Hype can vary from source to source. If you use something like IGN for your gaming news, you'll see endless hype about the upcoming licensed or big franchise games from companies like EA, Ubisoft, or Nintendo.
If, however, you use alternate sources, you may hear hype of a very different sort. I visit the forums of www.wayoftherodent.com quite often and so learn of very different games. Katamari Damacy is a good example. I heard about that game a loooooong before it was released on this side of the pond. Yet I haven't heard anything about the latest FPS by EA.
Its all a matter of finding sources that follow the types of games you're interested in. Following the big gaming news sites means you'll get hype about the big name games. Finding niche sites means you'll find out about more out-of-the-way games.
Aside from forums, another good place to get your gaming news is IRC. Find a channel that suits your interests (I hang out on #retrogamers and #gaming on EFNet, for example) and just let others paste links to important news.
Its like any type of news gathering, really: your choice of source decides what kind of information you will receive.
Intelligent people tend to be able to quickly learn multiple programs that perform similar tasks in similar ways.
As an aside, an interesting counter to your argument are the school districts in my area - up until about four years ago, Macs were used almost exclusively.
I think the idea is that you should vote for people who will use tax money for things you agree with. If you don't like what the current government is doing, vote them out.
Also, to spin your question around... why should the vast majority of people (well over 70%) residing in California be prevented from paying taxes that support something they think will have significant future benefits?
Yet more proof that 1Up is dominated by 'snes kiddies.' (People who have never played a console before the 16-bit generation.) The oldest game they list is from 1992.
The Star Wars arcade game by Atari was absolutely incredible. It is, by far, the best Star Wars action game ever. Heck, its one of the best action games ever.
They could've also mentioned The Empire Strikes Back on Atari 2600. That was a fun defender-type game on a system that couldn't handle defender that well.
Some of the categories seem stupid, too. Whats the point of an RPG category when there are two RPGs? A fighting category when there's one fighter? A better system would have been to group the games into three categories: Action (including platformers, the action-oriented flight combat games, FPS, fighting, and racing), Simulation (since there are a pile of Star Wars space sims, this deserves a seperate category from action), and Thinking (the RPGs, strategy games, board games, and that godawful Episode 1 adventure game).
And for the record, the best Star Wars game of all time is TIE Fighter. Somehow X-Wing VS TIE Fighter just didn't do it for me. But Atari Star Wars is the a close second. KOTOR1 is in third.
Psychonauts is well worth buying. I, er, 'acquired' the game a few days ago and decided to actually buy it earlier today. You can buy it (semi) direct from the developers as well, via their online store. You can even get it signed.
Amusingly enough, I also own Beyond Good and Evil and both Startropics games. I wish more gamers were like me. Then maybe we wouldn't see so many lame games like Project Snowblind or Wrestlemania 21.
That said, it does get really repetitive. If you snap yourself out of the spell for a bit and realize "This is just a game. My status relative to all these other players is totally irrelevant.", the game gets really boring really fast.
This could be applied to all games, more or less. Just rephrase it "This is just a game. My status is totally meaningless outside of this program on my computer." and it applies to single-player games as well.
The important part is fun. I don't enjoy MMORPGs. But if you enjoy the time you spend playing, go right ahead. Anyone (like me) who thinks MMORPGs feel more like work than anything should go play games of other genres.
You seem to think that Microsoft made a mistake in converting PC gamers over to the Xbox. I'd disagree. Remember that anyone publishing a game for Xbox has to pay Microsoft a royalty, which is not the case with PC games.
To forestall the possible argument that converting PC gamers reduces the sales of Windows, just remember that most people need computers anyway. There's more to computers than just games. I still need one for work and whatnot, though I do not play games on it anymore.
The Xbox did more than just convince some PC developers to start supporting consoles. The Xbox was the final thing necessary to push me over to gaming entirely on consoles. I was absolutely sick of the six month upgrade cycle you need to follow to run the latest PC games, and suddenly there were (nearly) all of the PC games I wanted to play, on a $300 console!
The one thing that worries me about the design of the Xbox 360 is the removal of what you mentioned as being a flaw with the original... the PC hardware. I wonder if we'll see less PC ports on Xbox 360 due to its hardware design. Personally, I quite enjoyed being able to play Morrowind, KOTOR and other ports on a $300 console rather than a $1500 PC. Sure, no port has been perfect, but I'll take a large amount of tradeoffs at that price difference.
But I guess the major thing, more important than the hardware, is the profit versus effort. Even if it takes more effort to port a PC game to completely unrelated console hardware, it will be done if they think there will be a profit. In other words, the sales will drive the amount of PC ports. I can only hope that PC-to-Xbox ports have sold well enough this generation to convince developers (or rather, the suits that direct the developers) to port their in-development titles to the upcoming console.
Re:Alternate Reality, Planetfall, Deus Ex, MUDs
on
For Love of The Game
·
· Score: 1
Did you ever play Stationfall? I think one sequence in that game was much more gut-wrenching than Floyd's death in Planetfall. If you've played it, you know the one I'm talking about. I think its THE most unforgettable moment in a game, ever.
Some games make you sad, some give you joy, some infuriate you. Stationfall is the only game that has ever made me feel guilt.
Amusingly enough, the other most memorable moment for me in a game is nearly the opposite. The finale of Double Dragon. You fight your way to the fortress, enter an arena, and then... the unforgettable title music starts up, and you fight for your life against a horde of enemies and then finally Willy (who is carrying a GUN!). A perfect, adrenaline-pumping finale worthy of an epic martial arts film.
However, you missed a game that managed to out-Zelda, well, Zelda. Beyond Good and Evil. Amazing graphics, an excellent plot, companions that could actually fight and do useful things, and tons of minigames made the game a lot more enjoyable than Wind Waker.
Evil draws near. From beyond the veil of the world you understand. You cannot turn your back on your heritage any longer. From it you will draw strength. All your life you have rejected the ways of your ancestors. The beliefs of your people. But now you must embrace them, if you are to survive.
God Of War is closer to a beat-em-up than anything else. Yes, a very modernized 3D beat-em-up with intricate combos and minigames, but a beat-em-up nonetheless.
Double Dragon is, of course, the genre-defining beat-em-up, though not my favourite in the genre. My pick is River City Ransom.
One thing to notice is that many of the best games don't fit easily into a single genre. The aforementioned River City Ransom is my favourite beat-em-up, but there are enough statistics and moves to learn that one could argue that its an action/rpg. Rez is a rail-shooter that could be also considered a rhythm game, due to the way the music is directly affected by the action. Crazy Taxi is sort of a racing game, but also has elements of Paperboy (which is another difficult-to-classify game) and takes place in a wide-open 3D city (pre-dating GTA's move to 3D). And how exactly would you classify NiGHTS? 3D-Platform-2D-Flight-Racing-Collecting-GodGame?
The Gathering (and really, how hard is it to put the official URL in the summary?) is primarily a demoparty, not a lan party. I'd say that this would better belong in a different section. Its not just about games and it has never been about games!
Instead of just oogling over the gaming competitions, take a look at the compo winners (hell, all of the entries) and see what kind of artwork can be done with computers.
Ignore the games and appreciate the demos. Keep the spirit of the demoscene alive.
The NES had an abnormally long lifespan - surviving (just barely) until the 32-bit era. The Sega Saturn was released in Japan on November 22, 1994, and the Sony Playstation was released in Japan on December 3, 1994.
So did the Super Famicom, actually. Nintendo and Capcom both released some games for the system in 1998.
Other than that, no mainstream console has lasted as long. The NeoGeo doesn't count, as it was a niche product from the beginning.
I doubt that there will be new XBox titles as late as 2007. It wouldn't make commercial sense to support the system that late, when it isn't even the most popular system right now! My money is on seeing the death of the XBox in early-to-mid 2006, depending on when Microsoft's new console is released.
When I worked at a gas station, we used a little bit of intelligence when it came to enforcing the 'no $50 or $100 bills' policy.
The main reason for having that sign is to prevent idiots from wiping out all of our change. Since our till had between $150 and $300 in it usually, paying for $10 of gas with a $100 bill created serious problems when trying to make change for other customers. So, we tended to refuse any bills that would require us to give above $30 in change back. On the other hand, we were happy to accept such large bills for, say, a $96 fill-up.
And all of you seem to forget that employees can be horrible too - I've given two dozen (loose) $2 coins (I'm Canadian) to the morons who swear up and down that the $50 is the only money they have on them. And then come back a week later and do the same thing again. If you do it to the cashiers repeatedly, don't be surprised if they return the favour.
It also helps to be looking for older pins. A Twilight Zone will still cost a couple thousand. Medieval Madness seems to stay at about $5000. But go back 15 or 20 years, and pins are around $500.
I still think you are unnecessarily dismissive of the western style of roleplaying. Such gems of statements as this one really indicate your bias: In fact, it's fairly foolish to refer to Japanese RPGs as a subset, when, they in fact, are responsible for probably 99% of the good titles in that genre.
To be honest, I dislike the majority of Japanese rpgs. Instead of just dismissing them outright (though I do sometimes deride their cliches), I simply ignore them. This keeps the fanboys off my back and prevents many flamewars. I will say that I quite enjoyed Final Fantasy 3 and the Secret of Mana series (aside from Sword of Mana), however, so I don't hate every example of the genre.
I tend to agree that it is rather clunky to refer to RPGs as either Japanese or Western, but I simply cannot think of a better way to seperate them. Yet they must be viewed seperately, as they share few conventions. Art style, story presentation, and battle systems are all distinctly different between the two, yet tend to be similar to othes of the same locale.
It all comes down, perhaps, to the cultural differences. I'm not an expert on Japan, so I cannot state or even theorize why RPGs have evolved into their current form over there.
But I can say that most conventions of western rpgs stem very directly from the pen-and-paper origins of the genre. Most Western RPGs use battle engines that allow freedom of movement, similar to the way pen-and-paper RPGs take distances into account during combat (which in itself stems from the origins of pen-and-paper RPGs in miniatures wargames). Story presentation also stems from the pen-and-paper origins, where one of the main draws was that you can act any way you wish and the dungeon master will alter the story as he sees fit.
Again, I consider the two styles to be different enough that you can rarely directly compare a game from one locality to one from another. Could you imagine doing a compare-and-contrast of Wizardry 8 to Xenosaga, for example?
So do not immediately dismiss Western RPGs as inferior. Ignore them if you like, but do not just crap on them. They are different enough to appeal to different people. If Western RPGs do not appeal to you, fine. I could say the same thing about anime versus 'real movies'. I greatly dislike anime and all of its conventions, but I will not call it inferior simply because it really is different from live-action movies.
You ignored the major difference between western rpgs and jrpgs. Freedom. In the majority of JRPGs (with a few exceptions, such as Legend of Mana or the World of Ruin section in Final Fantasy 3), the player is forced on a very linear path and must visit every location in a specific order and has zero influence on the storyline that unfolds. Many western rpgs don't ignore their pen-and-paper origins, and allow the player to affect the storyline. A friend of mine taking the game design course at USC called it the difference between 'interacting in the story' and 'interacting with the story'.
You want a list of important western RPGs?
Fallout - one of the best examples of this kind of gameplay. You can basically be anything you want to be. Good, evil, violent, pacifist... and there are no sections where you are forced to do something against the nature you have decided upon. Heck, you can even talk your way out of the final battle!
Planescape: Torment - the other example of this. Planescape one-ups Fallout in terms of storyline, however. The game is less focussed on how you behave during gameplay and more how you behave during dialogues, of which there are an absolute ton. Though it is AD&D-based, it has significant differences than other games of that kind, like Baldur's Gate. The most important is the alignment system... you start off as neutral and your alignment changes according to your actions and dialogue choices.
Wizardry 1, 6-8 - these take almost the opposite path of Planescape. Dialogues are few and far between in the early Wizardry games, and its all about the dungeon-crawling gameplay. Wizardry 1 was the primary influence on Phantasy Star. And for you Japanophiles out there, Wizardry is one of the most popular RPG series in Japan. Every single Wizardry game was released in Japan, and indeed re-released more often than they have been in the west!
Though the earlier games are focussed entirely on gameplay, Wizardry 6 to 8 have an equal focus on storyline. There are multiple endings to each of those games, and multiple beginnings to Wizardry 7 and 8 because you can import your party.
Ultima Underworld - its sort of an RPG, so I'm including it. It has many statistics and very deep dialogue options. It is also one of the first first-person games, and one of the greatest. Deus Ex, Arx Fatalis, and the System Shock series all descend from this game.
Ultima 4-7 - nice that you included Ultima 4, but you ignored the other excellent games in the series, each of which brought something new to the table.
Ultima 4, of course, has incredible gameplay that causes you to become a good person as you learn the Virtues. With one of the best dialogue systems I've ever seen, tons of non-linear gameplay, and a plot that remains unique to this day, it is perhaps the most important RPG ever made.
Ultima 5 uses an engine similar to Ultima 4, but adds npc schedules. Something most JRPGs haven't figured out yet. With a day/night cycle, shopkeepers go to bed, guards sleep (which is important if you want to take an important item from the castle), and it gets difficult to see outside.
Ultima 6 removed the tile-based system and overworld map to create an entirely seamless world, something that most JRPGs still lack. Combine that with a storyline that puts an incredible wrinkle in the typical stop-the-invaders plot, and you have yet another excellent rpg.
And then there's Ultima 7, one of the first true virtual worlds. Harvest wheat, pound it into grain, mix with water and bake bread. Or forge a sword. Or rob the mint (though the lack of money in the mint hints that Britannia's economy is about to collapse). Very nearly every object in Ultima 7 could be interacted with, an incredible feat. And JRPGs are still doing the typical check-the-dresser-for-a-health-potion 'interactivity'!
Those are just the games off the top of my head, too. I didn't even mention Wasteland, Lords of Midnight, Dungeons of Daggorath
While I hope to be less confrontational than the grandparent poster, I rather agree with his statements. But instead of simply opposing myself to this 'nonsense', I think it makes more sense for me to tell you exactly what I think is wrong and how I think you could improve.
It is very true that gaming journalism needs to evolve. Or rather, re-evolve. If you've ever read the older magazines, such as ZZap!64 or Your Sinclair, it is painfully clear that gaming journalism has gone downhill. Why? I don't know.
My two examples aren't particularly different than modern magazines. The demographics haven't changed very much. In fact, the average gamer in this day and age is probably older than the average gamer of 1985. It isn't because they were PC magazines. Look at PC Gamer for proof; proof that PC magazines are no more mature in tone than their console brethren.
But I don't know the answers to that. What I do know is that gaming journalism needs to be more mature and intelligent in tone.
But I don't think you guys are the solution. At least, not the complete solution. What are you? In your final paragraph, you claim that you are analysts. Analysts of the way a game makes you feel. This is the whole point of a game in the first place. To make you feel. Elation at victory, satisfaction at solving a puzzle, or pure emotion during a cinematic moment.
Incidentally, did you notice that emotional moments usually occur in pre-scripted events? Something to think about. I can think of a few RPGs and adventure games where you have a direct choice on events and thus feel greater emotion at their outcomes, but those are few and far between. But I digress...
Anyway, gaming reviewers have been analysts of the personal impact of games because that is the whole point we play them. A crew that has the right idea, I think, is Way Of The Rodent. Check out their reviews. They're awfully similar to your articles, yet stunningly different.
So what is the solution? Perhaps a combination of traditional gaming journalism (which has its basis in movie and music magazines) and this 'new games journalism' (which really feels closer to literary criticism than anything). Now that I think about it, the two styles are almost a before-and-after. Traditional gaming journalism, as flawed as it may be right now, attempts to answer the question "Why should I play a given game?" New gaming journalism is a gamer's (not journalist's or reviewer's... there seems to be a distinction) response to this question, phrased as "I played this given game and this is what I felt." You only concentrate on one aspect of that, so you will never be the whole solution. But perhaps you're a partial solution.
One of my major dislikes of current 'new gaming journalism' is that the majority of the writers seem to be Japanophiles, including you. Why have you ignored Western RPGs? A comparison of something like Planescape: Torment to Chrono Trigger would have been very benificial to your article. You talk about Splinter Cell's limitations, yet ignore the even more limiting constraints of Metal Gear Solid. Not being able to move in first-person comes to mind. You ignore many of the fantastic western games that truly allow the gamer to play the game any way he sees fit. Instead of only discussing the limitations of games such as GTA, you should have also taken a look at a game such as Fallout, which truly lets you play it any way you wish.
You really should get a non-Japanophile on staff. Someone who plays western-style games and understands the distinct philosophies that surround them. You guys certainly understand Japanese games, much more than I do at the very least, but your opinions on western games seem very shallow and dismissive.
Perhaps combining your current form with more traditional gaming journalism and reviewing would also improve your magazine. Like I mentioned in one of my earlier paragraphs, it would really provide the full sp
Slashdot Mirror
Hype can vary from source to source. If you use something like IGN for your gaming news, you'll see endless hype about the upcoming licensed or big franchise games from companies like EA, Ubisoft, or Nintendo.
If, however, you use alternate sources, you may hear hype of a very different sort. I visit the forums of www.wayoftherodent.com quite often and so learn of very different games. Katamari Damacy is a good example. I heard about that game a loooooong before it was released on this side of the pond. Yet I haven't heard anything about the latest FPS by EA.
Its all a matter of finding sources that follow the types of games you're interested in. Following the big gaming news sites means you'll get hype about the big name games. Finding niche sites means you'll find out about more out-of-the-way games.
Aside from forums, another good place to get your gaming news is IRC. Find a channel that suits your interests (I hang out on #retrogamers and #gaming on EFNet, for example) and just let others paste links to important news.
Its like any type of news gathering, really: your choice of source decides what kind of information you will receive.
Intelligent people tend to be able to quickly learn multiple programs that perform similar tasks in similar ways.
As an aside, an interesting counter to your argument are the school districts in my area - up until about four years ago, Macs were used almost exclusively.
Guess you've never seen the Apple Pippin. Sorry, but Microsoft beats Apple when it comes to console and controller design.
I think the idea is that you should vote for people who will use tax money for things you agree with. If you don't like what the current government is doing, vote them out.
Also, to spin your question around... why should the vast majority of people (well over 70%) residing in California be prevented from paying taxes that support something they think will have significant future benefits?
Yet more proof that 1Up is dominated by 'snes kiddies.' (People who have never played a console before the 16-bit generation.) The oldest game they list is from 1992.
The Star Wars arcade game by Atari was absolutely incredible. It is, by far, the best Star Wars action game ever. Heck, its one of the best action games ever.
They could've also mentioned The Empire Strikes Back on Atari 2600. That was a fun defender-type game on a system that couldn't handle defender that well.
Some of the categories seem stupid, too. Whats the point of an RPG category when there are two RPGs? A fighting category when there's one fighter? A better system would have been to group the games into three categories: Action (including platformers, the action-oriented flight combat games, FPS, fighting, and racing), Simulation (since there are a pile of Star Wars space sims, this deserves a seperate category from action), and Thinking (the RPGs, strategy games, board games, and that godawful Episode 1 adventure game).
And for the record, the best Star Wars game of all time is TIE Fighter. Somehow X-Wing VS TIE Fighter just didn't do it for me. But Atari Star Wars is the a close second. KOTOR1 is in third.
So, er, what did the first animal eat?
Psychonauts is well worth buying. I, er, 'acquired' the game a few days ago and decided to actually buy it earlier today. You can buy it (semi) direct from the developers as well, via their online store. You can even get it signed.
Amusingly enough, I also own Beyond Good and Evil and both Startropics games. I wish more gamers were like me. Then maybe we wouldn't see so many lame games like Project Snowblind or Wrestlemania 21.
That said, it does get really repetitive. If you snap yourself out of the spell for a bit and realize "This is just a game. My status relative to all these other players is totally irrelevant.", the game gets really boring really fast.
This could be applied to all games, more or less. Just rephrase it "This is just a game. My status is totally meaningless outside of this program on my computer." and it applies to single-player games as well.
The important part is fun. I don't enjoy MMORPGs. But if you enjoy the time you spend playing, go right ahead. Anyone (like me) who thinks MMORPGs feel more like work than anything should go play games of other genres.
You seem to think that Microsoft made a mistake in converting PC gamers over to the Xbox. I'd disagree. Remember that anyone publishing a game for Xbox has to pay Microsoft a royalty, which is not the case with PC games.
To forestall the possible argument that converting PC gamers reduces the sales of Windows, just remember that most people need computers anyway. There's more to computers than just games. I still need one for work and whatnot, though I do not play games on it anymore.
The Xbox did more than just convince some PC developers to start supporting consoles. The Xbox was the final thing necessary to push me over to gaming entirely on consoles. I was absolutely sick of the six month upgrade cycle you need to follow to run the latest PC games, and suddenly there were (nearly) all of the PC games I wanted to play, on a $300 console!
The one thing that worries me about the design of the Xbox 360 is the removal of what you mentioned as being a flaw with the original... the PC hardware. I wonder if we'll see less PC ports on Xbox 360 due to its hardware design. Personally, I quite enjoyed being able to play Morrowind, KOTOR and other ports on a $300 console rather than a $1500 PC. Sure, no port has been perfect, but I'll take a large amount of tradeoffs at that price difference.
But I guess the major thing, more important than the hardware, is the profit versus effort. Even if it takes more effort to port a PC game to completely unrelated console hardware, it will be done if they think there will be a profit. In other words, the sales will drive the amount of PC ports. I can only hope that PC-to-Xbox ports have sold well enough this generation to convince developers (or rather, the suits that direct the developers) to port their in-development titles to the upcoming console.
Did you ever play Stationfall? I think one sequence in that game was much more gut-wrenching than Floyd's death in Planetfall. If you've played it, you know the one I'm talking about. I think its THE most unforgettable moment in a game, ever.
Some games make you sad, some give you joy, some infuriate you. Stationfall is the only game that has ever made me feel guilt.
Amusingly enough, the other most memorable moment for me in a game is nearly the opposite. The finale of Double Dragon. You fight your way to the fortress, enter an arena, and then... the unforgettable title music starts up, and you fight for your life against a horde of enemies and then finally Willy (who is carrying a GUN!). A perfect, adrenaline-pumping finale worthy of an epic martial arts film.
I agree with you about Square Enix.
However, you missed a game that managed to out-Zelda, well, Zelda. Beyond Good and Evil. Amazing graphics, an excellent plot, companions that could actually fight and do useful things, and tons of minigames made the game a lot more enjoyable than Wind Waker.
In ASCII, the binary string reads:
Evil draws near. From beyond the veil of the world you understand. You cannot turn your back on your heritage any longer. From it you will draw strength. All your life you have rejected the ways of your ancestors. The beliefs of your people. But now you must embrace them, if you are to survive.
Mighty interesting, eh?
God Of War is closer to a beat-em-up than anything else. Yes, a very modernized 3D beat-em-up with intricate combos and minigames, but a beat-em-up nonetheless.
Double Dragon is, of course, the genre-defining beat-em-up, though not my favourite in the genre. My pick is River City Ransom.
One thing to notice is that many of the best games don't fit easily into a single genre. The aforementioned River City Ransom is my favourite beat-em-up, but there are enough statistics and moves to learn that one could argue that its an action/rpg. Rez is a rail-shooter that could be also considered a rhythm game, due to the way the music is directly affected by the action. Crazy Taxi is sort of a racing game, but also has elements of Paperboy (which is another difficult-to-classify game) and takes place in a wide-open 3D city (pre-dating GTA's move to 3D). And how exactly would you classify NiGHTS? 3D-Platform-2D-Flight-Racing-Collecting-GodGame?
When other people give your stuff away, it is theft.
That's what the RIAA and crew want you to think. I guess its working.
Downloading and uploading Metallica MP3s (to continue the example from the grandparent) is not theft. It is copyright infringement.
The Gathering (and really, how hard is it to put the official URL in the summary?) is primarily a demoparty, not a lan party. I'd say that this would better belong in a different section. Its not just about games and it has never been about games!
Instead of just oogling over the gaming competitions, take a look at the compo winners (hell, all of the entries) and see what kind of artwork can be done with computers.
Ignore the games and appreciate the demos. Keep the spirit of the demoscene alive.
The NES had an abnormally long lifespan - surviving (just barely) until the 32-bit era. The Sega Saturn was released in Japan on November 22, 1994, and the Sony Playstation was released in Japan on December 3, 1994.
So did the Super Famicom, actually. Nintendo and Capcom both released some games for the system in 1998.
Other than that, no mainstream console has lasted as long. The NeoGeo doesn't count, as it was a niche product from the beginning.
I doubt that there will be new XBox titles as late as 2007. It wouldn't make commercial sense to support the system that late, when it isn't even the most popular system right now! My money is on seeing the death of the XBox in early-to-mid 2006, depending on when Microsoft's new console is released.
I only need one word to describe why I'll never buy Hitachi/IBM again:
Deathstar
When I worked at a gas station, we used a little bit of intelligence when it came to enforcing the 'no $50 or $100 bills' policy.
The main reason for having that sign is to prevent idiots from wiping out all of our change. Since our till had between $150 and $300 in it usually, paying for $10 of gas with a $100 bill created serious problems when trying to make change for other customers. So, we tended to refuse any bills that would require us to give above $30 in change back. On the other hand, we were happy to accept such large bills for, say, a $96 fill-up.
And all of you seem to forget that employees can be horrible too - I've given two dozen (loose) $2 coins (I'm Canadian) to the morons who swear up and down that the $50 is the only money they have on them. And then come back a week later and do the same thing again. If you do it to the cashiers repeatedly, don't be surprised if they return the favour.
...I wonder how much good Donkey Kong Jungle Beat does me?
That'll improve endurance for a certain recreational activity. One which is quite popular with Slashdotters...
Your best bet is probably checking the newsgroup rec.games.pinball, or the Mr Pinball classifieds at http://www.xmission.com/~daina/classified/.
It also helps to be looking for older pins. A Twilight Zone will still cost a couple thousand. Medieval Madness seems to stay at about $5000. But go back 15 or 20 years, and pins are around $500.
You missed a few devices.
I still think you are unnecessarily dismissive of the western style of roleplaying. Such gems of statements as this one really indicate your bias: In fact, it's fairly foolish to refer to Japanese RPGs as a subset, when, they in fact, are responsible for probably 99% of the good titles in that genre.
To be honest, I dislike the majority of Japanese rpgs. Instead of just dismissing them outright (though I do sometimes deride their cliches), I simply ignore them. This keeps the fanboys off my back and prevents many flamewars. I will say that I quite enjoyed Final Fantasy 3 and the Secret of Mana series (aside from Sword of Mana), however, so I don't hate every example of the genre.
I tend to agree that it is rather clunky to refer to RPGs as either Japanese or Western, but I simply cannot think of a better way to seperate them. Yet they must be viewed seperately, as they share few conventions. Art style, story presentation, and battle systems are all distinctly different between the two, yet tend to be similar to othes of the same locale.
It all comes down, perhaps, to the cultural differences. I'm not an expert on Japan, so I cannot state or even theorize why RPGs have evolved into their current form over there.
But I can say that most conventions of western rpgs stem very directly from the pen-and-paper origins of the genre. Most Western RPGs use battle engines that allow freedom of movement, similar to the way pen-and-paper RPGs take distances into account during combat (which in itself stems from the origins of pen-and-paper RPGs in miniatures wargames). Story presentation also stems from the pen-and-paper origins, where one of the main draws was that you can act any way you wish and the dungeon master will alter the story as he sees fit.
Again, I consider the two styles to be different enough that you can rarely directly compare a game from one locality to one from another. Could you imagine doing a compare-and-contrast of Wizardry 8 to Xenosaga, for example?
So do not immediately dismiss Western RPGs as inferior. Ignore them if you like, but do not just crap on them. They are different enough to appeal to different people. If Western RPGs do not appeal to you, fine. I could say the same thing about anime versus 'real movies'. I greatly dislike anime and all of its conventions, but I will not call it inferior simply because it really is different from live-action movies.
You ignored the major difference between western rpgs and jrpgs. Freedom. In the majority of JRPGs (with a few exceptions, such as Legend of Mana or the World of Ruin section in Final Fantasy 3), the player is forced on a very linear path and must visit every location in a specific order and has zero influence on the storyline that unfolds. Many western rpgs don't ignore their pen-and-paper origins, and allow the player to affect the storyline. A friend of mine taking the game design course at USC called it the difference between 'interacting in the story' and 'interacting with the story'.
You want a list of important western RPGs?
Fallout - one of the best examples of this kind of gameplay. You can basically be anything you want to be. Good, evil, violent, pacifist... and there are no sections where you are forced to do something against the nature you have decided upon. Heck, you can even talk your way out of the final battle!
Planescape: Torment - the other example of this. Planescape one-ups Fallout in terms of storyline, however. The game is less focussed on how you behave during gameplay and more how you behave during dialogues, of which there are an absolute ton. Though it is AD&D-based, it has significant differences than other games of that kind, like Baldur's Gate. The most important is the alignment system... you start off as neutral and your alignment changes according to your actions and dialogue choices.
Wizardry 1, 6-8 - these take almost the opposite path of Planescape. Dialogues are few and far between in the early Wizardry games, and its all about the dungeon-crawling gameplay. Wizardry 1 was the primary influence on Phantasy Star. And for you Japanophiles out there, Wizardry is one of the most popular RPG series in Japan. Every single Wizardry game was released in Japan, and indeed re-released more often than they have been in the west!
Though the earlier games are focussed entirely on gameplay, Wizardry 6 to 8 have an equal focus on storyline. There are multiple endings to each of those games, and multiple beginnings to Wizardry 7 and 8 because you can import your party.
Ultima Underworld - its sort of an RPG, so I'm including it. It has many statistics and very deep dialogue options. It is also one of the first first-person games, and one of the greatest. Deus Ex, Arx Fatalis, and the System Shock series all descend from this game.
Ultima 4-7 - nice that you included Ultima 4, but you ignored the other excellent games in the series, each of which brought something new to the table.
Ultima 4, of course, has incredible gameplay that causes you to become a good person as you learn the Virtues. With one of the best dialogue systems I've ever seen, tons of non-linear gameplay, and a plot that remains unique to this day, it is perhaps the most important RPG ever made.
Ultima 5 uses an engine similar to Ultima 4, but adds npc schedules. Something most JRPGs haven't figured out yet. With a day/night cycle, shopkeepers go to bed, guards sleep (which is important if you want to take an important item from the castle), and it gets difficult to see outside.
Ultima 6 removed the tile-based system and overworld map to create an entirely seamless world, something that most JRPGs still lack. Combine that with a storyline that puts an incredible wrinkle in the typical stop-the-invaders plot, and you have yet another excellent rpg.
And then there's Ultima 7, one of the first true virtual worlds. Harvest wheat, pound it into grain, mix with water and bake bread. Or forge a sword. Or rob the mint (though the lack of money in the mint hints that Britannia's economy is about to collapse). Very nearly every object in Ultima 7 could be interacted with, an incredible feat. And JRPGs are still doing the typical check-the-dresser-for-a-health-potion 'interactivity'!
Those are just the games off the top of my head, too. I didn't even mention Wasteland, Lords of Midnight, Dungeons of Daggorath
While I hope to be less confrontational than the grandparent poster, I rather agree with his statements. But instead of simply opposing myself to this 'nonsense', I think it makes more sense for me to tell you exactly what I think is wrong and how I think you could improve.
It is very true that gaming journalism needs to evolve. Or rather, re-evolve. If you've ever read the older magazines, such as ZZap!64 or Your Sinclair, it is painfully clear that gaming journalism has gone downhill. Why? I don't know.
My two examples aren't particularly different than modern magazines. The demographics haven't changed very much. In fact, the average gamer in this day and age is probably older than the average gamer of 1985. It isn't because they were PC magazines. Look at PC Gamer for proof; proof that PC magazines are no more mature in tone than their console brethren.
But I don't know the answers to that. What I do know is that gaming journalism needs to be more mature and intelligent in tone.
But I don't think you guys are the solution. At least, not the complete solution. What are you? In your final paragraph, you claim that you are analysts. Analysts of the way a game makes you feel. This is the whole point of a game in the first place. To make you feel. Elation at victory, satisfaction at solving a puzzle, or pure emotion during a cinematic moment.
Incidentally, did you notice that emotional moments usually occur in pre-scripted events? Something to think about. I can think of a few RPGs and adventure games where you have a direct choice on events and thus feel greater emotion at their outcomes, but those are few and far between. But I digress...
Anyway, gaming reviewers have been analysts of the personal impact of games because that is the whole point we play them. A crew that has the right idea, I think, is Way Of The Rodent. Check out their reviews. They're awfully similar to your articles, yet stunningly different.
So what is the solution? Perhaps a combination of traditional gaming journalism (which has its basis in movie and music magazines) and this 'new games journalism' (which really feels closer to literary criticism than anything). Now that I think about it, the two styles are almost a before-and-after. Traditional gaming journalism, as flawed as it may be right now, attempts to answer the question "Why should I play a given game?" New gaming journalism is a gamer's (not journalist's or reviewer's... there seems to be a distinction) response to this question, phrased as "I played this given game and this is what I felt." You only concentrate on one aspect of that, so you will never be the whole solution. But perhaps you're a partial solution.
One of my major dislikes of current 'new gaming journalism' is that the majority of the writers seem to be Japanophiles, including you. Why have you ignored Western RPGs? A comparison of something like Planescape: Torment to Chrono Trigger would have been very benificial to your article. You talk about Splinter Cell's limitations, yet ignore the even more limiting constraints of Metal Gear Solid. Not being able to move in first-person comes to mind. You ignore many of the fantastic western games that truly allow the gamer to play the game any way he sees fit. Instead of only discussing the limitations of games such as GTA, you should have also taken a look at a game such as Fallout, which truly lets you play it any way you wish.
You really should get a non-Japanophile on staff. Someone who plays western-style games and understands the distinct philosophies that surround them. You guys certainly understand Japanese games, much more than I do at the very least, but your opinions on western games seem very shallow and dismissive.
Perhaps combining your current form with more traditional gaming journalism and reviewing would also improve your magazine. Like I mentioned in one of my earlier paragraphs, it would really provide the full sp