreover, the House of Mario recently stated that none of its "core" titles will be ready for 2009, which means that my dollars will be spent elsewhere.

I may still get a DS sometime in the future, but I think I've just sold my last Nintendo console. The weirdest thing is that I'm not bothered by that fact at all.

I guess Nintendo's not the only one that's moved on.

Ready, Set, Achieve!

2008-08-14T21:16:00.009-04:00

I love achievements. Those tiny little rewards that pop up every so often when playing an Xbox 360 game really make me happy, and I've found myself playing certain games longer than I normally would because of them. Many people don't care for them, and that's understandable, but to deride them makes little sense.

I think the charm of achievements lies in that they represent something we've been doing in games for years, only now it's been given a more prominent role. No one ever complained about how unlockables like new character clothing and items seemed like a cheap way to keep you playing, and many would argue that finding these hidden treasures and getting 100% in a particular game added to its overall value. Achievements only represent the natural evolution of the "unlockable."

To me, they offer enticing challenges that allow me to play further into a game than I normally would. Now, playing a crap game just for achievements is one thing, and it's something I'm completely against, but trying to 100% a game by unlocking all its achievements is something else entirely. When the achievements are practical and well-implemented, they can become challenging additions to an already fun game. Examples of this are achievements like completing all the guild quests in Oblivion. I know people who bypassed the guild quests entirely, and by doing so, they not only missed out on the achievements, but they also left some gaping holes in a lot of the sub plots that really added life to the game.

There are also achievements designed for bragging rights, like completing a game on its highest difficulty or getting 100% of every item. These are no different really, than the high scores tables of old, and I think there's nothing wrong with a gamer receiving a permanent citation for working his ass off in a particular title. I'm quite proud of several achievements of this type, and I like the idea of other people being able to see my accomplishments.

Granted, there has been poor implementation of achievements in a lot of games, and this is completely unacceptable. Games like Avatar, Madden 2006, and Blue Dragon have horrible achievements that are either pathetically easy or tedious beyond belief. These add nothing to their games, and show that lazy developers can be lazy in every aspect of their work. This should not be tolerated or encouraged by anyone.

So what do you think? Are achievements a positive thing or a detriment to gaming?

MadCatz Xbox 360 Arcade GameStick

2008-07-26T23:43:00.006-04:00

I picked this up for $10 at Gamestop today. I've heard mixed things about the quality of the stick, but I wanted the spinner control and Astropop. It also came with codes for Time Pilot and Frogger, but I have both of those. I'll probably hold onto to them for use as a prize in an upcoming Sega-16 contest.

The control itself seems pretty decent. I haven't had the chance to check out the spinner in action, but the overall construction of the whole thing is pretty sound. I know I won't be using this for regular games, but it might actually be pretty useful for arcade titles. Even if it doesn't work out, I at least now have a third controller, and I'll just consider it as a bonus that came with Astropop (which is pretty cool)!

So Long, Wii...

2008-07-24T13:32:00.005-04:00

Growing up on a hefty diet of everything Sega, I was never really partial to a Nintendo console. I loved the NES and every iteration of the Game Boy, but the feeling was just never "there" for me for the other consoles. Still, I tried to give it another shot by buying a Wii off a friend of mine a little over a year ago. I figured this would be the console that would make me a big Nintendo fan again.

It didn't, and now, it's up for sale.

I don't know what else to do with the darn thing. I have seven games in my collection, including most of the requirements like Zelda: Twilight Princess and Super Mario Galaxy, and I even have few third party games like Zak & Wiki and Ghost Squad. Still, I take a look at the list of upcoming titles, and there is nothing that interests me at all. Compared with the laundry list of Xbox 360 and PS3 titles that are on my "to buy" list for the remainder of 2008, there really is no reason for me to own a Wii right now.

I've actually been thinking of selling it off for about four months now. My justification for holding out has been along the lines of "I already have it, so I don't have to look for one later on. It's not hurting anyone under my TV," but thinking hard about it, I doubt I'll even bother looking for one at all later on. The Wii doesn't cater to my tastes, and that's unfortunate for me. Nintendo's too busy making money to care, and I understand that it needs to do what's best for it's bottom line. All companies do, and my defection won't hurt them at all in the long run.

The thing is, I don't care at all about Nintendo's bottom line. Unlike it, I care about being entertained, something the Wii is not doing. So rather than let it sit there and collect dust, I'm selling it to buy a Playstation 3. This is what's up for grabs:

Wii console with box and everything, Wii Sports with a custom Wii case. It has the following in memory:

Internet channel
Weather channel (Lol)
News channel (Lol x2)
Check Mii Out channel
Kirby's Adventure
Donkey Kong Country
Bonk's Adventure
Gunstar Heroes
Soldier Blade
Super Mario 64
200 Wii points

I also have these games for sale:

Ghost Squad
Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
Link's Crossbow Training with Zapper (with custom Wii case)
Super Mario Galaxy
Super Paper Mario
Zak & Wiki

Anyone interested can simply comment here, check my sales thread over at Sega-16, or email me at ken@sega-16.com.

So long Wii.

Toys R Us Clearence = Happy Me!

2008-07-22T12:05:00.005-04:00

I've been hitting up all the local TRU stores in my area, as I usually do, searching for any quality games that have dropped in price. Lately, however, I've been rewarded with some real bargains, and in this day and age of the $60+ game (here in P.R. at least), the cheaper I can find 'em, the better.

Last week I found Meet the Robinsons (Xbox 360) for only $8. Yes, I know what you're thinking. I normally wouldn't play such a game myself, but my daughter's appetite for anything Disney is insatiable. I've played through such games as Ratatouille and Cars with her, and it's actually developed into something of a symbiotic relationship: she gets new games that are easy enough for her to play, and I get achievement points. Some of those achievements can be pretty tough too. You try getting all 1000 points in Ratatouille!

This past weekend I found another Xbox 360 title, Monster Madness, for $8 as well. I downloaded the demo when it was released on the Xbox Live Marketplace, and it was quite underwhelming, but for the price I decided to give it another chance. Now that I have the full game, it's actually not as bad as I had thought. You can adjust the camera, making it completely controllable, and aside from the repetitive gameplay, it's actually a lot of fun. Anyone who liked Zombies Ate My Neighbors should look for a copy.

I'm going back to TRU later this week to see what else they have, and I'm a bit annoyed that there aren't any Wii games on sale. My poor console sports a thick coat of dust, and I'm seriously considering selling it/trading it in for a Playstation 3.

Scratch One More Game Off My Genesis List

2008-07-15T11:54:00.005-04:00

While browsing eBay yesterday, I came across this little gem!

It had a BIN of only $5.90, so I snatched that sucker up. I've been wanting to play the Ooze for a long time now, and emulation doesn't quite cut it, since the lack of an instruction manual leaves me in the dark about the gameplay. Now that I'll have a complete copy, I can finally review this one. Of course, that's after I finally finish up the Super Monaco GP twins, two games that I've been meaning to get to for a while but can never seem to accommodate in my schedule. Parenting takes a lot of time, and with a full-time job, my gaming time is sadly limited. I should at least have the first game done by the time the Ooze arrives, and they should all give me a few good games to review as I countdown to my 100th for Sega-16.

Another reason I really wanted to play this was because I'm a big fan of the Sega Technical Institute, and this is perhaps its one game with which I haven't spent any time. Now I can remedy that and see if this truly was the innovative action title I've heard it to be.

Thunder Force VI -Finally!

2008-07-10T13:14:00.015-04:00

I want to keep an open mind about this, and the skeptic in me tells me to reserve emotion until something tangible has surfaced, but I can't help myself. The news of a new Thunder Force game finally being released is too good to be true, and I truly want to believe that my anticipation will be justly rewarded upon its release this October 30 (Japan only. Argh!). There are some things involved with this resurrection that might raise concern, but I doubt that there's any real reason to be worried.

One thing is worth pondering, and that is the fact that this game is being done by a whole new team of people. The series has never disappointed in the past, but as they say with those products advertised on television: "past experiences are not indicative of future results," or something to that effect. The fact that the last three games rocked doesn't mean that this one will too, especially given that the development team doesn't have any experience with the franchise. Yeah, if you look at that Famitsu scan, it certainly looks awesome, but I'm still going to be a bit anxious until I see some gameplay in action. Techno Soft (or Tecnosoft, whatever...) no longer exists as it used to, and this newest sequel is being done by Sega. Considering the current development state of that company, this alone should send alarms sounding, and red flags should pop up everywhere.

There is a silver lining to this cloud though, as Tez Okano, the writer and director of Segaga for DC and the awesome Astro Boy Omega Force for GBA, is directing the project. He says that the blade weapon from Thunder Force IV (or the idiotically-named Lightening Force in America) is his favorite, so hopefully he'll try for a 16-bit feel for this game. These scans are all there is to go on so far, but I'm betting that we should hear more in a short time. The game looks to be pretty far along in development, and YouTube videos of gameplay should be popping up soon.

Glancing at those scans instantly reveals two things to me: the free-range weapon from part five is back, which may or may not be a good thing, and that the best-looking boss from Thunder Force III is returning! Yes, Gargoyle from planet Hydra can be seen there in the upper right-hand corner of the second page. He looks like he's been working out since his last appearance, but that signature flame breath looks just as deadly as ever.

It's no secret that Thunder Force III is my favorite of the bunch, so I'm hoping that the gameplay mirrors that sequel. Regardless, I will absolutely be all over this, even though I lack an import-friendly Playstation 2 to enjoy it. Hey, that's just a minor detail! Finally modding my dusty PS2 will give me ample reason to go out and enjoy other quality releases, like the Phantasy Star remakes and all those great Sega Ages releases.

It's great to see that this series is back, and I can only hope that it doesn't disappoint. I loved Gradius V and R-Type Final (despite its faults), and a new Thunder Force on my shelf is the shooter trifecta to me. This thunder is no longer broken!

Retro Game Reviews: A Different Beast?

2008-07-04T01:08:00.035-04:00

So much has been said about whether or not game reviews are actually needed. There have been entire articles written about the topic, so I'm not going to delve into the state of the modern game review here. There is one aspect of gaming journalism that I will tackle though, and it's from a retro standpoint. From what I've read, most of the criticisms about gaming journalism seem to really fit reviews of modern games, those that can be bought in stores now or rented from the local Blockbuster or GameTap. They have little to no bearing on reviews of games from the past, but they're still given a prominent place on a lot of mainstream media outlets (like IGN, for example). Naturally, they beggar the same question:

Do we really need game reviews at all?

The answer, I think, is quite different when we're talking about retro reviews. Unlike modern games, there is no industry pressure, no NDAs (non-disclosure agreements), no media blackouts, etc. Sega, for example, isn't going to come down on me for giving Golden Axe III a low score, as most of the people in charge over there probably weren't around the company when the game was released. Today's gaming journalists have to contend with many negative things that balance their E3 press passes and swag. They have to face the prospect of losing advertising over a bad review (a dark cloud of controversy that still hangs over GameSpot), and they can even be blacklisted by publishers. For instance, Electronic Gaming Monthly was given a laundry list of demands, literally at the last minute by Konami, after its hands-on with Metal Gear Solid 4. Obviously, the same thing wouldn't happen if I decided to review Contra: Hard Corps or even the original Metal Gear. Most likely, no one at Konami would even take notice of my article.

While journalists and gamers go back and forth about the merits of game reviews, the retro scene slips beneath the cracks. I've been told that the majority of readers look for the review score first, and that it's vitally important to any review. To be honest, I included scores in Sega-16's reviews mostly out of habit, and looking back on it now, I still would have most certainly included them, but on a scale of five instead of ten. I subscribe to the belief that the score is needed, but I don't believe that it should be the focal point of the review. It might serve as a one digit summary of the writer's thoughts, but anyone who is even bothering to write a review should give his audience more credit than thinking that a single number is enough to make an informed decision.

To me at least, a retro game review is a guideline to whether or not the reader should seek out a copy of the game in question, an endeavor that is usually much more challenging and more expensive than a trip to the local GameStop. To meet that end, the review should provide information that answers the basic questions a person might have. And no, I'm not referring to graphics, sound, and gameplay. Too many writers consider these staples to be the mandatory requirements of any review, and they couldn't be farther off the mark.

Let's go back to that comment about readers only wanting to see a score. First of all, to even make such a statement is contradictory, as all the major sites currently out there include some narrative with said scores. If people only want to see a number, why bother writing anything at all? Second, to make such a blanket statement is an insult to your audience. Knowing your audience is one of the basic tenets of writing, yet so many game journalists write as though their readers were children. Whether they know it or not, they're actually talking down to their audience, and this not only offends the reader, but it also makes the writer look weak. This is a major example of the self-depreciating attitude that is so prevalent in gaming journalism and a good reason why no one takes it seriously.

If you're going to write something... anything - review, feature, whatever - you must never assume your readers to be dumb. They may be misinformed about the particular topic you're discussing, but they're not stupid. The review narrative is essential to informing the reader, and the writer must be intelligent in his effort. Don't focus on that which can be gleaned from a screen shot or YouTube video; focus on the experience of the game itself. Why should my readers track down a copy of Pepen Ga Pengo? What does that score of 9/10 mean exactly?

Of course, this doesn't mean that the basic elements of the game should be ignored. You have to cover things like presentation and gameplay. However, that also doesn't mean that they should be the whole review. Where did the game come from? How hard is it to find? Is it expensive? What were the particular circumstances of its release? These are excellent questions that can be answered in the review, and they're things that modern review writers might not be able to discuss at press time. Retro writers have no such restrictions.

I think that game reviews are essential to the retro community, and their freedom from the shackles of the modern industry gives them even more value. When I write a retro review, I feel as though I'm trying to convey the importance of a piece of history, whether it be a must-buy or a game to avoid. A simple score can't express that, and the written effort itself is diluted if the writer assumes he's speaking to idiots. Scores are nice, but anyone really interested in a game will want to know more.

Tips for Creating a Successful Enthusiast Game Site

2008-06-29T22:50:00.041-04:00

Four years have passed since I founded Sega-16. Never did I dream that after so much time I would still be running a website and love doing it as as much as I did at the start. No, scratch that. I actually love it more now. I can safely say that my enthusiasm is as strong as ever, and I can't wait to see what the future holds.

Back when we had our one year anniversary, I mentioned in the retrospective that there are primarily two reasons why enthusiast sites fail: a lack of focus and a lack of motivation. Both can do in any site, but together they are a recipe for disaster. Take a look at any new site that hasn't updated regularly, and you'll see. Moribund and abandoned, they're just counting the days until they die. It's unfortunate but true, and it makes Sega-16's survival all the more impressive, at least to me. I've seen quite a few Sega sites come and go over the years, and they're mostly the victims of one of the two factors I mentioned. Yes, a lack of money or server space are also problems, but these two are the most notorious. Let's take a better look at them and see why so many young sites fail.

A lack of focus. A young fan and perhaps a few other people get together and decide to create the ULTIMATE fan site. They want to make their new creation the Mecca for everything related to their particular console/game of choice, and they could practically fuel a star with their collective energy. It sounds like a good start, but that star comparison really stops there. Stars take millions of years to complete a complex cycle of growth, maturity, twilight, and death; and they usually have long and full lives doing what stars are supposed to be doing. That is, they fulfill their function. Many sites don't ever get that far.

Yes, unlike the cosmos, game-related undertakings start with a bang, usually beginning with a flurry of forum threads and posts about potential ideas for the new site. Brainstorming can go on for weeks as staff and would-be contributors plan all the things they want to do. The problem is that a lot of the time, brainstorming is as far as it gets. Months, even a year after the URL has been bought and a free forum has been established, nothing of note has been done.

What happened? Well, a bunch of different things, probably. The creators couldn't agree on a direction for the site, people who committed to writing content upped and vanished, or the one person who was going to put it all online in some form has opted out, leaving the others in the lurch. Now, with no clear direction, the wind has been taken out of the other's sails, and they're now adrift and uncertain of what to do next. From my observations, this is what kills new sites the most. A lack of focus is the first big hurdle new webmasters face, and they often go down without a swing. The problem itself is a combination of smaller errors that could have easily been avoided but ended up killing a dream.

A lack of motivation. After all that enthusiasm and energy, many new webmasters lose interest after about the first six months or so. They look at their new sites a few months down the line and wonder why there isn't a server-straining deluge of hits coming in daily. No new content, the aforementioned lack of focus, and a desire to magically have the best site on the Internet usually do them in. Creating a quality site takes time. You'll need to be patient and continue forward, even when it looks like no one's reading the site but you.

Here are a few tips on how to avoid these problems:

Pick a direction and stick with it. All too often, aspiring webmasters try to do too much. Like it or not, it's simply not possible for your new site to compete with IGN, GameSpot, or whomever you wish to emulate. There's simply too many people and too much money behind them and not enough behind you. Look for something that isn't already being done by a hundred other sites. Otherwise, you risk becoming a drop of water in an ocean. This doesn't mean you should confine yourself to one thing, and allowing some room to grow is a smart idea. Just don't bite off more than you can chew at the start. For example, one of the key reasons I decided to start Sega-16 was the lack of comprehensive Genesis sites out there.
Plan ahead. Don't just come out and announce that you want to start a website. Think about it for a while, jot down potential ideas, discard the crap, and then tie together that which works. This is essentially what brainstorming is, so if you're going to do it, then do it right.
Don't count on others to make it work. Getting other people involved is nice, but after all is said and done, your website is yours and yours alone to run. Don't take contributors for granted, but don't assume that they'll keep you flooded with quality content all the time. I basically assume that I alone am responsible for content, and anyone else who comes along for the ride just makes my life easier. Other people might be motivated at the start, but they might not stick around. You're the one keeping things running, and they're going to operate under the mentality that things will continue without them.
Prepare for the long haul. How long do you plan on running the site? Can you see yourself doing this a year or more down the line? Can you fit the site into your real life plans? All of these are valid questions you'll need to ask yourself before you start. For example, Sega-16 is more than just a site I run; it's my passion. I spend at least 2-3 hours on it daily during the week and more on weekends. Not all of that is spent writing, of course, but researching and seeking out contacts often takes up more time than actually doing articles.
Content, content, content. Did I mention content? I don't care what your site covers, if the content isn't good no one will care. You need to provide quality articles to keep your audience interested and coming back, and lots of it. Along the way, you'll also need to decide what it is that your site does better than others in the same area. In my case, I feel that Sega-16 defines itself by its interviews, something no other Genesis site does with such frequency. You'll have to find your own niche, your "calling card" of sorts, and give readers a reason to return.
Forget about the design for now. I know, a lot of people think that clothes make the man. Well, we're talking about websites here, not men. It's nice to have a cool design for your website, sure, but that's not the most important thing. I'm a strong believer in NASA's philosophy of "form follows function." The design should conform to your needs, not the other way around, and even if you have a ghetto design, people will still come to your site if you provide them with consistent quality content. While this doesn't mean that you shouldn't strive to make the site appealing from the get-go, perhaps the one design item you should really focus on is making it manageable. A "three click" rule is mandatory. That means that nothing on your site should be more than three clicks from the main page. Everything else can really wait a while.
Get the word out. You're not going to see traffic spike instantly. Heck, you might go days without any hits at all! You'll need to promote your site, but please do it tastefully. Spamming other forums will do nothing but piss people off and close potential doors for making friends. Add your site to Google and other search engines and make friends where you can. Soon, things will pick up and you'll begin to establish your own readership. Unless you're willing to fork over some serious cash, word of mouth is the best way to advertise. Eventually, people will mention you on other forums and sites, and they might link to articles you've done.

Running a successful website can be a wonderful experience when it pans out. It takes a lot of patience and dedication, but if you start smart and stick to it, you should start to reap the rewards after about a year. Think of it like starting a new business. That first year or so isn't going to be about profit, but establishment of your brand. If you can stick to your guns and ride out the first few months, you should be in pretty good shape.

I've had a ball with Sega-16, and now that the site has been around for a few years, I can actually think less about filling it with good content and more about promoting it. It took four years to reach this point (I don't know what the average time frame is), and I eagerly look forward to working on the site each day. My sense of satisfaction is huge, and I hope others can look to Sega-16 as an example of a successful enthusiast site. If it can help others to aspire to make a site of their own, then even better. We still need comprehensive sites for more than a few consoles, you know!

I'm Sick of Gamers Being Labeled

2008-06-25T09:19:00.043-04:00

Really, I am. It's quite tiring to hear gamers categorized as "hardcore" or "casual," and it's positively cringe-worthy to divide them by gender. It's bad enough that we have so slice up the male population into sub-categories, but now we have to place distinctions based on sex? Come on now.

It's been said that gamers are their own worst enemy when it comes to the public's perception of their hobby (passion?), and I tend to agree. The image of a nerdy, basement-dwelling fat guy who cares more about World of Warcraft than getting a job or laid seems to be firmly etched in the consciousness of those who know nothing about gaming. Many people still think that being a gamer means you're lazy and socially inept. As someone who juggles a wife and two kids, a profession, a writing career, and still finds the time to bring my Xbox 360 gamerscore to 45k, I think I can attest to just how full of shit this stereotype really is.

Then someone goes and writes an article about "how to get a gamer girlfriend" and fucks it all up.

Specifically, the article's title is "Kombo's G uide to Picking Up Gamer Chicks: Part One." Part one? You mean the process is complex enough to warrant turning the article into a serial? Geez, no wonder so many "guy gamers" are single.

Don't get me wrong, as my beef isn't with the author herself. Candice seemed like a nice person the few times we spoke over AIM, and I'm sure she's a splendid gal with a healthy outlook on life. No, my problem is with the way her article perpetuates one of the very stereotypes gamers profess to hating. For all of our ranting and raving, we always seem to shoot ourselves in the foot on this issue. It's almost as if we want the distinctions to be made, when there's no reason to. What constitutes a girl gamer? My wife likes Animal Crossing and Super Mario Bros. 3. Does that mean she qualifies? I sincerely doubt any of the suggestions from the article would have worked on her, and I'd probably still be single if I had ever attempted to show her how in awe I was at her Tetris skills compared to my past girlfriends.

This is just the latest example of how we carve ourselves up into little pieces, spending as much time on complaining about how many pieces there are as we do on the actual carving. Over the years, the gaming industry has arbitrarily attached labels to gamers, creating market segments that look lovely on a pie chart but mean little in reality. Are you "hardcore" or "casual?" Do you consider yourself a professional gamer or are you strictly an amateur? Can you list the differences between "guy" and "girl" gamers? There are so many terms for people who like video games (read: gamers), and I sometimes think that the backroom of my local GameStop or Toys 'R Us has game executives watching me through a one-way mirror, analyzing my purchases and classifying me accordingly. It's sickening.

Looking around the Internet, it's quite easy to google the term "casual gamer" (yes, google with a small /g/, as in a verb. Look it up; it's correct) and come up with all sorts of news articles with horrific titles. Christ, even Wikipedia has detailed articles differentiating what "casual" and "hardcore" gamers are. Not enough? How about checking out Casual Gamer, the website that, by its own description, was "created by a group a Casual Games enthusiasts." Thank you for that profound and informative explanation of your motives. I would never have figured it out otherwise.

Companies are jumping on the label bandwagon, with both Microsoft and Ubisoft even creating whole divisions directed at the "casual" gamer. A smart business move, considering that this new sector of the industry is worth a proported $2.25 billion each year. So big has it become, that there's even a Casual Gamer Association out there now! The issue that needs addressing here is how this affects the people who actually buy and play the games. Do the people buying Wiis and playing games for the first time consider themselves casual gamers?

The problem with labels becomes most painfully apparent when not even the biggest of gaming companies itself can decide whether or not they exist. Take Nintendo Europe's own managing director of marketing, Laurence Fischer, for example. In a prime example of brilliant marketing skill, Mr. Fischer told casualgamingbiz last May that he disliked the term "casual gamer." He said "“I don’t like the word casual. There’s a lot of meaning and interpretation of the word. For me you’re either a gamer or a non-gamer."

Sounds reasonable enough, right? Of course, being a marketing guru, it was only a matter of time before an outbreak of Foot-in-Mouth Disease set in. Addressing concerns about the Wii's limited storage space to Edge magazine, Fischer continued his blitzkrieg of brilliance and casually (see what I did there?) stated that only "geeks and otaku" would feel the need for a Wii hard drive. I guess we should have seen it coming though, as in that same May casualgamingbiz article, Fischer also explained away Animal Crossing's audience by saying "“It was really an otaku game – it had a small community of people playing a lot.” So much for consistency.

This is compounded by the tireless work of gaming journalists who latch onto these labels far too easily. Perhaps they feel that it makes them sound smarter or more in touch with their audience, but all it does is give serious journalists more ammunition for their argument about how gaming journalism isn't really journalism at all. You don't hear any other area of the business slicing its audience into separate categories based on how much news they listen to or how often they get involved with the subject matter. The closest I can think of is sports, and even then there isn't a clear breaking down of the audience by the press. I've yet to hear ESPN or Sports Illustrated refer to "fair weather" fans on a regular basis, even though the concept clearly exists around the water cooler. On the news and in sports periodicals, the kid playing baseball in the park by his house isn't "casual" compared to "hardcore" MLB players, and no one goes out of their way to make the contrasts between NBA and WNBA players apparent. Are their differences? Of course there are. That doesn't mean we have to constantly point them out. Some things forgo mentioning for fear of belaboring the obvious.

Perhaps if game companies, and more importantly, gaming journalists, took their audience more seriously, the need to use labels would disappear. Yes, people put things into categories on a regular basis, but that's just because this is the primary way in which human beings interact with their environment. Hell, I bet you placed this very article into a category as soon as you began to read it. We all do it, sure, but that doesn't mean we have to splash those categories all over the place for everyone to see them. If game publishers want to use their labels in the board room to discuss sales, then fine, just keep it out of the general vernacular. I'm tired of being classified under several sub-categories of gaming. It's dumb, divisive, and it only serves to keep gaming as the black sheep of hobbies despite its immense size and money-making prowess.

But as I said at the beginning, it would be unfair to place the blame solely on the corporations and the press. Gamers themselves are as guilty in this regard, and one need only listen to the vitriol spouted across the Internet about the Wii and how Nintendo has turned its back on "real" gamers. There are those who take pride in being labeled a "hardcore gamer" - I even wrote for a magazine named exactly that - but there's more than one definition of the term! The Wikipedia entry I linked to lists no fewer than five separate criteria for defining what a "hardcore" gamer is, and trying to understand it is more trouble than it's worth. Judging from the convoluted rationalization it offers, it might just be better to just stick with what Fischer initially said about it all: you're either a gamer or you're not.

My name is Ken Horowitz, and I am a gamer. And that's all.

Thoughts on "The King of Kong"

2008-06-14T15:16:00.021-04:00

After months of trying, I was finally able to cat The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters on G4 last night. For those who haven't had a chance to see it, the movie is a great telling of the competition between Donkey Kong champ Billy Mitchell and unknown challenger Steve Wiebe. Wiebe, who plays religiously on the machine in his garage, manages to significantly beat Mitchell's two decade-old high score. He sends the tape in to Twin Galaxies, the official score keeper of video games, and has his score rejected because it was videotaped and not submitted in public. Twin Galaxies then goes on to accept a tape of Mitchell's after Wiebe beats his score in person at the New Hampshire arcade Funstop.

Although Twin Galaxies apologizes later on for its treatment of Wiebe and allows him to submit tapes in the future, the bias towards Mitchell is apparent from the get-go. While two referees are dispatched to Wiebe's Seattle home and proceed to dismantle his machine to see if the board had been tampered with (all while Wiebe isn't even home, mind you), no one questions Mitchell's taped run, which suffers from a mysterious flickering on the left side of the screen, conveniently covering his score just long enough for it to change.

Now that I've seen the movie, two things stand out to me. First off, Billy Mitchell comes off as an arrogant ass. He has amazing skill (he retook the Donkey Kong high score from Weibe a year after the movie was filmed and still holds it) and is undoubtedly the best professional gamer in history. However, Mitchell's skill is almost overshadowed by his attitude, and no matter how often he pleads his case in the movie - and it's a lot - you just don't want to take his side. Is this the real Billy Mitchell, or has he been unfairly portrayed? Other interviews with him that I've seen seem to point to the former.

Here's the best example. Numerous times during the film, Mitchell is interviewed and explains how the only way to prove someone is the best at a game is by playing in person. He makes several mentions about how only those who play in public can prove their skill and rightfully take their spot at the top of the mountain. On various occasions, Mitchell makes his position known, saying things like "To me, most important is to travel to a sanctioned location, like Funspot, that makes it official; if tomorrow Tiger Woods golfs a 59, big deal. If he does it at Augusta, that's where it counts."

The problem is that Mitchell is given three different chances to play against Wiebe head-to-head during the movie but always declines. When Wiebe defeats his score at Funstop, Mitchell already has a tape with a higher score en route to Twin Galaxies, which accepts it without question. For someone who is so sure of himself and thinks so little of Wiebe, he seemed awfully eager to keep from playing him head-on. Why not compete and shut everyone up once and for all? Mitchell eventually does put his money where his mouth is, but it's an entire year after the events in King of Kong, and while in public, it receives nowhere near the amount of buzz the movie did. Decidedly low key for someone who loves the spotlight as much as Mitchell does.

Second, I'm not entirely confident that Twin Galaxies was being fair here. Founder Walter Day has disputed the movie's portrayal of the situation, and he claims that Mitchell and Wiebe were on much friendlier terms than the film suggests. He also argues that he was never as biased against Wiebe as he's made out to be. Whether or not this is true, the fact that Day accepted Mitchell's video tape after disqualifying Wiebe's is controversial, to say the least. The board that Wiebe used to beat Mitchell's 1982 Donkey Kong score was provided by Roy Shildt, a longtime nemesis of Mitchell's, but it was never conclusively proven in the movie that it had been tampered with. You'd expect Twin Galaxies to at least treat Mitchell's low quality and questionable video tape with the same scrutiny as it had Wiebe's. It's only fair. I won't condemn Day and his organization, as he obviously tries to make amends with Wiebe during the film. I do think, though, that an organization that considers itself to be "official" shouldn't play favorites or consider anyone to be a "golden boy."

Overall, King of Kong is a great look into the world of professional video gaming, and anyone who is a fan of the industry should see it. The sense of competition between Mitchell and Wiebe is awesome, and now I have an almost instinctive urge to migrate to New Hampshire and play at Funspot. It's the place to go for this type of competition, and having now seen the movie, I can't help but wonder how many other neat little places like this there are around the country.

Personally, I love things like King of Kong, especially when they deal with the Golden Age of gaming and all those great titles from the early '80s. This movie is a treat for all retro gaming fans and should be in their DVD collections.

Delisting XBLA Games: The Latest Industry Blunder

2008-06-06T09:49:00.038-04:00

In an effort to clean up the "clutter" on XBLA, Microsoft is going to delist those games that have been available for at least six months, have a metacritic rating lower than 65%, and haven't had a high conversion rate (the percentage of people buying a title after downloading the demo). According to MS, delisting said games will allow for a smoother and easier experience buying games for the service. To call this policy stupid would be an understatement. There are several things wrong with delisting titles, and none of them have to do with making anyone's experience more enjoyable.

Microsoft's reasoning is that this will help reduce the clutter on the Live marketplace. Say what? Clutter... on a digital store that has no physical presence? Why not just come out and tell the truth. These games are being delisted because Microsoft has gone batshit insane approving every turd proposed for XBLA, and now it wants to clean up by getting rid of the stinkers. The same company that denied Valve's Portal a berth on XBLA went and released Sudoku and Warlords (no good without a paddle!) just a few weeks ago. This is what I'm talking about.

The Xbox maker has made a great move by upping the maximum game size to 350MB, but there really shouldn't be a cap in the first place, just ask Capcom. This line of thinking is why we have a store filled with Frogger and Yaris, and no one's playing them, Jeff Minter be damned. We've heard developers complain about the glut of crap on XBLA before, and MS seems to want a quick band-aid solution to its blatant lack of quality control by sweeping the games under the rug - literally. All of the delisted titles will still be available for purchase via a friend's recommendation, and they're not actually being taken off the servers, just off the main list. You can even still play them online. So they're there... it just doesn't look like they're there. Brilliant.

There's a bigger problem than people not being able to find Dig Dug, one that almost no one is talking about. The threat of delisting not only plagues gamers who might be afraid that a game they've been meaning to buy might up and vanish, it also bodes ill for developers. Think of the company that wants to try something different. The whole selling point of services like XBLA. the Playstation Store, and WiiWare is that they offer developers a place to sell their games without the costs and pitfalls of retail distribution. Selling online allows them to take chances and go for that particular title that might never have had a chance to come to store shelves. If there's a threat of it being taken off the service, developers will be less inclined to think outside the box and take chances.

You might be able to argue that this will also keep them from making crap, but the glut we've seen so far is no one else's fault but Microsoft's. If it hadn't kept approving weak arcade port after weak arcade port, we wouldn't have so many of them. Telling game makers that their new titles have a chance of being delisted could be enough to make them take their wares to the Wii or Playstation 3. And let's be honest, making a game invisible to the general consumer is as good as eliminating it from the service entirely.

I sincerely hope that Microsoft rethinks this foolish policy. There's no need to take any games off the main page, and simply reducing their price a bit and assigning them to a bargain bin section would take care of the entire problem. Hey, if you're going to make it so that the general public doesn't even know the games are there, dropping their prices to 200 or 400 MS points shouldn't be a reach. The more games on the service the better, and one man's Mad Tracks is another man's Puzzle Quest. There's no need to eliminate anything and risk alienating consumers and developers alike.

The Problem with Xbox Live

2008-05-27T19:08:00.039-04:00

Everything's online today. Once upon a time, it was enough just to be able to whup the butt of the guy playing next to you, but gamers were soon enamored by the prospect of whupping butt cross-country. Being able to take on a real, live human opponent any time and anywhere was very enticing; it still is. So enticing in fact, that modern hardware manufacturers have endeavored to make it a key part of their console strategies. This hardware generation marks the first in which an online component isn't some random add-on peripheral that you can buy if you want. No, this cycle has made it part of the equation for all three systems, and we will most likely never again go back to that world of standing in line to play against someone.

There's a problem though, at least something that I consider to be one, and I'm referring specifically to Xbox Live. While gamers the world over look at upcoming titles and wonder about their online components, this fervor and anticipation doesn't last as long as you'd think. Unless you're looking at a major release, such as Halo 3, Rock Band, or Gears of War; the online lobbies tend to taper off in use mere weeks after a game's release. Come back a year later, and they're practically dead. That's a serious paradox there folks, and it's one that game developers are no doubt taking seriously when they're considering investing the time and money needed to bring a title online. Why incorporate an online component if no one is going to stick with it?

I first noticed this phenomenon back with the original Xbox. Everyone was playing Mech Assault, and full games were not a problem to find. That is, until about five or six months later, when everyone had moved on to the next big release. The same thing happened to me with OutRun 2. People played feverishly for a while, and then poof - they lost interest and started playing something else. About the only original Xbox title with which I had no trouble finding people to play was Project Gotham Racing 2, which most likely had to do with just how incredible it was... and the fact that there wasn't anything really like it online.

This problem hasn't just manifested itself on the Xbox 360, it's grown and multiplied like a virus. Just this past week, I tried to find someone online to play Overlord's survival mode with me. My search came back empty. Pillage? Nothing. Slaughter? Zilch. Curious to see if this was the case with some other titles, I popped in Kameo to see if someone was online. I still have those co-op achievements to get! It was a wasteland as well. I got the same results with Splinter Cell: Double Agent. Where has everyone gone?

No, I know the answer to that one. Just a glimpse of my friends list tells me all I need to know. GTA IV is number one right now, but many are still online with Halo 3 and Gears of War, and... nothing else. I see some sporadic Guitar Hero III and Rock Band in there sometimes, but these three are the only ones consistently played online. And by "online," I'm not just referring to the player being signed in to Live; I mean that an online mode is actually being played.

Xbox Live Arcade titles are even more susceptible to this, as their window to shine is usually about seven days (unless you have a week when MS releases two sure-fire soon-to-be-delisted titles like this one, with Warlords and Suduku). Ever see anyone playing Gauntlet in co-op? How about Teenage Ninja Mutant Turtles? The latter is an interesting mention, because I can remember how everyone was dying, DYING to play it in four-player co-op. That frothing demand lasted about two weeks.

Why does this happen? Is it because Xbox 360 gamers are ADD-riddled and have too much cash to spend? Partially, perhaps. I think there are a few other mitigating factors contributing to this quick disinterest in all things online:

Too Many Games to Play. How many people are still playing Stranglehold online? Not very many, judging by my fruitless attempts to find someone. It's only been eight months since the game was released, and the lobbies are dead most of the time. With a solid online component, I'm sure Midway thought it would ride the top of the Live charts for months, instead of sinking off like a virtual Titanic. Is it the game's fault? Hardly. Who played anything in November that wasn't Halo 3? A lot of titles got their Live walking papers when Bungie's monster hit, and most haven't recovered. Even the mighty Halo itself was staggered by Call of Duty 4, which in turn was toppled by GTA IV. It's almost as if gamers have to embark on a playing frenzy to milk their investment of as much playtime as possible before it's overtaken by the next big thing.
Crappy Online Implementation. The most obvious reason, it alone has the power to kill anyone's desire to play online. No one sticks around for a game that has issues connecting to a lobby, disconnects constantly, or lags like a frame-by-frame examination of the Zepruder film. The XBLA games I mentioned are notorious for this. All the games I mentioned above had horribly laggy online play, some to the point of being unplayable. TMNT was especially heart-breaking, because I had more than enough friends willing to help me kick Shredder's ass, but the Foot Clan apparently hacked into Microsoft's server, thus disabling any attempt on my part to save Splinter. Damn ninjas, always so arrogant with their shurikens and hacking skills...
Lazy Developers. Ooh, that's right, I said it. Half-ass online play excites no one, yet we continue to see it happen. A game where you're part of a squad loses its luster when said squad always has to be A.I. Even worse are when developers add only a few modes to games that literally scream for full online co-op. GTA IV is a perfect example of this. I wanted to cruise Liberty City with friends and do the missions with them. Impossible, since the campaign is Niko's story, and co-op play would ruin the deep and thought-provoking narrative of one man's journey from one repetitive drop off mission and fetch quest to the next.

Rainbow Six: Vegas 2 used a similarly lame excuse for reducing campaign online co-op from four players to two. "We wanted to enhance the graphics in multi-player," Ubi Soft explained, and by doing so, it crippled the gameplay. If so grand was its desire for software excellence, then could someone explain to me why I never got the achievement for beating the game on Realistic difficulty, even after Ubi Soft patched the game to allow it?

Sierra's upcoming Ghostbusters game did the same thing, adding online play for only "special" missions in a mode separate from the main game. Developer Terminal Reality has stated that it believes that playing co-op would disrupt the narrative of the story. Ok, seeing that the game is being penned by the original writers and features the voices and likenesses of all the Ghostbusters, I can understand that. What I don't understand is why, in this day and age, they simply can't do like the original Rainbow Six: Vegas did. When you played the story by yourself, you got all the juicy narrative and the whole plot. In co-op mode, you didn't, but you got to kill terrorists with three pals.

Anyone who wants to play this new Ghostbusters game (which is probably everyone) is going to play through the story, so why not motivate them to do it both ways? Offer achievements for beating stages alone and in co-op mode, so they have to do it more than once. My friend playing as Egon isn't going to "ruin" the experience for me, because I'll most likely have beaten the game solo already. This is just a poor excuse.

These factors give lower profile releases virtually no online life to speak of. Overshadowed by the major apps and without the hype of the media to generate interest, they fade into obscurity, leaving many gamers unable to enjoy those games that did online right. One simply cannot be expected to play everything released on launch day, and I'm sure that many gamers don't try out certain titles until they've come down in price. Something's gotta give, as they say.

Despite this sad trend, some games manage to avoid this situation simply because of how different they are from everything else. For example, you can always find people playing Uno, and I'm sure there are more than a few titles (Forza 2 and Project Gotham Racing 4 come to mind) that will endure. For the majority of online games however, their time to shine is severely limited, and once they're gone, they're gone for good.

Anyone up for some Phantom Dust?

Welcome Back Dr. Jones

2008-05-26T08:27:00.048-04:00

It's finally here. After almost two decades of anticipation, we finally got a new Indiana Jones movie. As a major fan (who isn't?), I've spent years hoping that this would happen, and it was almost surreal to see that it's finally a reality. After it all sank in though, and the initial euphoria wore off, I began to wonder if Phantom Menace Syndrome (PMS) would strike this sequel as well. In my case, I have a clean bill of health, but unfortunately for some people, it seems it has.

For those not in the know, PMS is a condition where the victim spends years, perhaps even decades building up their expectations of what the next installment of their favorite movie series will be like, until they reach a level so unattainable that nothing possibly put to print could ever satisfy them. The syndrome gets its name from the insane amount of anticipation and hype generated for the first new Star Wars film in over two decades, a film which while bad, could never have sated the hunger for that mind-shattering, wet pants-inducing experience the audience had been waiting so long for, no matter how good it was.

See, PMS is vicious in that it attacks the part of the mind that deals with nostalgia and all those warm and fuzzy memories of days gone by. Recent victims of the disease include Transformers and Live Free or Die Hard. Neither lived up to what a lot of people wanted, even though they were both solid films. They say you can't go home again, and this seems to ring most true when it comes to childhood memories.

I do like the term "Phantom Menace Syndrome" though. I like it because its initials are the same as that other condition that induces unwarranted bitchiness and anger. In fact, I like the term so much that I'm going to trademark it.

Phantom Menace Syndrome™

There. Feel free to use it if you like, but please be sure to credit the author!

I guess you could say that I had mixed emotions going into the fourth chapter of the Indiana Jones saga. The build up and electricity this movie has generated is more than enough to make even the most fervent fan a little nervous about its quality. Still, I always wanted another chance to see one of these films on the big screen, so off I went. After finally pushing my way through massive theater lines and sitting through the worst selection of trailers one could imagine being tied to such a major release, I was finally able to partake in Indiana Jones & the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Quite a long title, to be sure, and I was apprehensive that it was symbolic of what this movie was doing: needlessly stretching things out.

I've heard a lot of people talk about how this film wasn't needed, and that the title of The Last Crusade referred to the curtain being drawn on the major film use of the Jones character, as well as the hunt for the Holy Grail (despite Ford, Lucas, and Spielberg saying the opposite for years after the third film was released). They say Kingdom shouldn't have been made, and that the famous trio should have left well enough alone. Needless to say, it got my mind working as I stood in line for my ticket. Almost twenty years had passed since Last Crusade, and as someone who grew up with Indy, would this new movie stomp all over my childhood memories? Was I making a mistake? Would my image of the character be shattered if this film stunk? By then, it was too late. I was already approaching the box office window.
Two hours later I emerged from the theater a relieved man, but let me say this straight off. Kingdom isn't as good as Raiders of the Lost Ark or The Last Crusade, though I'd put it about on the same level as Temple of Doom. Now, some people hate Temple, but that's their loss. I like it a lot and consider it a nice change of pace from the "stop the Nazis from taking yet another supernatural artifact" storyline of the other two films. Kingdom, with its extra terrestrial-centered plot, fits in there nicely, and it serves as a fitting bookend to Indy's film and TV adventures.

And perhaps the term "bookend" is the best way to describe this movie. Sure, it didn't have to be made, but it's nice that it was. I loved the way they tied it in to the other installments, giving it its proper place in the Indy timeline. All the films offer a year at the beginning, but none of them affect the others chronologically. Kingdom changes this by obviously connecting itself into Raiders of the Lost Ark by re-introducing Marion Ravenwood, Indy's old flame and the daughter of his mentor. Abner. However, it goes further into the other parts of the Indy mythos by explaining why Sir Sean Connery and Denholm Elliot aren't present, as well linking itself to the Young Indiana Chronicles by referencing the episode Curse of the Jackal and Indy's adventure with Pancho Villa. It was a nice touch, and it helps bring the old man's life full circle. Furthermore, it sets up Mutt Williams (Shai LeBeouf's character) for future adventures. For example, when Mutt asks Indy how old he was when he rode with Villa, the old archeologist replies "about your age." Very cool.

Characterization aside, many people have expressed disappointment with the acting in the film. In this regard, I'm forced to agree. Ford doesn't seem to be on his best day, which is odd considering how eager he'd always said he was to get another shot at playing Indy. Karen Allen is pretty rusty as well, and LeBeouf is the only one who comes across as generally sincere. The others seem to just be going through the motions most of the time. That's not to say that vintage Indy doesn't rear his head. He does and quite well at that. The warehouse scene is great, albeit too short, and Ford looks and moves incredibly well for a man who's just reached Social Security age.
That has to be my only gripe with the movie, aside from a Tarzan-like vine-swinging display from Williams in Peru. I liked the special effects - a hallmark of the series - and never found the use of CG to be excessive, though I'm sure that there are those out there who cringe every time it's used. For them, I have no pity, as they walked into a LucasFilm product knowing full well what to expect. It seems that they need to touch the hot stove with each and every one of his movies before they realize the burn danger is real. The fact that just about every action and adventure movie today uses CG means that its detractors have a dwindling amount of options for their viewing pleasures. Get used to it folks, CG is here to stay.

I'm thankful to say that PMS didn't afflict me, and I'm feeling fine in regards to the condition of the elderly Dr. Jones. I liked the plot. I liked old Indy. I liked Mutt Williams. Dare I say I'd be eager to see him wear the Fedora and continue in Ford's footsteps? Yes, yes I would.

Let It Go People... Let It Go...

2008-05-23T09:22:00.047-04:00

For some reason, there are still people out there who think Sega should take another stab at the hardware market. As provocative as this sounds, it's not very viable financially. Everyone knows the terrible shape Sega was in financially for almost a decade after it released the Saturn, and it's only been in the last few years that the company has reached any type of solvency at all. That's why re-entering the hardware market now would sound the death knell for Sega, especially with three solid and successful consoles already in the public's consciousness.

This isn't the mid '80s anymore, when a virtually unknown company in the U.S. could launch a new console and revive the home market. Remember when the NES debuted? How many people could identify the Nintendo brand at merely a glance? As the story goes, former NOA chairman Howard Lincoln couldn't get anyone to give the NES (then called the AVS, or Advanced Video System) a second look when it debuted at the January 1984 Consumer Electronics Show. No, today, everyone knows what a "Wii" is, and the terms "Xbox" and "Playstation" have been firmly entrenched in the public's mind. For Sega to even consider entering such hostile territory, it would take either the greatest software push and creativity ever seen in video gaming, and quite possibly the world's biggest death wish.

Which is why I find it odd that someone, a games journalist at that, would publish an article proposing that Sega do exactly that. C|Net's Don Reisinger wrote a lengthy piece last week entitled Why Sega Should Release a New Console. In it, Mr. Reisinger lays out what he thinks could be a winning formula for Sega to get back into the game and reverse its economic fortunes. Unfortunately, the article contradicts itself a few times and Reisinger comes off as not really knowing his history. Let's take a look at some of his major points:

The company incurred a loss $501 million during its 2008 fiscal year and its video games division lost about $56.3 million.

Those numbers look frightening, don't they? $56 million is enough to keep anyone up at night. But when you compare it with the overall amount of Sega/Sammy's losses - the overwhelming majority of which came from its sagging Pachinko business - it's not so bad. Add to that that Sega has seen the gaming side of its business become solid over the past three or four years, and you realize that the monetary misfortunes the company is facing stem from the Sammy side of things.

Sega began to turn things around as early as 1992, not even two years after relieving itself of the albatross around its neck that was the Dreamcast. The House of Sonic is confident that things will turn around next year, thanks to its software side making up for Sammy's failings. With game sales picking up overseas and the success of titles like Yakuza 3 in Japan, it's obvious that the game maker isn't responsible for the problems the overall group is facing.

True, Sega is still being dragged downward by Sammy's Pachinko woes, and while I don't think it will be able to overcome those losses just by its game sales alone, I also think that the games division is on an upswing that has put it in a better position than it ever was as a hardware maker. Consider that Sega incurred $398 million in debt in 1998, the year before it released the Dreamcast. That's $342 million more than this year's loss. Yes, the company is losing money. But when you compare it to how it was bleeding cash for years while pushing failing hardware formats, the loss has been substantially reduced.

Sega's Sonic franchise is floundering.

In terms of quality, definitely. In terms of sales, no. Just look at the numbers. Sonic Heroes: over a million units sold. Shadow the Hedghog: over a million units sold. Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games: over five million units sold. Even Sonic & the Secret Rings was a best seller for its respective debut month, and has reportedly gone on to sell over a million units as well (I can't confirm this though). Does this look like a series that's in decline to you?

Just a year ago, Sega/Sammy reported losses for the third straight year but saw a 32% increase in software sales, prompted by the famous hedgehog. Sonic has two upcoming releases, Sonic Unleashed and Sonic Chronicles: The Dark Brotherhood, both of which are highly anticipated. Sonic has consistently been a big seller, regardless of diminishing quality, and this consistency goes back to his first third party outing, Sonic Adventure 2 Battle on the GameCube. We as gamers are lamenting the decline in quality of the franchise, but the sales numbers do not lie, and Sega's foremost concern is with sales. As long as the games sell well, no one will shake this hedgehog's tree, so to say that the franchise is "floundering" isn't just exaggerating; it's plain wrong.

Depending on the study you read, the average gamer is anywhere between 30-35 years old. Because of that, it's safe to assume that the vast majority of gamers remember the days of Sega console gaming and there is still a huge group of Sega zealots in the wild that long for another Dreamcast.

The average gamer Mr. Reisinger refers to are the same ones that snubbed the Saturn in favor of a Playstation and ignored the Dreamcast in anticipation of the Playstation 2. These older gamers still remember the money they spent on their 32X and Sega CD attachments, and just the mention of either add-on is enough to release years of pent-up angst. Why on Earth would this particular demographic buy another Sega console after such a long and storied history with the company? After more than half a decade with their Xboxes and firmly enjoying their Wiis and Playstation 3s, why would they add another console into mix now?

If anything, this should be the target audience Sega should avoid. They most likely aren't the ones who bought Mario & Sonic or any of the other new releases, and we've seen just how far the support of older gamers goes with Sega with such massive flops as Panzer Dragoon Orta, both Otogi titles, as well as recent flops like Sega Superstars Tennis, which dropped to $20 about a month after its release. All of these are excellent games that should be in everyone's libraries but were largely ignored by the very audience Reisinger says Sega should pursue.

There's no debating the fact that Sega has been a relative failure in the software space. Since its decision to drop out of the hardware game, the company has had a few minor hits, but nothing has been developed that we can classify as a blockbuster.

Once more, the sales numbers for the Sonic franchise soundly contest this, but he may be right about the rest of Sega's line up since going third party. Of course, how he thinks this will magically change because of new hardware is beyond me, and I believe Sega already launched a new console with an amazing library of original and creative games that was totally crushed in the market. It was called the Dreamcast.

In order for Sega to truly keep its game division afloat, it'll need to develop hardware that's both forward-thinking and inexorably tied to the online space. Beyond that, it'll need to repair the issues it may still have with retailers and some other developers and endeavor to build a console that can compete on the same level with the Xbox 360 and the Playstation 3.

Sega did a good job of repairing its relationship with retailers when the Dreamcast debuted. Remember how Kay-Bee Games refused to stock anything Saturn-related because of Sega's suprise launch in May of 1995? They stocked Dreamcast games and systems. However, Reisinger's assertion that the new hardware would have to be online has been tried before, again by the Dreamcast. He must have forgotten that Sega couldn't get people to play it online even when it gave the console away just for signing up for SegaNet. Why would it be more successful now? Furthermore, how would Sega fund such an endeavor, when Reisinger opens his article citing how much money the company has lost? It cost Microsoft over a billion dollars just to get Xbox Live up and running, and Sega hasn't seen that much cash since the Genesis was still its product. It's just not possible for Sega to even consider such an investment, especially - as Reisinger so poignantly illustrates - the company has been losing money for four consecutive years.

Third-parties are having trouble selling games on the Wii and if they believe that they can turn an even greater profit by selling games on three consoles, the deals should start to build up.

Has Resinger even been playing games for the last three years? Third parties are using the Wii to farm easy cash with quick ports and shovelware, and you know what? They're making money. How else could you explain crap like Carnival Games selling almost a million copies? I should also remind Reisinger of the success Capcom has had with Resident Evil 4 and Ubi Soft's massive sales of Red Steel and Rayman Raving Rabbids. And companies are already turning greater profits by selling games on multiple platforms. Again, Capcom reaped the rewards of this strategy with Devil May Cry 4, and Ubi Soft cleaned up with TMNT. Companies are doing just fine, and while another console could mean more potential copies to sell, but it wouldn't be a major attraction to a new Sega console, especially one with zero user base, considering how well the big companies are already doing.

After forming the deals with developers, Sega will need to build the hype machine up as much as possible. Instead of following the faulty plan of years ago, it needs to show off a console that's both more powerful than anything available, offers a Blu-ray drive, and has the kind of online component we're only seeing in the Xbox 360. The company also needs to play by the rules: it shouldn't announce the console and release it on the same day and it should take as much time as it needs to ensure all of its ducks are in a row before it launches it.

Again, where is Sega supposed to get the cash to do this? How is a company that's posted four straight yearly losses supposed to secure the capital for a machine more powerful than the Xbox 360 and the Playstation 3? And how would it sell it for a reasonable price? People complained of the current consoles pricing of $400 and $500, and Sega would definitely have to target the higher end of the price spectrum to avoid losing its shirt. Factor in the news that a price drop is most likely coming this year for the two next gen consoles (yeah, I went there), and Reisinger's argument collapses completely.

Look, I agree that it would rock to have Sega back making consoles. As one of those older gamers Reisinger refers to, it still feels odd to me to not have a Sega system in the market after almost two decades of buying its hardware. Unfortunately, the reality of the situation does not favor such a move by the company, and it's likely that we'll never see another Sega console again. It's nice to dream, but if Reisinger is serious in his contention that Sega could and should return to making hardware, then he's not living in the same reality as Sega.

Thank You Mr. Postman!

2008-05-22T11:40:00.003-04:00

I just received my copy of Ayrton Senna's Super Monaco GP for the Genesis from the mailman. I've been looking for this one for quite some time, and it's been harder than you'd think to find a complete copy for a decent price. After months of searching, I finally found one, and for a mere $1.99 to boot!

I haven't really sat down with it yet, but I definitely plan to put plenty of time into it. I want to go back and play the first Super Monaco GP first and then review it for Sega-16, and then I'll dive headfirst into the sequel. From what I've seen though, Senna's game (which he had a direct hand in making) seems like it's leaps and bounds over the already-solid original.

Impressions forthcoming! In the meantime, just check out the video in case you haven't seen this game before.

OMG, It's Still Growing!

2008-05-16T23:55:00.010-04:00

... my Genesis collection, that is.

When I originally began to reacquire it back in 2000, I never really thought how far I would go with it. I had no plans for a website at the time, and I was still new to the world of emulation. Back then, I felt - as I still do today - that actual hardware is the best way to experience games (emulation is invaluable for demoing and documentation), so I wanted to grab as many Genesis games as I could. I was lucky, because you practically couldn't give the darn things away at the time, and I managed to snag a few gems like M.U.S.H.A. and Shining Force really cheap.

Fast forward eight years, and I'm still buying games. Mine's a modest collection compared to many others out there ( 220 boxed games, only 2 missing their manuals), but I love it. I love the hunt, and I love the anticipation of getting a new game in the mail. I still don't have a limit of how many titles I plan to buy, and I'm even more lax now with which games I consider worth purchasing. For instance, a few years ago I never would have considered buying any sports title, believing them to be too dated to retain my interest. That's changed, and I recently got copies of World Series Baseball and NBA Jam T.E. A fun game is a fun game, and who cares if three quarters of the roster retired already?

Currently, I just snagged Super Baseball 2020 (look for a review soon!) and Bubba 'N Stix, and I still have a copy of Aryton Senna's Super Monaco GP 2 on the way. My biggest problem is where to house my collection. I'm going to have a custom bookcase made when my new gameroom is completed sometime before the next millennium arrives, but as it is now, I'm pretty tight on space!

Not that a lack of space will stop my from buying more games... Curse you eBay!

Thoughts on 1st Gears of War 2 Gameplay Video

2008-05-10T23:02:00.017-04:00

So the video went up last night, and my eager little fingers clicked enthusiastically to load it. Bufferring can be sweet, sweet agony, and when it finally loaded, I was treated to Cliffy B giving the rundown on how the game picks up after the original. Things then cut to an awesome scene of Phoenix and the other Cogs fighting Locusts in an outdoor on-rails stage on some kind of mobile battle platform. The battle took place in the third chapter of the first act, dubbed "Assault," a fittingly-named Locust attack on a Cog convoy, and there was much carnage involved. The action starts out with Phoenix and another Cog taking out a group of airborne Reavers, and then Phoenix unloads his Lancer into a sea of rushing Locusts that are assailing the convoy.

A great addition to the already solid gameplay is that Phoenix can now use an enemy as a human shield (which he dispatches afterward by snapping its neck and kicking it overboard), and there are now chainsaw duels! Someone comes at you with a chainsaw, what do you do? You rev yours up and block! Mash the B button madly and you end up slicing the baddie in two. There was also a scene where Phoenix seemed to impale a Locust with his chainsaw. Gruesome but oh so satisfying! My favorite part had to be when all the Cogs concentrated their fire on this massive two-legged beast that sported a back-mounted cannon. When it was on its last legs, they rammed it with their vehicle, knocking it dead to the side of the road.

The visuals look a lot like the original game, but they've apparently been tweaked and enhanced. The first Gears is simply gorgeous, so there isn't much need to improve, in my opinion, but I can honestly say that this footage looked awesome. This is going to rock hard folks, and November just can't come soon enough. Check out these screen grabs to whet your appetite, and then follow the link and see the glory for yourselves.

First Gameplay Video of Gears of War 2 Tonight on Xbox Live!

2008-05-09T23:36:00.007-04:00

Joystiq is reporting that the very first actual gameplay of the eagerly awaited Gears of War 2 will go up on Xbox Live tonight at 11:00 p.m. PST. 1up will have the footage a whole half hour earlier, so there's no excuse to not see this! I loved the first (single-player and online co-op, not big on adversarial), so I will be all over this. I'll also be back tomorrow night with some impressions of the video, which I will undoubtedly watch a billion times. November can't come soon enough!

Thoughts on GTA IV

2008-05-03T21:18:00.020-04:00

By now, everyone and his brother has a copy of Grand Theft Auto IV nestled warmly in their Xbox 360s or Playstation 3s, and I'm sure they all agree that it's the bee's knees. I concur, for the most part, as the game has done what the series is famous for much better than other installments did. That doesn't mean it's infallible, though. In fact, there are some things about it that downright piss me off.

Driving sucks. I've heard countless people tell me that I should "get" the new driving controls after a while and that they're "more realistic." As far as gaming goes, whenever anyone tells me I need to "get" something, it usually means that said thing sucks. I had to "get" Rez and Space Giraffe, and now I'm supposed to "get" something as simple as driving. This is bullshit, plain and simple. The fact that anyone can argue realism in a game where I can kill multiple people without consequences, run around the city brandishing all sorts of firearms without anyone caring, and simply outrun police after a crime until they simply forget what I've done has no moral ground to argue in favor of realistic driving controls.

I don't want the cars to control like those in a racing game; I want them to control well. What's next, customizing suspension and tires? The fact that so many people are even bringing this up as an issue means that it was something that wasn't meant to be tinkered with. No other GTA game had the need for more realistic driving controls, and this holds true for part four. And don't even get me started on helicopters...

Melee combat sucks. Fighting someone in close quarters is an exercise in frustration, as the button combos aren't intuitive at all. And if you're using the auto-aim feature, then forget it. Which brings me to the next issue...

Aiming still sucks. It's much, MUCH better than before, but I guess Rockstar's Xbox 360 red ringed just as they were getting to know the aiming dynamic in Saints Row. That game fixed the whole issue completely, and I'm shocked that Rockstar still couldn't get this right for their game - which was released an entire year later. Auto-aim makes gun fights impossible, and taking it off is better but too slow sometimes. But in retrospect, I guess anything's an improvement over previous games in the series.

No mid-mission checkpoints. I start a mission where I'm supposed to follow a drug dealer clear across town to a warehouse where he's meeting other drug dealers. We finally get there, he goes inside and I follow, a gunfight ensues, and I die. I click on the "replay" option on my cellphone, and now have to start all the way back at the fucking beginning of the mission? What. The. Hell. Why can't I just restart at the point before I enter the warehouse? Now I have to redo that tedious-as-hell drive across town again. Did I mention that several missions have you following people like this?

So yeah, GTA IV isn't perfect, and I know that I shouldn't be expecting perfection from this series at all. However, the fact that this is the sixth installment with this type of gameplay and some problems have never been fixed (I'm not even mentioning game-crashing bugs and glitches) is unforgivable. Moreover, some stuff that never was a problem before now is, and I still find the competition - Saints Row - doing stuff better a whole year earlier. Part two of that franchise is coming this summer, and it features full online campaign co-op, so I will definitely be watching it to see how it compares to Rockstar's magnum opus.

Anyway, I still love GTA, and the storytelling is incredible. Niko's the man, and Little Jacob is hilarious. Good show Rockstar. Not perfect, but good show.

GTA IV Midnight Clusterfuck!

2008-04-29T20:31:00.015-04:00

I've never gone to a midnight launch. I didn't go for Halo 3, I passed on the Wii, and I wasn't going to go to the Grand Theft Auto IV one either. Standing in the cold dark amongst a group of pushy teens while sales clerks take their sweet time to let you in? No thanks. I'd rather be home and warm, thank you.

That was how I used to feel, and the little voice inside my head (you know, the one little voice you actually should listen to?) told me that this time should be no different. So what did I do? Yep, I ignored my instincts and went against my better judgment, and I grabbed some old games for trade-in and headed down to the mall at half past eleven. My thinking was that GTA IV was a game worth getting, and my not having to be at work early the next day would still give me plenty of time to play even if I got home late.

So there I was, standing in a crowd of about sixty people who all want exactly the same thing as me. Sixty loud and pushy people who only wanted to cram themselves through the one open door that was viciously guarded by a savage rent-a-cop. This Gamestop store doesn't have a street entrance, so you have to be let into the mall to get to it. That should have been my first clue. Malls in Puerto Rico - or at least this particular one - close at seven (!) on a weeknight, so being here at midnight seemed almost surreal for me. At least it did until the menacing specter of Puerto Rican inefficiency reared its ugly head and reminded me that my situation was all too real.

First of all, there was no organization to the line whatsoever. Logic would dictate that there should have been someone receiving the gamers as they arrived and filing them into a single line along the wall next to the door. This would have established order and allowed for full control of the door by only a single guard. Instead, they just let everyone dog pile around the door and push like fevered lemmings every time it was opened. I never had to even try to move, as people behind me would push me towards the door whenever it was time to let more people in.

There was a single guard watching the door, and he would let gamers in ten at a time. Another guard would escort them down the mall passage to Gamestop, where three (yes, three) more guards placed them in line outside the store and stood watch. Inside, three sales clerks worked like mad to process each sale quickly so they could go home as soon as possible. Things were pretty orderly inside the mall, but they fucked up again with the line of gamers coming out of Gamestop. We had to sit and wait for everyone in our group to buy their game before we could leave, and I was number three. That meant that I had to wait for seven others. Had there been someone controlling the line outside the mall, they could have easily let people in five at a time and had a constant flow of customers that would have made the sale go much quicker.

That's my biggest gripe, I guess. This particular Gamestop has done multiple midnight launches before. Why then, was this still so unorganized? You'd think they'd have their shit together by now. I did manage to get my copy of the game for the Xbox 360, so I'm happy. I also did better than expected since a nice guy in line behind me offered $40 for my copy of Rainbow Six: Vegas 2, a full $10 more than Gamestop would have given me. I quickly plucked the game from the counter and told the clerk not to include it, and instead of having to pay the difference, I actually walked out with $3 in my wallet! That's almost enough for a Whopper combo!

I now know what I've been missing in regards to midnight launches, and I can confidently say that this will by my debut and finale. I could easily have snagged a copy of GTA IV today without all the stupid pre-order hassle, and I only did it to get an extra 20% of trade-in value towards Rock Band, which was replaced and works fine now! I'll chalk this one up to curiosity, and now that it's sated, I have no desire to pursue it further.

Oh, and GTA IV is completely awesome.

Xbox 360 Love/Hate Part Deux

2008-04-21T09:16:00.005-04:00

Yesterday, I bought Rock Band. You know, that rhythm game with all the instruments that everyone and their brother is playing? I bought the game by itself, since I already own a guitar thanks to Guitar Hero II. I figured I'd buy it now, and then I'd pick the drum kit later on down the road. I'm loving the game so far... from what I've been able to play, that is.

It's ironic that my last post before this one was about how many used games I bought and what a great asset they were. Well, it appears that I must have stirred up some bad mojo because my wonderful copy of Rock Band - which I bought used - doesn't work. Wait, that's not entirely true. After four or five attempts at getting my 360 to recognize it as an actual game and not some foreign DVD, I can finally start playing. If I'm lucky, I can get through a set without a dirty disc error too.

I can't believe I didn't notice the large scratch the disc has on the outer edge. Had I seen that in-store, there's no way I would have bought it. Now I'll have to take it back tomorrow and exchange it for a new one. And I mean "new" as in "unopened." No more used versions of Harmonix's awesome rock fest for me! I need this one to work flawlessly, as I have some online jamming to do, and a DDE in the middle of a solo is not something I'd look forward to.

It's funny how finicky the 360 is. It never once flaked on me with Stormfront's turd Just Cause, and it didn't like Rainbow 6: Vegas 2 at first. After I banged the shit out of it, however, the darn thing came around. It just hasn't liked Rock Band from the outset though, but this time around the scratched disc is where I place the blame . Hopefully things will go more smoothly when I get a fresh copy of the game.

I really like this one too. I've downloaded several songs already, including the incredible Shiva by Smashing Pumpkins and More Than A Feeling by Boston. A part of me died though when I purchased Metallica's Blackened. I can just see Lars Ulrich rubbing his hands together like Mr. Burns, silently muttering "excellent... excellent" to himself as the download counter rises. Metallica has represented all kinds of suck since the mid '90s, and its campaign against P2P downloading just left a bad taste in my mouth. Blackened is a metal masterpiece, however, so what the hell? Why not?

I can just imagine how much this game is going to rock when I have the drum kit. I've always loved the drums, and mixing them with video games is better than peanut butter and chocolate!

Used Games & Trade In = My New Best Friends

2008-04-17T22:52:00.006-04:00

I know there are a lot of people out there that don't like to buy used games from Gamestop. I know all about the company's douchey history, and I agree with most of it. That being said, when I'm looking for something new to fire up in the ol' 360, modern prices can be downright intimidating.

Here in Puerto Rico, a new Xbox 360 game retails for $62.99 - before tax. Your final tally is around $67, so you can imagine why I don't buy as many new games as I used to. No, nowadays I'm content to pick up those titles that interest me when they drop in price new or appear used for some decent coin. As long as the game is in good condition and complete, I have no problem with it being used. I do prefer my games new when possible, so hunting for the cheapest price has become a necessity.

Sure, I don't play as many games at once as I used to, but is that necessarily a bad thing? How many games can one guy play at a time anyway? Right now, I can think of several titles, like Conan, Condemned 2, Ace Combat 6, and Guitar Hero III, that I'll be grabbing as soon as they drop. Out of the sixty or so 360 games I've owned so far, I've only bought two cash for full price: NBA 2K7 and Oblivion. The good thing about buying games cheap is that once I've beaten them and gotten as many achievements as possible, they become good trade-in fodder. Yes, I used Gamestop's trade-in program! For shame!

Hey, I've gotten great games like Call of Duty 4, Rainbow 6: Vegas 2, and even the mighty Gears of War for pennies cash thanks to trading in old games. Using the membership card and taking advantage of specials, one can really knock off a lot from the total price. My policy is that the less I have to pay cash, the better. And it's not like I'm losing out by keeping these old games around. Once I'm done with them, why have them stick around? Does anyone honestly think I'm screwing myself by trading in Ratatouille once my daughter and I have beaten it?

Games haven't come down in price, despite the spiel of shit publishers shoveled down our throats in the '90s. Remember "CDs are cheaper than cartridges!"? Yeah - for the publishers. It's funny how today's DVD-based games are as expensive as SNES and N64 carts were a decade ago. It's all bullshit, just like how in-game advertising would help reduce prices too.

I'm not a rich dude. I have a mortgage and two kids, so I'm going to get my game on any way I can. If that means I have to wait out some titles and reduce the size of my current library in order to get new games, then so be it. It's not like I'm going to pirate them or anything (I'm totally against that), so who can blame me for not buying games full price? I still get to play all the big titles when they're released too.That's where those old games shine one more time before they're gone. GTA 4? I've got four old games just waiting to be traded in for that one.

Presenting the Super Genintari!

2008-04-14T19:45:00.000-04:00

I've seen some great homebrew projects in my time (Ben Hekendorn is a god among men in this area), but this one by a dude who goes by the name vomitsaw just has to be about the coolest I've ever seen. The Super Genintari is a massive console that houses an Atari 2600, NES, SNES, and Genesis - all in one! It sports a quality finish and looks to be one tough little console. I'd get into more on it, but I think this picture and video below say everything much better than I ever could!

Super Guns, meet your match!

Whatever Happened to Commitment?

2008-04-11T20:32:00.000-04:00

No, I'm not talking about marriage.

I'm referring to making a commitment - in this case a writing one - and not coming through on it. This has been the case with Sega-16 and its revolving door of staff members since we organized the group a little over a year ago. In total, twelve people have joined up, but only five are actually producing anything lately. Many of those who aren't have either opted out of their positions or just disappeared into the wilderness.

My question stems from the fact that of those who failed to honor their commitment, very few were actually approached by me to join in the first place. In the vast majority of cases, it was the writer who emailed me and asked to join the staff. As we're always looking for talented writers, those who are articulate enough and willing to stick around usually get the nod. It all goes well for the first couple of months, and then BAM! all gone...

I understand better than just about anyone how the rigors of real life can wreak havoc with one's online persona. Being a full-time English professor with two small children, it's not easy to run Sega-16 and still be there for my responsibilities. Nonetheless, I've not only been able to do it for almost four years now, but I have a higher Xbox 360 gamerscore than a lot of people I know! Even us family guys have to get our game on!

It's not the inability of some people to meet staff requirements that bite me as much as it is the vanishing act that usually follows. If you can't write for us anymore, that's fine, but please have the decency to let me know about it. Idling on the staff forum, waiting to see if these people are going to check in (Bueller...? Bueller...?) is not fun, and it causes chaos with the site's update schedule.

For that reason, I recently had to scale back said schedule. Where we used to update four times a week (two reviews and two features), we'll now only be updating with one feature a week. I love to write them, but I can't write enough of them to meet the schedule all by myself. As it is, I've often had to write reviews and features ahead of schedule just to have something for the update! That's no way to run a site, so I decided to slow things down a bit.

Not that this will really hurt us. With almost five hundred reviews and over three hundred features up already, our readers have more than enough to keep them busy. I just wish that some people had a higher sense of professionalism about writing for an enthusiast site. Many times, writers tend to think of their position as something unimportant ("I'm not getting paid, so who cares?"), and don't take it seriously. I, for one, do take it quite seriously. Sure, you're not getting a check for your efforts, and since we're not a media outlet, we don't usually even get review copies for staff to check out for free. That doesn't make what we do any less important, and it sure doesn't mean that we don't have to be professional in the task.

Those who are looking to break into the games journalism often get their starts at enthusiast sites. While there, they learn how to improve their writing skills, and they are able to get a feel of what writing for a publication is like. They also get their names tossed around in the industry. Take me for example. Four years ago, my journalism experience consisted of nineteen articles written for a Houston area PC magazine (HAL-PC for those interested). With Sega-16, I've managed to produce over eighty reviews and almost two hundred features, including over sixty interviews with people from all corners of the Genesis era. That includes everyone from game testers to both Genesis-era SOA presidents Michael Katz & Tom Kalinske to big names like Yuzo Koshiro, David Perry, and Trip Hawkins. How have I been able to accomplish this? Has it through contacts in the industry? Special skills? Not at all. In fact, all but a handful of my interviews have been the result of two things:

Google and a lot of patience.

Now, four years later, I actually do have contacts in the industry, and I can even get the mighty Sega itself to hear me. I haven't made a dime off my work, and I don't want to. I do it out of passion for the subject I research and cover, and I do it because I feel that people will want to read about it. Judging from Sega-16's growth over these past years and our steady increase in readership, I can honestly say that I think my work hasn't been in vain.

Surely then, those who chose to write for us can come up with two articles a month (one review and one feature). It's not asking a lot, I think. And this obviously doesn't apply to everyone on the Sega-16 staff, of course. We have a core group that has been brilliant over the years, and with talented veterans and enthusiastic newcomers all working together, I'm sure we can meet our schedule and continue to bring our readership the best Genesis coverage on the planet, bar none. I just wish everyone felt the same as they and I do.

Quality Control Is Not A Next Gen Concept

2008-04-09T21:34:00.000-04:00

I really, really hate it when I buy a game for the Xbox 360 and the first thing I see is a request for an update. WTF? I just took my new game out of its wrapper, and I'm already being hit up for an update? And on release day?

This is just one of the small nuisances today's gamers have to live with. Thanks to the proliferation of online gaming, the industry is now full swing in its "launch now, patch later" mentality. Shipping a half-assed product is becoming the norm, and it seems there's nothing we can do about it save for protesting with our dollars.

Case in point: Ubi Soft's Rainbow Six: Vegas 2. As if being a $60 expansion pack weren't enough, the game is also chock full of ugly glitches. Bullets miss their targets at point blank range, enemies kill you through concrete walls, and grenades sometimes have less effect than year-old firecrackers. This alone would be enough to get many a panty in a wad, but Ubi Soft has done us one better. See, in its mad dash to boost its quarterly earnings, it shipped a game with glitched achievements.

Again.

Remember the original Rainbow Six: Vegas for the Xbox 360? A great game to be sure, but it had the most annoying glitched achievement. Completing the game on Realistic difficulty was supposed to earn you a hearty bonus, but imagine my surprise when I complete the game and get... nothing. It turns out that if you quit to the menu and later reload your save, the difficulty defaults back to normal. The only way to get the Realistic achievement is to play each level individually and set the difficulty manually. This was annoying, especially after I had gone through all the trouble of finishing the game a second time.

This time around, Ubi Soft took even longer to get off its ass, and the achievement is even worse. Now, it's completely random. You might get it by finishing the game solo on Realistic... or you might not. You might get it by beating the game as the host in online/split-screen co-op... or you might not. Hell, a pal of mine over at The Next Level got it after beating the game in online co-op on normal difficulty!

This is just too much. I'm already upset that my reward for having beaten the first game was 2500 XP - and no PFC achievement. That's the first glitched achievement players encountered, and all they did was load the game. Ubi Soft reportedly knows of the problem and is "looking into it," but I have little faith in its ability to fix this promptly. Chances are, the patch will arrive a month after I've moved on to another game (namely GTA 4), and I just won't care anymore. Ubi Soft pulled this shit before after I bought the red map pack for the first R6: V, when they later said it had been a mistake to charge and then GAVE EVERYONE THE MAPS FOR FREE. I'm still waiting for my refund, but I'm sure that was just another empty promise.

Before you raise your shotgun in my direction, please know that I've enjoyed Rainbow 6: Vegas 2 very much, despite its glitches. I've beaten the single-player campaign twice, finished all terrorist hunt maps on Realistic difficulty, and I'm two ranks away from the coveted Elite status. I love the gameplay, and since Ubi Soft only added a sprint button to what was already rock-solid, that portion of the experience is still as enjoyable as ever. I just wish the glitches weren't there, and the developers weren't taking so darn long to fix things.

For that reason, I think I'll refrain from buying anymore Ubi Soft titles at launch. Until the company gets its shit together and actually finishes its games before releasing them, I'll either buy them used or discounted, or I'll just not buy them at all. Perhaps it's time to put my dollars to better use somewhere else.

Sonic Unleashed: Could It Be the One?

2008-04-04T21:40:00.000-04:00

Oh God, oh God, oh God... I so want the new Sonic game announced recently, Sonic Unleashed, to actually be good. The poor hedgehog just hasn't been the same since he went 3D, and to say that Sega's recent offerings (Sonic Heroes, Sonic The Hedgehog) were lacking would be quite the understatement. Sonic Team seems to finally have taken fans' complaints to heart and gone back to what made Sonic so cool to begin with: playing as Sonic.

I'm not sure when Sonic Team decided that people should use all of the furry friends that hang out with Sega's mascot. Perhaps Sonic himself decided he needed an entourage. Who knows? All I know is that scavenger hunting with Sonic and galavanting around in a large metal mech with Tails was not the reason I signed up to play Sonic Adventure 2 and the games that followed. When Sega tried to bring things full circle with its latest release on the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360, things went horribly, horribly wrong. Terrible camera work, poor collision detection, and severe clipping issues were just some of the charges leveled at what was supposed to be the mammal's return to form.

That's what is so exciting about Sonic Unleashed. Going 2.5D could be just what the doctor ordered. For those of you who missed the latest installment of MEGA Bites, check out Sega's official debut trailer and feast your eyes on what could finally be a great modern Sonic game:

Tell me that doesn't make you giddy! Of course, I could be setting myself up for failure (again), and one must remember that this video is just a teaser. It shows nothing about the actual control, the supposed melee combat that's being included, or how the game changes with the time of day. Yep, according to Sega's press release, "both day and night play different, yet important, roles in Sonic’s newest quest… as the sun sets, a new adventure awakens." I don't know what that specifically refers to, but there have been reports of a werewolf coming into play.

Ok, that last part has me a bit skeptical. I really don't want this to turn into a new Shadow the Hedgehog. So long as I can play as Sonic through the whole game, and there are some nifty platforming sections that aren't killed by a bad camera, I'm willing to give this one a chance. Sega-16 will be previewing Sonic Unleashed soon, and we'll also be giving it a full hands-on when it's released this holiday season.

Oh, and we might just have an interview with Sega about it! Keep your eyes peeled!

The Rise of Casual Gaming (at my house)

2008-04-02T13:42:00.000-04:00

As my daughter Kimberly gets older, she's become increasingly interested in video games. She's become quite proficient as well, actually, and she recently completed the first six stages (Episode 1) of Lego Star Wars: The Complete Saga. For that reason, I've recently found myself buying more and more casual games. In just the last month, I've bought and completed Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End and Ratatouille, and before that I beat the aforementioned Star Wars game, along with Cars. All of these purchases have been for the Xbox 360, and since my daughter sometimes prefers to just watch me play, I figure I might as well get some achievement points out of them!

Now though, she's become more engaged in gaming, doing better and better at Super Mario 3, and actually knowing when to use the Force and switch characters to progress in the Lego games. I'm pretty impressed by her talents, and we've been really able to bond over our gaming sessions. Heck, I'm even looking at the Wii library in a new light! Just so long as I don't have to play any Bratz games. Seriously, I hate those things...

I Love/Hate My Xbox 360

2008-03-29T21:43:00.000-04:00

I originally purchased the console from a friend in April 2006. He had only bought it a week before, and he found that most of the games didn't appeal to him (he's a definite Japanophile), so he offered to sell it to me with Dead Rising for $340... and he said there was no rush to pay him. I immediately took him up on his offer and began to enjoy a year of gaming bliss until something happened. Can you guess what it was? I'll give you a hint:

Left with no other choice, I packed it up and sent it off to Microsoft. My next step was to hurry up and wait, and after a month I got back a "new" console. I use the term "new" lightly, as my shiny 360 now had a manufacture date of October, 2007. It seemed like my troubles were over, and I could finally go about, you know, playing the darn thing.

Then I started to get dirty disc errors while playing Rainbow 6: Vegas 2. Not just one or two, I mean the console wouldn't read anything. I cleaned the lens and tried again. Nothing. I tried Project Gotham Racing 2. Nothing. I tried a few other games and got the same result. Now I was left with the prospect of having to send yet another 360 to Microsoft, with the kicker being that since it hadn't red ringed me, it was out of warranty. I have to pay for Microsoft's crappy workmanship!

With little recourse, I tried the scientific method: I banged the shit out of it. If it was going to die, it was going to do so on my terms. I tried R6:V2 again, and this time it ran! In black and white. I played for a bit and got tired of the lack of color, so I banged the thing around again. Suddenly, it works fine, and in full color! I guess I showed that 360 who's boss!

If it dies again, I'll have no other option but to send it in and pay the repair tab. This will be the last time though. One more malfunction and I'm giving up the ghost. There's a Playstation 3 waiting for me, and those things actually work. I hear they play Blu-Ray DVDs too!

Sega Superstars Tennis

2008-03-28T10:58:00.000-04:00

I mentioned this in the last edition of MEGA Bites, and the more I think about it, the more it irks me. My dilemma is that those who've played the game tell me that it's actually quite good, and that it's rife with Sega goodness. Lamentably, virtually all that goodness is from the 32-bit era on, so the Genesis gets no love here. Gilius Thunderblade and Alex Kidd are present, but where are ToeJam & Earl? They'd be perfect for doubles. Instead, we get every furry creature to ever befriend Sonic The Hedgehog. GG, Sega.

It's Time to Give This Another Go...

2008-03-28T10:16:00.001-04:00

A few years ago, I used to have a blog over at 1up.com. At the time, I figured I'd use it to discuss all the different things that were going on over at my site, Sega-16 (http://www.sega-16.com/), and it was something of a challenge to actually remember to update the darn thing. After a few months, I let it die of starvation, and the world of blogging was left behind me forever...

... or so I thought.

Here I am, giving it another chance, and I honestly hope to keep it updated, at least weekly. What is it with people's obsession with blogs? Why do we feel compelled to share out inner thoughts with people we don't even know? Does anyone read these things? I'm not sure who'll be interested, but I look at the bright side: if no one is reading this, then I'm effectively talking to myself, and people will be none the wiser.