Carzy Little Thing Called Life...

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!

Buying Used Sucks Sometimes

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*

Batman: Arkham Asylum = Game of the Year

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!

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!

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!

Kickin' ASSassin's Creed

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.

Toys R Us Clearence = Happy Me!

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.

Retro Game Reviews: A Different Beast?

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.

I'm Sick of Gamers Being Labeled

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 Guide 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 GTA IV

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!

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

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

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!

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!

Quality Control Is Not A Next Gen Concept

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.

The Rise of Casual Gaming (at my house)

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

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!