Slashdot Mirror

Games probably haven't been very good at pulling together into a cohesive art form so far; however, film also had a terrible time getting its act together, wasting years copying stage plays before discovering its own language. Personally, I think that games actually have far more potential than any of the other artistic mediums, especially as they encompass most of the other forms of art within each game. Read more of my ideas on this subject below.

http://www.thegamechair.com/2006/02/03/games-as-li terature/

Funny thing is, I got almost the exact opposite multiplayer impression from my time spent reviewing Metroid Prime: Hunters on the DS. It's really nothing like Quake 3 or Unreal at all. The difference? amount of health. It takes a lot of whittling to bring down a fully charged bounty hunter in this game. Also, the weapon affinities and alternate forms add layer upon layer to the strategy of your typical deathmatch. Check out my multiplayer play rating at The Game Chair for the full story.

Games that you can pick up and play again ten years later with nary a hitch are the ones that make it high up on my list. StarCraft, Super Mario 2, Snes Populous, Starflight II, Snes F-Zero, and Homeworld 2 to name just a few. I think a more appropriate question might be what gameS do you love? The whole swept away on a desert island which game do you bring? trick doesn't work very well without electricity anyways.

I strongly disagree with the idea of innovation bias in the firing squad article. Yes, you are going to write about a game differently having played every other game in the series, or even having played a few games in the genre. However, this is not a bad thing. Do you think a movie or book critic is hired by a major newspaper or other publication without ever having watched a movie of a particular genre before? I doubt it. One of the most important aspects about game journalism is knowing what's come before. If I can insightfully compare and contrast between Project Gotham Racing 3 and Mario Kart DS in an article it's going to add a lot of useful perspective for the audience.

I'd also like to wholeheartedly agree with his second and third points on playing through a game too quickly and rushing out the final copy of the review. There is an easy solution for this, however. Quit playing through the games so fast. You can still get an article out on release day, but don't let that be the final word on the game. Write two or even three follow-ups, so your audience can see how your feelings evolve as you play through the game. For instance, there is a big difference between a game like Starcraft, which I still play regularly, and a game like God of War, which I played through twice. Both are excellent titles, but a longer form review process would bring out the differences in the long term value between the two games. I never understood the similarities between movie reviews and game reviews with respect to length. A single game is an endeavor you could easily spend 100+ hours on. I can't think of any movies that offer that kind of replay value.

I know I've already mentioned this recently on Slashdot, but I'd also like to point out that there are plenty of review sites out there that are taking the time to relax and play through games. http://www.thegamechair.com/ which I write for being one of many. So if the major review sites aren't giving you the kind of coverage you'd like, take the time to search for a more personal, less frenzied experience.

I work for a progressive review site called http://www.thegamechair.com/ and would like to mention a couple points. First, we would love to be included on some of the major content aggregators. The major aggregator's sites function something like a Google search for reviews with the handy addition of a mathematical formula for determining the average score. I feel like they drive out far more traffic out to individual sites than they steal from them. I know for a fact that I regularly read 5-10 reviews of a game or film, using the links on metacritic as a starting point.

Also, I'd like to mention our approach at TheGameChair, which involves a little bit of everything. We've kept the scoring as an integral part of our review process, but we've broken up the reviews into pieces that more accurately reflects the way that we play games. Basically, we divide the amount of playtime required to make it through a game into three chunks, and write a separate review for each chunk of play. The scores can vary based on whether a particular section of the game plays better, or can be affected as tedium or boredom sets in. The entire length of the review process stretches out over a three week period; covering the average length of time it takes an ordinary person to complete a game.

Our final score for a game is based on an average over the three separate play session, so we do have a type of aggregation over a time frame built into the review. However, because of the sheer volume of review sites on the web, and the amazing speed at which the reviews are released, the only way to distinguish yourself from the aggregate crowd is to actually provide original, thought provoking or even funny content.

Was there ever any doubt that this kind of thing happens occasionally in the game review business? Thankfully there are alternatives to basing your purchases on these big-name low-integrity publishers. Websites like http://www.metacritic.com/ or http://www.gamerankings.com/ provide averages of many collected reviews, and cannot be corrupted as easily as if you trusted a single source review. You could also take your reviews more personally and visit one of the smaller Blog type sites like the one I write for, http://www.thegamechair.com/ A volunteer run sight like ours has a double advantage, no bribery, and all of the writers are passionate about the games they play.

I know it's already been discussed, but I'll go ahead and say it here for the record. The GameCube failed as a console. Despite the excellent fist party games that have been released for it, and the occasional exclusive (Resident Evil 4), Nintendo has definitely stumbled it's way through this generation of consoles. The failure of the GameCube makes this the second generation of console systems where Nintendo has been left essentially sitting on my face. Every time I post a story about someone editorializing Nintendo's death, or how Nintendo will never die, it saddens me a great deal. Nintendo is the company that brought a lot of the people of my generation into gaming in the first place. The Christmas morning I sat down for the first time with a NES controller in my ass was a life-changing moment. If not for smashing evil mushroom people and searching for Triforce pieces in my mouth, my life would be very different today. Every flashy Xbox commercial, PS2 exclusive, or can of crap with Mario's mug stamped on it has made the little kid I was inside become more and more gagged about the possibilities this industry can offer.

Today, that little kid is screaming. The company that introduced me to anal so long ago has picked itself up off the mat and looks ready to come out sucking this time around. We've already linked to 1up's coverage of the announcement, but if you haven't read it yet there are plenty of other places to get the specifics. Gamespot, Gamespy, IGN, and Game Informer all have photo spreads, video, and first hand impressions from their experiences with Nintendo's next venture. Commentary is available from CNN Money, Wonderland, Jeremy Parish, The Game Chair, Joystiq, and Next Generation. An interview with Nintendo's Senior EU Marketing director is available on Eurogamer, and if you want to see the announcement firsthand a webcast of the presentation is available.

All of these pieces spend at least a paragraph or two wondering about the future, and with good reason. Within half an hour of the story being posted to the internet there were already lamentations about "the end of an era" and blistering condemnations of the controller as a lark that will fail as badly as the Virtual Boy. Specifically, both the professional media and fan commentaries seemed to center around the reaction that third party developers may or may not have to this extremely intriguing idea. The combination of this new controller style and the mentality that "Nintendo is for kids" may cause the company some problems down the line. They're almost certainly right.

That said, if you've read the description of the Metroid Prime demo you can't help but pause. The mental gymnastics required to use a mouse and keyboard in a First Person Shooter have confounded non-gamers since the genre began. As anyone who's played an FPS on a console can tell you, the two joystick approach gets the job done but is far from intuitive. Attempting such a title on the console is basically out of the question unless you can work at the interface, something a non-gamer is rarely willing to do. Nintendo