Katamary is definitely a unique entry in terms of concept. I agree with that. The gameplay mechanic is simply exploring, and becoming efficient at exploring. In that sense, it's really not different than a lot of the violent, or military simulation games that you allude to. I don't really see where's there a lot of depth in the game itself. It's interesting solely because it's unique conceptually, not because there are layers in the game itself. Still, you're right that the differences themselves are worth examing.
I've got only one real argument with this guy's point about why games need to be critiqued. A game should be worthy of critique rather than review. For example, critique of Katamary Damacy might be intellectually stimulating for the writer and fans of Katamary Damacy, but the game itself does nothing that deserves critique. It's the equivolent of critiquing Zoolander. The point of videogames is almost solely as entertainment, and there's very few games that go beyond that. A game like Shadow of the Colossus would merit critique in opinion because it creates a unique universe, with mythology, and presents classically inspired questions of the nature of heroism. NBA Ballers, on the otherhand, doesn't need any critique.
How do you market specifically to social gamers? By definition they're mostly looking for interaction with other players, not the game environment per se.
With games like DDR, Guitar Hero, Mario Party, etc.
It seems to me like games, not hardware drive the industry. PS2, while an inferior machine to the Xbox and Gamecube, had the most developers making the most appealing games.
I bought a PS2 because I knew it had the "best" games (or the ones that appeal to me the most - don't get the mario/zelda/metroid worship). So unless Sony loses a lot of their exclusives, it seems to me like they should retain most of their market share over the life of the PS3.
The other thing is that in a few years, when developers get a hang of writing the PS3, the games should really blow the other systems out of the water, given the specs. If they retain exclusivity, and can hold on long enough, PS3 could make a big jump at that point.
We need more games like that to help us win the culture wars and to serve a market that we currently ignore for the most part: people who read the Beat poets, people who enjoy comparing different productions of Das Rheingold, people who would rather visit an art museum than attend a Kylie Minogue concert.
Unfortunately, the culture wars are being waged by politicians looking to agitate voters, make it appear like they're actually helping families. The groups above does not represent any significant portion of the population in so that it would make a difference in either public perception or this culture war. Sure, a few of these people might learn to enjoy video games and become the David Byrne of video games or something. But given the immense financial success of video games over the past generation, it's unlikely video games are in any kind of "danger."
There are gems, and then there is the majority of video games out there. The gems will always exist, and so will the slop. Just like movies and music. The fact that he ignores that highbrow games exist by saying that the mainstream doesn't know about them stinks. He argues that Opera, for example, even if not widely appreciated is considered to be highbrow, whether the opera is good or not. So what he's arguing for then? An arbitrarily assigned category of games that's considered hoity-toity? No, the industry is a juggernaut. We'll occasionally get our unique and wonderful games like Shadow of The Colossus, Myst, Tertis, and so on. Whether they're highbrow or not doesn't so much matter, as long as they're good.
There's another difference between video games and other forms he discusses. Video games are the only product where the consumer is fully integrated into the experience. Control is yielded to the player. This means that video games, at a much higher rate than movies or music must display, and benefit from, technical excellence. That is to say a well crafted game, such as Midnight Club III, Hulk:UD, Black, Gran Turismo 4, God of War, etc . . . can more than make up for their lack of thought-provoking content with their tight controls, innovative gaming concepts, and just sheer fun of PLAYING!
Regardless of what they're touting themselves as, WIRED consistently has some of the most interesting articles, and opinions I've read. And I'm no business person. Obviously, tastes differ.
I find their blend of style, tech, and politics to be a pretty entertaining aesthetic. Also factor in that I'm not reading WIRED to be exposed to some kind of shocking revelation, or in depth analysis of the latest IT development.
What I want is a casual, all-around magazine. It's a lot more like Martha Stewart Living for the techset, than it is like PC Magazine.
It's not trade, it's lifestyle. Which is why I dig it.
This is what capitalist call the invisible hand. They're not doing it for file-sharers sake, but their own, which happens to aid the file-sharers. It gets done, so who cares why. That's what a capitalist would argue (not me, mind you).
Good gfx always enhance a gaming experience. But the core, of course, is the gaming experience. I think people are excited about Doom 3 because they know ID is going to produce a good gaming experience, and this time it will have a lot of interesting visuals and sounds. It's like the sprinkles on the ice-cream.
Take Rayman 2, for the DC. The gameplay is sweet as hell, it's a fun game that's challenging but not frustrating. What makes it even better is just how mesmorizing, quirky, and beautiful the graphic for the game are.
I guess what I'm saying is, if the gameplay is good, go ahead, go nuts on the graphics. What could it hurt?
Well, let's see. We've got $20 a CD, 10 - 15 songs a CD, makes each song rough worth $1.33 - 2.00. Which means I can share at least 500 songs before I can be prosecuted. Now if everybody shares roughly 500 songs, well shit, that's still a whole lot of songs now, isn't it?
I've never seen anything suck horse wang the way the RIAA does. damn.
They're not blocking them for your own good. They're blocking them to maintain the integrity of their network and to keep their customer base. If you get DoSed, and you know of an ISP that would block that attack, wouldn't you switch. They're doing nothing more than protecting their business, which is what the RIAA is claiming that they're doing. This has nothing to do with your own safety, but rather their ability to do business. If they don't block, somebody else will and suck up all the business. Let's face it. High speed is for downloading, not checking e-mail. These guys provide high-speed, they gotta make their customers happy and allow them to download what they want to stay competitive.
not using windows media player in the first place? Bet that'll fix most of your music problems. Don't like winamp? Try thisSonique Media Player instead.
Yeah. Completely forgot about laptops. Dell makes some decent models too. It'll be nice to load up whatever I want on there. Sony blows. The only reason I'll ever buy one of their products is Soulcalibur 2 (not buying an x-box because of M$, gamecube don't play dvds).
This is fantastic news. Now, I'd imagine that most people who buy a PC from dell probably won't be installing linux anyway. If you know how to install/operate linux, then you're probably building your own PC, for a whole lot cheaper than dell can get you one.
So why am I saying that this is great news? When's the last time win2kpro, xppro, linux, or other OS's where an option on a home PC? Moreover, when's the last time an PC came with just an OS. Who the hell wants AOL, Jukebox, Compaq management station, Jacknutz McGee's antiviral sponge program, and all other kinds of useless crap that they never asked for in the first place on their PC? This is good news for the average Joe schmoo who can finally get a computer and put what they want on it without having to know too much about computers in general.
It's a big step back from M$ dictating what average folk do with their PC's, and I dig it.
This, of course, is what many socio-political theorist in the early 20th century noted as being one of the main problems of capitalism: The separation of the worker and his product. However, they didn't account for the grace of consumerism, which can remedy the malaise they thought capitalism brings about.
If you make/sell donuts, haircuts, etc. . . you're likely to immediately see the results of your work. Someone eats, or looks good, they're pleased with the service, and bing-o! You feel happy, you've done you're job. However, most jobs that give such a instant and tangible feeling of satisfaction, tend not to pay quite as well as the more typical office job. Not too much money to spend on stuff. Some leave these jobs and find more lucrative work, in an office cubicle.
In essence, many of us are trading in this feeling of gratification for more money, which allows us to spend more (new toys make us happy). Eventually, some people get tired of their neat little shit, and want to get more out of their work, so they go back to selling homemade donuts.
I suppose it's really just a matter of which you prefer, a quickly satisfying job, or Soulcalibur 2 'till your eyes bleed (mmmmm, soulcalibur twooooo. ..)
But to do the subject some justice:-) With the US becoming more and more isolationist over time, it's hardly surprising others are reacting in the same way
Hmmm, we don't like what you're doing, so we'll do it too. >:-P
Is anyone else just terribly embarrased everytime our president says something and it makes the international news? Dear god almighty, enough with the nonesense talk, W.
Yes, I was about to say, "Open, as in the anus, which Sony plans to ream repeatedly." You seem to have put it in a somewhat . . . less childish manner.
It's kind of worse than spying. Spying, at least you're being tricked. This is really domineering (spelling?).
"We're going to watch you silly consumers, so you don't do things with our product that we don't want you to do. Why? Because we're bigger and stronger, that's why."
Slashdot Mirror
Katamary is definitely a unique entry in terms of concept. I agree with that. The gameplay mechanic is simply exploring, and becoming efficient at exploring. In that sense, it's really not different than a lot of the violent, or military simulation games that you allude to. I don't really see where's there a lot of depth in the game itself. It's interesting solely because it's unique conceptually, not because there are layers in the game itself. Still, you're right that the differences themselves are worth examing.
I've got only one real argument with this guy's point about why games need to be critiqued. A game should be worthy of critique rather than review. For example, critique of Katamary Damacy might be intellectually stimulating for the writer and fans of Katamary Damacy, but the game itself does nothing that deserves critique. It's the equivolent of critiquing Zoolander.
The point of videogames is almost solely as entertainment, and there's very few games that go beyond that. A game like Shadow of the Colossus would merit critique in opinion because it creates a unique universe, with mythology, and presents classically inspired questions of the nature of heroism. NBA Ballers, on the otherhand, doesn't need any critique.
It seems to me like games, not hardware drive the industry. PS2, while an inferior machine to the Xbox and Gamecube, had the most developers making the most appealing games. I bought a PS2 because I knew it had the "best" games (or the ones that appeal to me the most - don't get the mario/zelda/metroid worship). So unless Sony loses a lot of their exclusives, it seems to me like they should retain most of their market share over the life of the PS3. The other thing is that in a few years, when developers get a hang of writing the PS3, the games should really blow the other systems out of the water, given the specs. If they retain exclusivity, and can hold on long enough, PS3 could make a big jump at that point.
Unfortunately, the culture wars are being waged by politicians looking to agitate voters, make it appear like they're actually helping families. The groups above does not represent any significant portion of the population in so that it would make a difference in either public perception or this culture war. Sure, a few of these people might learn to enjoy video games and become the David Byrne of video games or something. But given the immense financial success of video games over the past generation, it's unlikely video games are in any kind of "danger."
There are gems, and then there is the majority of video games out there. The gems will always exist, and so will the slop. Just like movies and music. The fact that he ignores that highbrow games exist by saying that the mainstream doesn't know about them stinks. He argues that Opera, for example, even if not widely appreciated is considered to be highbrow, whether the opera is good or not. So what he's arguing for then? An arbitrarily assigned category of games that's considered hoity-toity? No, the industry is a juggernaut. We'll occasionally get our unique and wonderful games like Shadow of The Colossus, Myst, Tertis, and so on. Whether they're highbrow or not doesn't so much matter, as long as they're good.
There's another difference between video games and other forms he discusses. Video games are the only product where the consumer is fully integrated into the experience. Control is yielded to the player. This means that video games, at a much higher rate than movies or music must display, and benefit from, technical excellence. That is to say a well crafted game, such as Midnight Club III, Hulk:UD, Black, Gran Turismo 4, God of War, etc . . . can more than make up for their lack of thought-provoking content with their tight controls, innovative gaming concepts, and just sheer fun of PLAYING!
Regardless of what they're touting themselves as, WIRED consistently has some of the most interesting articles, and opinions I've read. And I'm no business person. Obviously, tastes differ. I find their blend of style, tech, and politics to be a pretty entertaining aesthetic. Also factor in that I'm not reading WIRED to be exposed to some kind of shocking revelation, or in depth analysis of the latest IT development. What I want is a casual, all-around magazine. It's a lot more like Martha Stewart Living for the techset, than it is like PC Magazine. It's not trade, it's lifestyle. Which is why I dig it.
I love Wired. There's no shortage of interesting articles in there. Plus, the "Play" section is about as much fun as you can have with consumerism.
I read wired cover to cover every month. It's the only paper publication I read. It's as pretty as it is poignant.
This is what capitalist call the invisible hand. They're not doing it for file-sharers sake, but their own, which happens to aid the file-sharers. It gets done, so who cares why. That's what a capitalist would argue (not me, mind you).
Take Rayman 2, for the DC. The gameplay is sweet as hell, it's a fun game that's challenging but not frustrating. What makes it even better is just how mesmorizing, quirky, and beautiful the graphic for the game are.
I guess what I'm saying is, if the gameplay is good, go ahead, go nuts on the graphics. What could it hurt?
It's not advertising if you don't pay attention to it.
Talk about the family jewels.
I've never seen anything suck horse wang the way the RIAA does. damn.
They're not blocking them for your own good. They're blocking them to maintain the integrity of their network and to keep their customer base. If you get DoSed, and you know of an ISP that would block that attack, wouldn't you switch. They're doing nothing more than protecting their business, which is what the RIAA is claiming that they're doing. This has nothing to do with your own safety, but rather their ability to do business. If they don't block, somebody else will and suck up all the business. Let's face it. High speed is for downloading, not checking e-mail. These guys provide high-speed, they gotta make their customers happy and allow them to download what they want to stay competitive.
not using windows media player in the first place? Bet that'll fix most of your music problems. Don't like winamp? Try thisSonique Media Player instead.
Pirated software is the stuff of life.
So why am I saying that this is great news? When's the last time win2kpro, xppro, linux, or other OS's where an option on a home PC? Moreover, when's the last time an PC came with just an OS. Who the hell wants AOL, Jukebox, Compaq management station, Jacknutz McGee's antiviral sponge program, and all other kinds of useless crap that they never asked for in the first place on their PC? This is good news for the average Joe schmoo who can finally get a computer and put what they want on it without having to know too much about computers in general.
It's a big step back from M$ dictating what average folk do with their PC's, and I dig it.
13 digits? Cool, just like cubs relief pitcher Alfonseca.
Wouldn't that be great?
If you make/sell donuts, haircuts, etc. . . you're likely to immediately see the results of your work. Someone eats, or looks good, they're pleased with the service, and bing-o! You feel happy, you've done you're job. However, most jobs that give such a instant and tangible feeling of satisfaction, tend not to pay quite as well as the more typical office job. Not too much money to spend on stuff. Some leave these jobs and find more lucrative work, in an office cubicle.
In essence, many of us are trading in this feeling of gratification for more money, which allows us to spend more (new toys make us happy). Eventually, some people get tired of their neat little shit, and want to get more out of their work, so they go back to selling homemade donuts.
I suppose it's really just a matter of which you prefer, a quickly satisfying job, or Soulcalibur 2 'till your eyes bleed (mmmmm, soulcalibur twooooo. . .)
The whole tips thing is just embarrasing.
I've always felt the net to be relatively free of interference. Seems to me that one can still find/do pretty much anything on the net.
Yes, I was about to say, "Open, as in the anus, which Sony plans to ream repeatedly." You seem to have put it in a somewhat . . . less childish manner.
"We're going to watch you silly consumers, so you don't do things with our product that we don't want you to do. Why? Because we're bigger and stronger, that's why."