Guild Wars 2: The next step in MMOs?

Moving is serious business, especially when you're playing tetris with your furniture. While not everything is unpacked yet, I didn't expect it to take quite this long to get back to blogging, but life is life. That said, I want to continue the discourse from my last post regarding how cooperation is executed in games. With the advent of Guild Wars 2's first anniversary August 30^th, I thought it would be a great parallel post to focus on.

Gotta love XKCD

I've only been able to be at launch for one other MMO in my life so far and that was Shin Megami Tensei Imagine. While I loved the idea of the game and the ability to persuade demons & youkai to my team and go around Pokemon style in a cyberpunk setting, the MMO never quite picked up like World of Warcraft or Guild Wars has. The lag, lack of players (and friends playing with me) after the first couple of months, and the inability of my laptop to play the game made me give up. I needed friends to really do dungeons, and when you can't even get a party together after a couple of hours because you can't find anyone within your level range and willing, it's rather a detriment. I'd like to go back eventually because I love the whole SMT series, but ultimately I think the MMO failed because of it was an earlier free to play MMO. To get ahead in the game, I would have had to spend money- money I couldn't afford, which was why I was happy to play this MMO.

A great game artistically at the very least, I hope it's something I can go back to someday without having to pay to win/play.

With Guild Wars 2, While I never played the original, I paid my initial $60.00 to buy a physical copy (I'm a bit old fashioned in that aspect I guess, I like being able to hold a game if I can) But having a company at least having an initial bit of money to fund the production of the game plus any money spent into its in game currency called gems in this instance, Guild Wars two takes a middling approach from the traditional monthly subscription fee business model. I for one enjoy this. I don't have to feel guilty that I'm wasting my time not playing because of how much I might pay a month or that I would need to cancel and renew as needed. With this more laid back attitude, I'm more relaxed in playing and thus I think more people are willing to play as the MMO is not bare bones, yet not as grindy for a constant need to keep player count active. I will say though that player count did drop significantly for a few months before they started releasing their monthly and bimonthly Living Story expansions. By these mini expansions coupled with a few game mechanic aspects unique to Guild Wars 2 gamer attendance is relatively stable.

Rawr! I'm a dragon!

The biggest mechanic that I want to mention here is the dynamic event mechanic. A player can find come across a random event that will trigger upon arrival into the area. It can be pretty much anything from collecting to escorting, to killing something really big. You don't have to be there from the start however and any amount of participation (whether alone, or in a zerg group) will net you some amount of reward. With this along with regular heart quests (which take place of regular quests), regional bosses, and three behemoth sized dragons make playing together in a group or as a map easier and much more fun. Luckily, most of these dynamic events and heart quests can be soloed, but for any world events or map event such a the claw of Jormag, Tequatl the sunless, or the Shatterer, dragon champions representing elemental dragons that have been plaguing the land of Tyria with their corrupted minions in tangent with Zhaitan, the games ultimate boss must be played cooperatively. Because of this, Guild Wars 2 rewards accordingly. Along with daily, monthly, and a slew of other achievements, the rewards for most of these feats are rather nice. In addition, a character is never vying for a fair share of the loot; every person is allotted a balanced share of the awards so there isn't the tension of rolling for loot within a party or guild.

Tequatl the Sunless, who is actually going to get beefed up in the next expansion since players have figured out pretty much everything about this guy.

Finally dungeons round out the PvE experience. These are the one other aspect of the game that cannot be soloed. One has a party of up to five people (though it's possible with one or two less) to tackle a dungeon particular to that area. There is incentive too to play more than just the initial time in “story mode” as there are three different branches opened up to the player after story mode in “explorable mode”. Explorable mode has a different boss to fight at the end of each branching route of varying difficulty and add extra fun and variety to an existing dungeon.

Honor of the waves, one of the prettiest dungeons, you're fighting on a giant ice ship trying to save the Kodans, giant polar bear people who have had to flee from Zhaitan, the colossal death dragon that's the boss of the MMO so far.

By having parties team up and creating a bonding experience over something completely new or the slightly familiar, I think Arena Net, the creator of Guild Wars 2 has the right idea in the particular mix they have going for them. There are other aspects which I haven’t mentioned such as World v World, a gargantuan map that pairs server vs server or SpvP which is more scaled down to individual teams of players fighting against each other with the mob Ais aren't enough of a challenge anymore, but that will be for another time. The cooperative focus on parties and spontaneous groupings of players to defeat a threat create a more engaging and familial environment, building upon the MMOs that came before it. Coupled with the biweekly expansions constantly churning out new content, Guild Wars 2 certainly can be considered a evolutionary step up in the MMO theatre.

The events even overlap with other heart quests or even other dynamic events

Cooperation is the Name of the Game

No post last week due to some birthday celebrations. Next week will have no post as well unfortunately due to it being near moving day. This week's post however will be a two partner post. This week's post will focus on Cooperation mechanics in games and how they evolved to reflect gamers for nearly 30 years. The post after will then focus on Guildwars 2 for PC, focusing on the cooperation mechanics in it and how they compare to current MMO's in the market.

With that in mind, it's a great idea to first get acquainted with the onset of playing cooperatively rather than competitively. In Pong, one could play against both the computer or another player. Competition was encouraged and while the game was simplistic, it started a trend as the first successful video game to play against a friend rather than with them. Usually when we think of games, we think of a player by themselves or playing against another player. Back when games were taking off in the 70's the limitations on technology blocked the progress of co-op. Therefore some of the earliest co-op games were beat 'em up/brawler games like Double Dragon or Streets of Rage which came out in the 1980's and culminating popularity with Street Fighter II. Later on when more advanced games came to home consoles, they reached a new level of popularity. Some series like the Tales games were unusual in that they were co-op RPGs. They had the ability to play with up to 4 players which otherwise would have been controlled with AI. Games like Sonic, Donkey Kong Country and co-op sports games continued the trend which continued until the introduction of 3D games like the N64.

Once the N64 came out with 4 ports for controllers, other consoles followed suit including Dreamcast, Xbox and Gamecube. With the new threshold came more delay in co-op as the 64 was limited in capacity at first. Two games even required extra ram which was sold separately a few years later but only had competitive multiplayer in Donkey Kong 64.

It's as fun as a mine cart full of monkeys (and apes of course)

On the PC side however, technology was introduced much faster by nature of the PC itself. This rapid improvement led the PC to become a mainstay for co-op gaming. Doom, release in 1993 led the way for FPS's. While it's competitive deathmatches were most popular, it did support co-op. Diablo the help of Battlenet let characters complete campaign modes together. It wasn't much of a jump then until the early MMOs then started to emerge. MMO gaming changed the whole outset of how many gamers play games today. The ability to actively fix a live game for bugs rather than live with a defect or to interact with players experiences and wishes gave rise to the notion of a connected gaming community. In games like Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter Nights. The most well known MMO of course is World of Warcraft. By partying up to work on completing quests and later on in Dungeons, world bosses and raids, players could collaborate on a much wider scale and could then accomplish feats that simply weren't possible with console games. Antics such as the famous Leeroy Jenkins meme show the consequences of individual's actions on the group are that much more magnified as such acts can have widespread repercussions. Everything is live compared to redoing or restarting a game. Taking the time to plan dungeons runs or strategies to take down a boss are dependent on everyone withing a group.

Yay! They did it!

 Games such as MMOs could also retain a constant presence in cyberspace as it could be played around the world. Some more recent MMOs that are great examples of games that have complex co-op games such as EVE Online (a truly neutral environment), Left for Dead 2 (one of the most popular Steam co-op games) and Guildwars 2, by Arenanet. Guildwars 2 uses WOW's techniques and builds upon them, stressing cooperation between other players on the server by not dividing a set amount of loot when dropped by an enemy. Each player receives their own nominally equal share of the loot. In addition, one gains experience by reviving a fallen player. More will be discussed on this and how such reciprocity affect the culture of Guildwars 2.

The Claw of Jormag, a rather fun battle that can draw players from all over the world map.

The next time you play something, try thinking about the general atmosphere and culture of the game you're playing. How does it compare between competitive games and co-op games. While many competitive games are great ways to release tension and aggression, co-op can can be help in creating community and bonds between players as they much work together to solve a problem which I think can be under appreciated sometimes. Every player has their own preferences of course, but I must encourage others to think on the amount of positive impact they can have as compared to competitive games, especially for younger gamers.

My own toon. If you're on IoJ, maybe you'll see me.

JRPGs Today: The Dissipating Health of Full Blown JRPGs in the Global Theatre

When was the last time you played a proper JRPG? No, I'm not talking about something on your phone, or a ported DS or Vita version of something, I'm referring to one which you can view on that flat screen of yours in all its glory. Such occurrences and getting fewer and fewer as many JRPG's that are localized are  either being ported to handhelds or simply not making their way to the States or the EU at all, forcing lovers of certain series to obtain translations or find non region locked handhelds in order to play the next installment  What happened? Is it simply a money issue that we aren't seeing such games? Was the 90's truly the end of a golden age for non Japanese RPGers?

When I talk about RPGs or Role Playing Games to those that are new to the genre, I'm typically talking about some grand epic that you have a party of characters setting out for in a turn based or RTS based setting. Such games usually get the most bang for your buck if you are speaking simply about content completion, having many games span over 40 hours and more if you intend to play any side quests that are frequently there to flush out the game or incorporate character development. One of the most important aspects of such JRPGs is the bonds that you create with your party. After developing your characters for hours living a story with them, you tend to grow attached to them. When a game can get you caring about a character by the experiences you've shared with them, I'd like to say that makes a great game.

A perfect example of some of the issues I'd like to bring up can be found with the Tales Series. Developed mainly by “Namco Bandai Games (formerly Namco), and primarily developed by its subsidiary, Namco Tales Studio” (wikipedia), It has had the issues of lack of localization, porting to less powerful systems, and overall, a general lack of advertising outside of Japan. While advertising has always been an issue for any non American game in the states, the ability to procure legitimate copies of games or games on their original formats is quite troubling. You can find a list of the games in the series here.

Tales of Symphonia was the first 3d Tales game and the first released on GC in the States. Tales of Phantasia here is the first game of the series and used a side scrolling battle system for their battle mechanics.

With the Tales series, if you had wanted to play Tales of Phantasia, the first game in the series in America, you had to wait til 2006 from 1995 to play it. A difference of 11 years is rather much. And while each game (with a few exceptions) is an independent installment of the next games, the fact that such things are so out of touch with outside markets where there are plenty of fans and potential customers seems to only harm the outlook of future games. In addition, Tales of Phantasia originally started out on the SNES. While in this instance being ported to GBA was an inprovement in systems, the difference of 11 years needs to be taken into account as Nintendo wasn't selling regular Game boys at that point. For Their newest released games which I am currently playing, Tales of Xillia released August 6^th of this month here in the states. In Japan, Tales of Xillia 2 is already out. The original Tales of Xillia being released there in 2011. While a difference of 2 years is much more understandable, especially in regards to laws and the task of translating, my interest is piqued as to why at this point in time if trends of popularity for games such as this have been proven, why not incorporate alternate subtitles upon release of the original game? Money and capital are usually the answer to this, but I would think that with a greater length of time to sell units would be a plus compared to waiting years to possibly release something on a global scale. Namco isn't a small company. 

The first Tales of Xillia

While most people new to RPGs would think of the Final Fantasy series being the first JRPG that they would think about, Square has had different issues to contend with. Unfortunately, while they have been great about porting their games within a understandable time frame and their rendering abilities have only increased, their content, use of rehashing older installments, and general lack of understanding the MMO world have dropped them from being the crown jewel of JRPGs. No I don't think they are dead, but they are floundering. I believe the upper echelon has become stagnated, and that they need to work on new IP. With the renaming of Final Fantasy XIII Versus to Final Fantasy XV after years in development limbo, I think they've lost their focus on trying to make a great game instead focusing on increased cup size and  of  boob jiggling Lightning, their Protagonist for the Fabula Nova Crystallis series.

 B to a C eh? Lemme just use some of my magic here and distract these Malboros from using bad breath. 

 The apparent trend to cater to fan service while leaving story and strong female leads to the wayside tells me that Square is falling prey to following rather than leading in the market. The originality of story line and mechanics were defining factors back in their hey day. Do I think they can rise again to their former greatness? Possibly, but they're going to have to act fast or fail if the next few games keep disappointing us with sub par gameplay. In addition, with there being much more female gamers within the demographics now, ostracizing and focusing on male geared fan service probably isn't the best tactic to use. While I love alternative outfits and JRPGs have always had a penchant for the impossible as far as keeping things in their proper place, it's getting rather ridiculous when the characters starts to lose their sense of self in lieu of some extra boob jiggle.

So while I hope to get as many games as I can legitimately, if I have to I will find a way to play Tales of Destiny here in America, I'd just rather pay Namco properly you know? Unless they really do want to keep such games just for Japanese, but I don't think that's just the case. In the mean time, I better go brush up on my Katakana or look for a translated script...

Logo Progress

No formal post this week, I'm working on a new logo for the site here. Posting will resume this weekend. The topic for this week will be The state of JRPGs in the current market. Are they doomed to be moved to handhelds (which are being ousted by smartphones themselves)? How about the free to play,  or pay to win models? We shall see...

A rough drawing of what's to come.

and... a color version. Now to figure out how to adjust it as a header and all that jazz after adding some swanky font.

The Siren's Song of Gaming: Symphonic Renditions of Video games

I was a weird kid. I grew up without exposure to a lot of popular music of the day, unfortunatly so I was always behind the curve on what my friends were listening to. But because of this, I had always had the fantasy of hearing some of my favorite video games in concert instead of these more well known bands. Never would I have thought years later that I was not alone in such endeavors. Nowadays, you have a plethora of concerts touring around the world. Distant Worlds: Music from Final Fantasy, The Legend of Zelda's Symphony of the Goddesses , and Video Games Live are just a few of the big name concerts to emerge within the last few years. Many of these concerts are affordable to go see as well, selling seats for around $25.00; less than a brand new game in most instances (Steam sales excluded of course). In addition to these professional concerts, numerous tribute bands, remixes, and inspired renditions by fans assault the internet everyday. These showings of appreciation for music emphasis to the casual onlooker the importance of music and musical quality that many developers are now striving to implement in their games as well.

I haven't gotten the chance to see Distant Worlds yet, but it's on my list.

While we are long done with the days of 8-bit music, retro games such as Minecraft make use with the comparable graphics as it fits the nostalgia factor. Many franchises are hitting 20 and 25 years respectively, bringing about an awareness of the progress they’ve made throughout the last two decades in video games. While some companies are getting back to their roots with ports and reboots, others are shooting for more and more realistic graphics using motion capture technology. This new standard equally calls for quality musical composition, of which more and more composers and organizations are collaborating with. Pacific Symphony orchestra in Costa Mesa did the music for Diablo III. Ni No Kuni: Wrath of the White Witch, a Level 5 game for PS3 had the Tokyo Philharmonic Orchestra as its soundtrack for the game (and no wonder, with Studio Ghibli doing the art for it!). Even if Music isn’t your “thing”, you can't deny the power of presence that it evokes on a game. 

Rawr! I'm a dragon!

Another interesting phenomena that has been taking place are the introduction of soundtracks in collector editions or on their own on sites like Amazon or itunes. The notion of being able to listen to your music from a legitimate copy rather than a rip from the game helps to bond fans further with the games they love. And while not everyone loves every games they play, you have to admit, it’s rather fun to drive on the highway blasting some fighting music (Soul Calibur V is a favorite of mine right now) on your way home after a day of work.

Not to mention an artbook, but that will be a post for later when I touch on concept art.

While classic composers like Koji Kondo, Shoji Meguro, or Nobuo Uematsu might not be household names yet, there are nonetheless a current stream of up & coming composers that are redefining the industry with the current pace of technology. Composers such as Jesper Kyd of the Assassin’s Creed series, Gustavo Santaolalla from The Last of Us, (normally a film composer) are taking center stage with their music. This focus on quality music rivals many tent pole films nowadays, so the next time you unwrap a new game (or finish downloading it) give a thought to who is making the music, you might just hear it in a concert near you.

The Evolution of the NPC & Morality Mechanics

I apologize for not posting last week. Real life kept me busy a bit more than I thought and I recently got into Magic the Gathering, so I was off learning about extort & detain mechanics

NPC's are without a doubt essential to gaming. They move the storyline along, provide goals & incentives for the player, help them out via actions, items, or upgrades & add to the overall immersion & ambiance of believably for a game. Having a town with no people is rather an eerie thing in real life, yet when working in the early days of 8 & 16 bit gaming, NPCs solely for ambiance were few & far between to where they are nowadays. Regardless of how such rendering has improved, the fact that they are there & interact with the player are crucial factors that lend to the immersion. 

Celadon City, the early days

In addition to NPC's being more present in current games, that means we have more and more ways to interact with these NPCs. New mechanics such as the paragon/renegade stat in the Mass Effects series (or morality as a stat which effects choices you can make in general), the morality mechanic in many of Bethesda's games & the Fable series, of which then alter your character psychically to reflect their inner self.

 In regards to a good/evil dichotomy which many games started out with when dealing with morality mechanics, many were either be too simplistic in its transparency of choices. By blatantly having you make choices that were extremes of good or bad, it could deter from the game in not giving the player interesting or ethical questions to think about. Such black & white sides often block out deviations of plot scenarios or force the player to make uncharacteristic choices according to the story. In addition, many games that utilize this mechanic do not have the player take responsibility for their actions. If you were to go and kill a village of people in a game, most likely the next town wouldn't react to murder on that scale and treat you as any other traveler. With a more grey scale system, such acts could either be accumulated in points or scale of the act. 

As with the  Mass Effect series, Shepard's morality is based on the paragon/renegade system. While the player is able to complete the storyline with a focus on either paragon or renegade, dialogue is changed or may not be present, and character reactions are different as well. Her physical appearance changes as well, if not to the degree of the Fable series. While the responsibility factor is not as highlighted as other games, this control and customization over the Shepard's personality & reputation help to form a better bond between Character & player through her interaction & decisions with NPCs.

Just because she's evil doesn't mean she can't do nice things now and again.

In regards to the utility of NPCs in current games, the Fable series is a great game that integrates morality & how NPCs can interact with the player as well, which change depending on the morality (and corresponding psychical appearance) of the player. It's a bit of a simulation, so you can eventually get married, have kids, and even rule a kingdom, which only highlights the choices you have to make. 

Yes minion, your  service is appreciated.

Having more interaction also means having more dialogue. We've come a long way from the one liners that never change, even if the protagonist is on the run from the royal guard or some princess gets kidnapped . By engaging and reacting to the players' actions with more realistic and empathetic responses, the NPCs within a game are another major factor in creating an established connection and giving a sense of a game being alive. Having a city with a bustling market & only 5 people in it doesn't lend to its credibility in this day and age. Before, having to create multiple characters for background purposes and aesthetics was cut down heavily in lieu of other mechanics that mattered more or because a developer might have had a deadline to meet. With the advancement of rendering technology, different textures on NPC's, more diverse character skins, gender markers (such as bows or beards) and bigger budgets from larger developers, such parts of games that were previously glazed over are seeing proper treatment as developers realize that these additions can lend to a more polished game.

Looks much more like a market now doesn't it?

In addition to these deeper bonds, some will lead to romantic relationships. Some games, such as Persona 3 & Persona 4, even track more advanced interactions usually seen in dating sims. By maxing out a relationship with a character, the protagonist can become closer to an NPC, which grants better stat bonuses and a greater affinity for the arcana she represents. This affects the ease of capturing certain personas and also unlocks the ultimate persona of that arcana. These added benefits are the driving force in how someone picks how they interact with another character, but the amount of choice required to build that relationship makes the gameplay much more morally ambiguous. 

I went for Yukiko myself, she was such an Oujousan

Having that "market feel" as a character is introduced to a city, the sorrow of seeing a child you helped in an earlier side quest get killed, the excitement to joining a guild and learning all about them & their secrets are all much more believable now that these choices must be made. And while imagination will always trump an  a a game with a certain visual setting, much like a movie of a book can change how you see the book from then on, the refinement of NPCs via their relationships with a character as well as their reaction to a player's choices all lend to the sustaining of believably and enjoyment of a game.

The Mad (and not so Mad) Scientist

WORLD DOMINATION! A UTOPIA! FREE ICE CREAM FOR EVERYONE! All could be valid excuses for the myriad mad scientists within videogames. From the outset, these power & control hungry men & women of science have been standard villains. Many of these villains also frame our term of "classic" videogames and are the foundation for popular games today. My question here is why do they make such great villains to begin with & how madness (in relation to villains) affects the story & player.

One of the great things about Mad scientists is that they truly believe what they are doing (whether it be destroy the world or to turn everyone into robots), so they can have noble intentions that for whatever reason goes askew. Sometimes, the plan is benign as well & it's simply an accident that almost dooms the world that makes the scientist "mad" for simply attempting something. These lovable characters like Lucca are on the low end of the scale. Usually they might be protagonists or friends of the protagonists and they try to right the wrongs they've created. Sometimes you get such characters as villains as they either change their mind & go along with such mistakes or they attempt to solve the problem but makes matters worse.

A little crazy, but a loyal friend to the group. She even sets up an orphanage later on! 

In other instances though, the scientist has either lost touch with their faith in humanity, their empathy, or are seeking revenge that they believe to be retribution for the grievances done to them. Dr. Neo Cortex would be a great example of this. He's seeking revenge in the form of world domination by creating a chimera like army with animals. After creating & rejecting Crash the protagonist (who is linked greatly with Cortex as he wouldn't have such a persona otherwise), he turns his attention on eliminating Crash, who keeps foiling him. 

This Blood feud only escalates every games, making the mad scientist who can try world domination with another invention ( and thus letting the same antagonist live throughout the games) be a great commodity for sequels. By creating a bond with the same villain, it saves on the developers end for roughly the type of relationship between characters and give a sense of familiarity between games. This works for most games as long as they are not too similar in plot and/or mechanics and can even lead to creating a villain gone friend trope by having them both band together against a common enemy. 

Pew Pew guns are cool don't you know?

For many games that only intend to due a limited number of sequels or one shot games (usually, but not in all cases of course) the disconnect of the mad scientist to the rest of the world & the reasons why a "crazy" person has been put in charge of something that can change or destroy the world are possible is the main focus. Ideologies such as alturism, hubris, or playing god; issues that are fragile to begin with that much more dangerous when they become warped or rationalized to the point that everything is going to hell. The brilliant denizens of Rapture from the Bioshock series are great examples of this, not realizing that even though they think they are above scrubbing the toilets, that such jobs are integral functions to society. Andrew Ryan & Sofia Lamb are on opposite ends of schools of thought, but both beliefs are taken out of control, igniting a civil war that turned the city into a dystopia. 

You look errr lovely...dear, that glowing around the eyes really suits you

At other times, the scientist needs to lose their empathy specifically to gain the ability to save the world. I was talking to someone earlier about how someone pressing a button to bomb a city that has a plague for making zombies is in a tight position if they are trying to be simply a humanist. Do you go the altruistic route & knowingly kill people to potentially save the world, or do you quarantine the place with the potential of not being able to stop the plague/virus in the hope that it won't get out of hand? I had previously thought that both would be just as bad because you were unable to save everyone, so you should try & quarantine them, based on the fact that you don't have facts, you have assumptions (that you can't find another way, or a cure, or that this plague won't spread regardless of killing the city). Having the issue be based on logic however, the altruistic choice of killing the city "for the greater good" seems the best of a worst situation scenario. But that also means that you just commited murder as well (you monster!). Or are you? By doing such a thing, you could be labled as "mad" & "monstrous" couldn't you? You lose your reputation & agency at that point unless you continue to act out to keep your power, which could then verify people of such "insanity on your part". And then you have an "us against them" mentality, or a pesky hero trying to stop you from destroying more cities, or coming your way to put an end to you. You see where this is going?

Ultimately such a fine line of labeling is largely based on ethics & perceptions then, which is so interesting to see such a humanized (and thus identifiable) story from a different angle. Some games use this to their advantage having you pick sides that both seem to be "right" to them. In the area of the mad scientist trope however, the "other side" is usually explained as it sets the rules and goals that the protagonist must reside within to resolve an issue or meet a goal.

Cave Johnson here!

In games where mad scientists themselves but the effects they have on a game play a more important role such as the people of Chronopolis in Chrono Trigger & Chrono Cross the Portal series their failures are seen as hamartia of the human race and warnings to future generations. These lasting effects are usually big plot points in a story and play an active role in how a game plays. Because the Scientist trope is all about inventing & imagination, these instances become great little experiments to further explore human nature with things we are believing we can invent (or at least want to invent) & the ramifications of each. And while things may go terribly wrong in the games, the issues being dealt with are all great things to think about as our world is constantly upgrading itself.

Our Infatuation with Zombies & the Apocalypse

If you're still with me here, I'd like to thank you for continuing to read my post. I don't want to turn people off to my posting, but by writing about the world, games, or pretty much anything, certain topics need to be addressed even if they're uncomfortable. On that note, I'd like to bring to your attention the sheer mass of zombie everything that has been popular for the past fifty years or so. Zombie movies, games, tabletops, the "what weapon would you use in the event of a zombie apocalypse" quizzes on your Facebook feeds, etc. I always make a joke about learning how to use my bow "in the event of a zombie apocalypse" because they are quieter than guns and I can make my own ammo. But! why is it exactly that we love retelling such a modern myth, especially in video games and what does that say about our culture and society in general? Why are games such an efficient medium to convey the how of such an event?

The psychological issues alone are worth discussing. After getting through it, having to live in it, and in Ellie's case not knowing any different are something to think about. How would you behave?

To put it simply, it's a release of tension and "play acting" of our society in the event that something like this does happen. We might have vastly different fears such as terrorism, our growing lack of privacy as the whole Snowden issue is currently playing out, or the issue of the income gap making the rich richer and the poor poorer. Whatever the reasons in real life, giving a dehumanized (and thus, killable thing) to push all our anger and fear at, our society can release tension and then begin to rationalize what all this means for our future. As I will come back to when I post later on about robots & androids, there's this uncanny valley that we all subconsciously categorizes humanlike beings into which you can find here. This includes dolls, puppets, furries (if you have to ask...), androids (I would suggest watching Bladerunner or reading Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep  and  Isaac Asimov's laws of robotics to get an idea of the separation issues between humans and androids), and dead people aka zombies. It's a good indicator in video games in general if a game is "good" graphics wise in some cases if this valley can be suspended somewhat or why something that might be a little too realistic might be a bad thing.

While this identification can be a good thing sometimes like the case of a transformer or Astro Boy, it generally leaves a sense of unease, especially in the case of constant interaction and the issues that arise. Think about what Data from Star Trek The Next Generation had to deal with and how he changed through the seasons to become more human to bridge this gap in the valley.

In the case of zombies, and specifically video games zombies, their humanness has been doubly distanced to the point that they become walking shooting targets of which many of us had a great time rekilling in classic arcade games like the House of the Dead series, and Resident Evil/Biohazard series, and a multitude of others. In many cases, they are the basic unit of a game, being noob fodder for players in tutorial levels and whatnot. I'm currently playing the last of us and the rendering and mechanics for the Clickers in the game is a nice deviation from the traditional zombie.

How the zombie is infected or killed and reraised is sometimes of consequence, but for all intensive purposes mechanics wise, you're meant to exterminate them or put them to rest. By coming back to a problem we'd thought we'd dealt with already, the comparison of having to "fix" one's past mistakes or "ghosts" lends me to ask the question of how comfortable people are with responsibility on a micro and macro level. Most of us know that dealing with an issue at the advent of an issue rather than running away is usually best, but sometimes we aren't prepared to take on these monsters and have to regroup. But, knowing that such things are lurking out there, we can never feel quite safe until we can clear a room and search every nook and cranny, especially if we're trying to flee from beings like Slenderman (or problems that we know we can't get away from and have no ability to halt or stop from coming to get you.)

Oh hell no...

When you think about it then, each tweak on the classic undead monster trying to nom your brains out could be a particular issue that we as a society might be going through at that time. This of course includes not just zombies but aliens as well, which though similar has some different undertones. Facing a zombies specifically means that at one point this thing was a rational human being that for the most part had the same issues as we the players do. They probably don't want to eat you if they knew what they were doing and retained their humanity, which is why the runners in The Last of Us and some "smarter" zombies are that much more pitiable to kill, because they are trying to resist but unable to, and that we would be in the same position if not for some random reason or skill that has prevented us being being killed/eaten yet.

This lack of agency and control is a fear all of us have when dealing with these situations. Putting it all in the context of an apocalypse only amplifies such fears further. That there might be millions of these things across the globe if not billions? That's a frightening thought indeed. The next time you're playing a survival horror game (think resiliency in spite of _____ ) ponder exactly why and how you're suppose to deal with your situation. Can there be a cure? Is it something that must be exterminated in order for humanity to start anew? And how do these particular issues reflect what is going on right now in the world. 

The Feminism Discussion

So I admit it: I'm (gasp!) a feminist. And yes coming out to that on the internet is still seen as something dirty to many eyes, especially in the gaming community. Many think extremes of trying to think that women are superior to men and that we all want to usurp the men around us by validating our womanly agendas. So stop that right now, because that isn't what it's about at all. You've been misled and uninformed for probably good reason.

When I talk about feminism (and while this relates to games more it applies to everything else as well) I'm talking about equality and balance here. Everyone is good at doing different things and that goes right into gaming. Different genres and scenarios/tropes appeal to different men & women and that's just peachy. I like RPG's because they're story driven and I enjoy searching every nook and cranny for that elusive sidequest or weapon that I missed, or jonesing after that 100% map completion. That's something I attribute to me being more "girly". It also seems to me why JRPG's in particular are a dying breed in America at least. Many developers gear FPS's to guys for catering a sense of masculinity. In manipulation on both ends to generate sales and Many companies unfortunately are in denial about the demographic of their gamers nowadays in addition to the buying power that women have in regards to their game purchases. At the very least, you have mothers and siblings and daughters wanting in on what their other male family members enjoy to such a degree, but what I've heard o' too often is that a strong female protagonist doesn't sell. That I will say right now is bullshit.

This is according to the ESA

In the world of MMO's a fair amount of male gamers pick female toons because they would rather look at a female than a male while playing. I was mistaken for a dude awhile back when I mentioned my fiance could help out in Guild Wars 2 when suddenly a party member ditched our pickup group in the Molten Facility dungeon. I was amused rather than taken aback because I tend to play females as I identify with them more as well as that they don't make very many good looking male toons to play. That this is a normal thing to do begs the question then of why. While it used to be vastly skewed that you'd find the token gamer girl within a group that is not the case. There are plenty of girls around but feel they have to hide their gender as they'll be treated differently in addition to having to fend off being hit on or harassed. I've heard of women modulating their voice in vent because some gamers wouldn't play with them if there was a female in the group. Feeling like they are intruding on a male haven, they are either belittled (oh isn't she a gem trying to kill that zombie with a shot gun!) to insulted in ability based solely on gender (regardless of verified game time or experience) to being sexually harassed (creepy pm's or blatant come on in chat) it is still very much a man's world in the gaming community. 

I do not blame men as a demographic though, since that would be just as bad. Generalizing and being prejudiced blindly would be reciprocating the exact opposite of what should be done. It's a little bit of everyone fault here but I frankly don't care about handing out blame. What I want is a discussion and progress towards making games a more inviting environment for men, women, gays, trans, etc. It doesn't matter what's under the pants, it's the mind, mentality, and skills that matter. If you can pick off a Boomer with the grace and agility of a proper sniper- that's what I care about. If you can place first in Mario Kart because you know how to control Luigi like a boss- that's what I care about.

I'll probably get some backlash for even discussing this issue which is probably a zombie horse by now nonetheless needs to be restated again and again. The adverse retaliation to Anita Sarkeesian http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian is unacceptable. Death threats, sexual insults, etc etc are the type of crap women (and men) have to deal with when simply addressing the issue and trying to bring change. It's 2013 and yet we still (And women are sometimes the worst of this) have a 50's mentality of roles of men and women when video games didn't even exist back then.Just take a Bechdel test and see how things have degraded some of the more recent releases for instance. Everyone has a mother (Sorry Batman), a female friend, a sister that I sure as hell they wouldn't want treated as such, yet might be unknowingly perpetuating such a mindset. What I'm asking of everyone is to be conscious of such things and choose hard and carefully of your actions, whether it's something you type in local, something you say on vent, or an action you do in a game.Anita's show Female Frequency is a good review of some of the most common issues with the condition in gaming. While a bit slanted, from my personal opinion that facts themselves can't really be refuted as while it is hard to prove why exactly, such things are happening.

 http://www.feministfrequency.com/

Granted, this type of armor would kill you alot quicker too...

And while this is one aspect of a "solution" if you will, what essentially it boils down to is that there are too few female developers making some of these decisions. STEM majors are vastly geared towards men and boys from an early part of our childhoods. The competitive environment deters many women from completing degrees or (if they do) from getting a job within gaming companies in key positions http://www.igda.org/sites/default/files/IGDA_QualityOfLife_WhitePaper.pdf. 

The same problems in game permeate to the workplace unfortunately. Brosie the Riveter is one of the newest "switches" - that of putting male characers is sexualized clothing and posing usually retained for their female counterparts http://www.wired.com/underwire/2013/05/hawken-brosie-meteor-k2/. A wake up call like this is an extreme case of stating the obvious, but it seemed to have made a dent in their boss's awareness in the office environment. Granted this particular issue has been recently brought some awareness and has been taken into account with a fair number of top games. Hilde from Soul Caliber, Shepard from Mass Effect, some of the Skyrim armor, and others have made great attempts at making more realistic (at at least practical) armor that protects better than a metal bikini. Not to say they aren't beautiful in their outfits, but more of how that number is going to deflect a sword blow.

Finally I'd like to conclude with my uncertainly over being considered a bitch, and why that is either a good & bad thing. A contronym meaning that it means it's opposites makes using the term in context that much more important. Bitch can be good in meaning taking charge and not letting anyone push you around but also being a stubborn or strong female (She's/He's such a little bitch right?). If directed at a man, implies that being female is something of a lesser quality blah blah. The fact, it's ambiguous and contradictory use makes it an overpowering negatively skewed word. You should both want to be a bitch but not be a bitch simultaneously (If that's not misleading...). Frankly I'd rather you use some varying length of adjectival descriptors and be a bit more witty rather than calling me out as a one syllable insult I'd respect you a bit more. 

E3 and the Safety of Sequels

Now that E3 has come & gone, I'd like to point out the staggering proportion of sequels to new IP (or intellectual property for the layman). On IGN's site of games announced which you can find here http://www.ign.com/wikis/e3/Big_Games_at_E3_2013 quite a fair share of sequels or dated games make the list. This phenomena both helps and hinders developers and gamers alike for multiple reasons.

For some game series, multiple games are needed as they are planned. This happens rarely I have found in earlier years, but seems to be more and more common with the larger developers that can afford to do so. Most games (especially in earlier years) never had their sequels planned out. If it made money and the gamers clamored for more, it happened. Games like Chrono Trigger and Chrono Cross are great examples here. Chrono Cross is considered an Indirect sequel so as not to rehash the story & mechanics and to let people enjoy the story regardless if the had played Trigger before. This was during the highlight of the Square days as well, so Cross was able to come out rather quickly compared to some other sequels.

Undoubtedly one of the best game series I have ever played (Their soundtracks are top notch as well if you haven't heard them).

Another issue is simply the piggybacking method, notably used in any Madden game or any other sport game that revolves around the actual IRL comparison of players and their game counterparts. Essentially the same game every year but with changed rosters and better graphics, games like Madden ride on the popularity of outside factors and rehash them,selves year after year for a nice and steady tribute of $60.00+ from their fans that happen to own consoles. I have nothing against this from a fan's point of view (though I have never owned one of these sports game I understand the fan dynamic of wanting to support something, whether it be a team, a fashion, or some other hobby). But the issue is that such games lack substance and tend to bled into the notion of "what games are" in the public's eye. This can be detrimental if one of these games are the few bits of exposure that someone gets from what a video game "is" to them simply because there is so much more out there than the pixel count of Brett Farve's muscles. 

I think I see a pattern here...

The other issue of piggybacking in respect to more traditional games can be highlighted by series such as Shadow Hearts. The story essentially takes place over two games, yet we have a 3rd installment entitled Shadow Hearts: From the Brave New World. It is set in the same universe much like Chrono Cross is to Chrono Trigger, yet is playing on the previous popularity and fame of the previous two games. 

Unfortunately I haven't had the chance to play it, but from my understanding I feel that I need to play it simply because it is related to that universe rather than on its own merit. This is exactly what has stopped me from playing it so far even though I do mean to play it at some point. I've even heard that the game was subpar in comparison (though I leave my own judgement for later on that) yet I know I will still play it regardless. Such a conscious compulsion however doesn't make many gamers happy as it gives a "have to" rather than "want to" mentality. 

This type of piggybacking goes hand in hand with the simple notion that sequels are SAFE. The first one made money, so why shouldn't the second albeit repackaged a little differently work the same? It's why we see so many movies doing the same (Does Hangover really need a 2nd and 3rd installment? No. It was a standalone movie that the producers wanted more from). Games that have no business having added storyline then can get considerably ruined from having sequels in this way. Characters that had developed empathy and character suddenly forget all they have learned in the first game and must again slay some evil that eerily seems like their last encounter. Such sequels invalidate the worth of the first games as such and it pulls at my heart to see them treated so. One of the games getting redone is FFX-2. All that Yuna did and sacrificed so you could dress her Rikku & Paine in different outfits as she looks for Tidus seems rather coarse towards what they all went through in the original FFX http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Dressphere. I like that it's getting the HD treatment along with FFX at least, but X-2 is not the game that FFX is. Others may disagree with this specifically and that's ok, but you cannot deny that this rough treatment has been done to other great game franchises.

You rock it ladies

Obviously then as mentioned in my last post you have the issue of games not fitting into any sequential order or subverting themsleves in between published game timelines. Games such as these cannot be grouped together with other direct sequels because they are not trying to be direct sequels. Lots of racing games or series that have established universes if not characters that a player are tied to fit this bill. These type of sequels usually don't have the same numbering system as well tending to have subheadings. Take the Need for Speed series. EA has produced a plethora of these, most having their subheading and sometimes even a second one to denote the particular version that it's compatible on. With the onset of mobile and tablet devices taking wing over the past few years each installment has more freedom to focus on a particular feature or mechanic. Better graphics and new choices in cars is considered standard for them much like the sports games as they are dependent on cars in real life, yet they are not trying to be as realistic as a football player in that sense (Play some Gran Turismo instead if you want that) which grants them a much greater amount of freedom. As long as it continues to make money then, such a model seems like the way to go.

This doesn't usually work for more story driven games however. It's why I believe Biohazard/Resident Evil 6 flopped so hard. Games trying to reboot themselves need to take much greater care when trying to recreate themselves as they have an established fan base and particular character personalities that they need to work around. Games like Prince of Persia were able to do this fantastically as they were able to create a character for the Prince, while Games Like Fallout focused on the player and the choices that the player makes themselves to liven up the series. Unfortunately, if a company deviates too much from a pre established character however, such reboots are usually left in the dust for not being able to bridge such a connection between the player and the original game. 

From this...

To this.