RIP :(

NO! Leslie Nielsen's dead! Surely you can't be serious, Mr Newsman!

"I am serious, and don't call me Shirley"

Today is a sad day :(

You Can't Stop Me Celebrating Yuletide!

Oh great. It's started already. How I love this.

Yet again the moaning blinkered right wing traditionalists of this country are banging on about banning celebrations of Christmas, replacing it with DIRTY EVIL Muslim festivals that we must all celebrate on pain of death.

Or, in reality, the Daily Mail twisted something Birmingham City Council did in 1997 to meet their own agenda and a bunch of uneducated morons believed it to be true without actually researching what they'd read and to this day we continue to get these people crawling out from under their rocks to rant incoherently about "those bloody foreigners and those PC dogooders ruining everything for everyone"

In 1997, Birmingham decided to hold a huge winter celebration called Winterval, as a way to encourage people into the newly refurbished city centre. It was an attempt to extend the festive season to cover pretty much every festival they possibly could. It started in mid-October with the coming of Diwali and ended in January with the Chinese New Year, and covered Hanukkah, Eid, Ramadan, Bonfire Night, Halloween and lord knows what else in between. At the centre of the whole thing, providing a central backbone, was a whole WEALTH of celebrations connected with a little-known holiday called Christmas. The traditional CHRISTMAS Carol Concert happened, the Frankfurt CHRISTMAS Market lined the streets, and nativity scenes and signs wishing people a MERY CHRISTMAS were everywhere.

And yet apparently the whole thing was designed to ban Christmas from being celebrated because it "offends minorities" *facepalm*

I don't know about you, but a 3-4 month celebration bringing together a whole bunch of festivals and filling a cold winter High Street with light and colour and good food and joy sounds pretty awesome to me. OK, I'm not Christian, but Xmas is still a fantastic time of year, so why not throw in a few more festivals to make it just that little bit more fantastic? After all, the Christians certainly didn't mind founding the holiday on a whole bunch of Pagan traditions from Yuletide (which are the only bits of Xmas I celebrate to be honest), and for some odd reason the site of a Menorah around this time of year doesn't get the right wing's knickers in a twist (in fact, I've seen them crop up on Advent Calendars, which is just weird), so why are Ramadan and Diwali such an issue?

Xmas should be a time of giving, a time of charity and love and peace for all. So why all this fuss about other cultures being allowed to celebrate their festivals? Not particularly peaceful, loving thinking, is it? I say let those of other cultures join in Xmas, and similarly I imagine they'll be more than happy to return the favour with their holidays. It's the very spirit of Xmas in action, coming together and having a huge fucking party for 3 months.

So no, no one is being banned from celebrating Xmas, so don't destroy anyone else's chances to celebrate their holidays this time of year either. If you still have a problem with it, then you sit in your house and be a Scrooge and leave the rest of us to have a great holiday season. Everyone's happy then. Well, except you, but that was your own choice.

As we creep into December, I would like to take the opportunity to say that no matter what you believe, no matter what you celebrate at this time of year, I hope you have a great time. Let's show these short-sighted fools what this time of year is all about!

Disasteriffic!

Today I was stuck driving behind an SVU with the registration "YRP".

















(May not be the exact model, this is merely to illustrate my point)

For the entire drive, I was thinking one thing.

Christ, the Gullwings have gone downmarket, haven't they?

For those who don't get what I'm on about, PLAY MOAR FINAL FANTASY X-2!

Yes, I'm sad. Am I sad? I am sad. Sad am I. See, Yoda's sad too. Yes. Sorry, bit of a strange mood. You love it ;)

That's all I have for now. Sorry!

Dogger, Rising slowly

Can someone please tell me why iPod menus insist on lagging like crazy? Oh, Apple, you and your silly ideas of style over usefulness! When will you learn? (Having said that, I do love my iPod and wouldn't change it for another mp3 player just...because)

Anyway, thought I'd write another blog into the ether of the interwebs in hopes of entertaining a few passing strangers. I've said this before, but I will say it again. I aim to write in this daily from now on. I mean it, guys! Don't try and stop me!

Today I was reading a new instruction book that I bought. I buy many instruction books about all sorts of topics with the good intentions of saying "THIS will make me awesome! I'll buy this book on car maintenance, become a mechanic and then become filthy stinking rich! YEAH!"

Then I abandon the book and play some video games or watch Lost. By the way, I'm currently watching ALL of Lost, right from the beginning. I've made it to Season 4 but I haven't seen any of Seasons 5 or 6. So if anyone DARES tell me what happens in those seasons, expect to wake up dead tomorrow. Yes, you heard me.

Anyway, yes. Tangents. I buy instruction books and then forget about them shortly afterwards. Recently I bought a book called The Remixer's Bible: Build Better Beats, because I'd like to think I have the capabilities of being a fantastic music producer despite having about as much understanding of music theory as a polar bear understands how to make a cocktail.

In this book, there was a section on sampling and the legal wrangles that occur, namely "sample anything copyrighted and the RIAA will kill your entire family, but if you're British the BPI will just tut at you disapprovingly then call the hounds on you". Not quite in those words, but you get the idea. Amusingly, it mentioned that Chrissie Hynde gave Garbage full permission to her ass once, which naturally will get real person fanfic writers writing Chrissie Hynde x Shirley Manson erotica, but whatever.

The important thing is, it got me thinking about copyright law. No rants, it actually raised an interesting question in my mind.

Is the Shipping Forecast under copyright?

The Shipping Forecast, for those who don't know, is the ultimate chillout broadcast. Basically, BBC Radio 4, at some crazy hour of the morning, broadcast the sound of a very posh man/woman reading out place names in a very soothing rhythm in order to help people get to sleep. Also, apparently it helps sailors not die horribly in a storm or something, but that's not important. The important thing is that it's so soothing and amazing that it's been sampled and referenced by a range of musicians from Blur to Kate Bush to....that other guy. Yeah. His version was the best.

But my point is, if you sampled it, would you have to get permission from Auntie Beeb? Or because it's issued by The Maritime And Coastguard Agency (they're a government department involved in helping sailors not die in a horrible boating accident or something, but that's not important), does this make it publicly-owned? I know that government issued propaganda educational material is generally public domain, so why not The Shipping Forecast?

Does anyone know? Seriously, this is important. My life depends on knowing the answer to this. Help me!

In other news, I'm unofficially participating in NaNoWriMo, although in my case it'd be InternaNoWriMo, but that's complicating things. I aim to have the first draft of a novel by 30th November. I shall hopefully report my findings here. Which should be fun.

EXCITEMENT!

So, for those who care, the Labour leadership battle has ended today and the Labour party now has a new leader! HURRAY! Who is it? Well, it's Milliband...either Dave or Ed, can't remember which because, let's face it, the "hotly contested leadership battle between Dave Milliband and his brother Ed" is entirely reminiscent of that Futurama episode with the election, fought out between identical clones Jack Johnson and John Jackson.














Personally, I was rooting for their lesser known brother Steve, although some people call him "Maurice" (WOO WOOOOO)

(Why yes, this entire blog entry was just so I could make that terrible joke. What of it?)

No, seriously, I have nothing else to say on the matter. I just had to get that out of my system :p

Do you belEEEEEEve in love after love?

Two topics have cropped up in the news today, two topics I could argue for hours on, but instead I'm going to argue it in this blog. That's good enough, right?

Anyway, yeah, so first of all, The X Factor has proven its contribution to music yet again...sorry, proven its contribution to THE DOWNFALL of pop music, got my lines wrong (even though this is written), by apparently using autotune in the auditions of the show. Why? I don't know. At the end of the day, I thought auditions were about seeing whether or not someone was capable of singing. If you're going to tweak everyone's voices so they're all singing "in key", then surely what's the point? Now, OK, they didn't use autotune live on the night, but the fact they've used it for the TV audience is still baffling. The reasons for it are especially great.

"There were too many microphones in the studio and we were just cleaning up the audio for broadcast" (seriously, what?)
"Everyone expects autotune these days, no one wants to hear a bum note"
"We were delivering the most entertaining experience possible"

These are paraphrased, but close enough to what I read. First of, too many microphones? No, just no. I've done a media degree, part of which involved working with microphones and I can safely say MICROPHONES DO NOT WORK THAT WAY. In fact, if you've got lots of recordings of a single show, then that's even less of an excuse to use autotune, since if the audio messes up on one recording, you can simply edit in the audio from a better recording. SIMPLE! Secondly, no one NOTICES bum notes here and there. Sure, if someone's singing wildly off-key throughout the song, then everyone will notice, but the average member of public won't pick up a single flat note in an otherwise flawless line delivery. However, EVERYONE will notice if the singer suddenly sounds like a robot for no apparent reason. And as for delivering the most entertaining experience possible, how about not dragging the inflated Blackpool Pier "talent" show over 5 bloody months and actually make it about proper music not just Simon Cowell's half-arsed shiny balladery? But no, Cowell needs another house in the Algarve, we can't possibly do that.

My issue with all of this isn't shock at what X Factor did because, well, I've been a staunch opponent of the show since its inception (Cowell's comments about "giving these talented young people a chance to live their dream" ring hollow when you realise Joe Pasquale or whatever his name was hasn't released a single thing since his ill-fated Xmas single got beaten to no. 1 by Rage Against The Machine), my issue is the fact that autotune is an abomination.

No really, autotune is what's caused modern day pop music to sound hollow and lifeless (well, that and the fact that anybody can apparently get a record deal these days, talent or no talent). Autotune, as an effect, can sound good, but only when it's used an effect. As my title alludes to, Cher used it years ago for her song Believe. However, she had every intention of making her voice sound robotic and inhuman as an effect. Other examples of this, such as Ellen McLain having her voice tweaked in the end song for Portal (because she was playing an AI) or any synthpop band in the past ten years (because, well, if all the instruments are electronic, why not do the same to the voices and say we're all robots?). In those uses, autotune becomes no more offensive an effect than echo or reverb or phasing.

But when it's used incessantly on every single pop record, to the point where everyone sounds like an android, it becomes less of a fun effect and more a sinister ploy of the media to homogenous everyone and everything, also notable in the fact than many of these singers look identical too, with the makeup and the hair and the exact same designer label clothing. Hell, sometimes it makes me wonder if all of this is autotune at all and is in fact a secret invasion of some super advanced android race, slowly assimilating everyone into its cult of personality. Either way, it's terrifying, and we should all be prepared for some kind of uprising. I'm prepared, why aren't you?

But seriously, my main issue with the use of autotune is the fact that raw, untweaked vocal performances sound BETTER, imperfections and all. I'd rather hear a singer occasionally slip on the odd note and glide from word to word than hear a jarring set of twisting electronic noises vaguely resembling a human voice. If I wanted that, I'd listen to Daft Punk (and usually do). An untweaked voice sounds human, it has soul and emotion, it's warmer. And remember, this is coming from someone who loves electronic music in addition to non-electronic music. I also like the two combined, but tweaking someone's voice so it sounds "perfect" just seems...wrong...

Is it just me who feels this way? I hope not, because I'd hate to be the only sane man left on earth!

Also, I said there were two points. What's the other? Medal Of Honour. Our government is now urging a ban on the game because it's "anti-British" and "a disgrace". Why?

Because apparently, this EVIL game is ABOUT the Taliban and it TEACHES CHILDREN to kill BRITISH soldiers and it says THIS IS OK.

Please note that from what I've been reading in gaming circles, those bits in caps are actually all innaccurate. Well, maybe not the evil bit, it is being published by EA after all :p

First of all, it's not about the Taliban at all. You merely can play as the Taliban in multiplayer. This is not new. Many games with online multiplayer will have players on the "good" side and the "bad" side. That's how it works. I fully agree with the EA spokesperson that when we were kids, we all played games like cops and robbers where someone had to play as the bad guy. In fact, other games in the series allowed you to play as the Nazis during World War II, who, if my historical knowledge has taught me anything, were just as bad as, if not worse than, the Taliban. And yet it's fine to play as one but not the other. Oh, well that makes sense. Oh wait, no it doesn't.

And laughably, the government argument is that many people have died at the hands of the Taliban. Let's not tell them about the many atrocities committed by the US government in regards to Iraq, that might make their minds explode from the logical fallacies they're presenting. Also, again, Nazis in previous games. How many innocent people died in the Holocaust again? Yeah, but that's OK, right?

Secondly, there are apparently no British troops in this game, only American, because, remember, the American are always the Big Damn Heroes coming to save the day. Remember, Team America was a documentary. With puppets. Unless Liam Fox meant it was anti-British because the British aren't in it, but judging by his level of research, I don't think so somehow. Next point.

Oh yes, the "murder simulator" argument again. Let me tell you something. Playing a driving game is considerably less complicated than driving a real car. I own a copy of the original Gran Turismo, yet I learned how to drive with an actual instructor. Because, you know, games aren't simulators. And Microsoft Flight Simulator isn't a game, it's a simulator. There is a line. Please note the dividing line.

Similarly, playing a first person shooter isn't going to instantly make you into a trained killer, because a DualShock/360 controller/Wiimote is nothing like an actual gun. I've played many games with guns in them, yet if you were to hand me an actual gun, I wouldn't know what to do with it. All I know is what I've heard in films, and from what I've read elsewhere, all that information is slightly less than accurate. Hell, I can't even name an actual model of gun, and I get confused over what the actual definition of a "rifle" is. And yet I've been "trained" by video games to fire guns. Apparently.

Here, let MC Lars explain:

"Beating Call Of Duty doesn't mean your aim is good
Beating Wii Golf doesn't make you Tiger Woods
Playing Apples To Apples doesn't make you a farmer
Watching UFC won't make you any harder
Friends on Myspace won't make you a musician
Beating Operation doesn't make you a physician
Watching CSI doesn't make you a detective
Playing Mario Paint doesn't mean you have perspective
Beating Gears Of War doesn't make you Winston Churchill
Quoting 90s sitcoms doesn't make you Steve Urkel
Grand Theft Auto doesn't make you a player
Playing Sim City doesn't make you a mayor
Beating Rock Band doesn't mean you rock
Beating Tony Hawk doesn't make you Tony Hawk
American Idol won't make you a star
Beating Guitar Hero doesn't mean you play guitar"

Get it yet?

By the logic of the "murder simulator" argument, my PS3 collection would mean that I'm a trained assassin, capable of shooting lightning out of my hands, playing guitar, drums and turntables like a pro, manipulating strange mythical creatures to do my bidding in the Netherworld, successfully capturing ghosts, performing parkour, opening portals, running at the speed of sound, taking out a helicopter with a grenade launcher, discovering the Hammer Of Thor and using it to cause great damage to Atlantean gods and leading a great war effort with a ragtag band of anime-esque commandos.

However, can I do any of those things? No. But the instruments would be fun. And maybe the parkour too.

In other words, again, GAMES ARE NOT SIMULATORS. Very few people are going to play as the Taliban in MOH's online multiplayer and immediately start shouting "DEATH TO THE WEST!" and strapping C4 to themselves. And if they do, then they're probably already terror suspects anyway. Also, please note the "children" bit cropping up again. This game will be rated 18, ie. ILLEGAL to sell to minors. Figure it out.

But never mind. I won't be playing it. I'm too busy trying to get into Stonehenge at night so I can go into the land of faeries as a result of currently playing Folklore on the PS3. See ya!

Men Playing With Their Balls

Apparently England lost the football. All I can say is...

THANK FUCK FOR THAT!

Maybe now our over-saturated news outlets can start reporting real news for a change.

Ha! Only kidding. It'll be more "the government is shit and we're all doomed" coupled with "BINGE-DRINKING YOUTHS!". When our press shows genuine disappointment that England fans in South Africa didn't cause a single bit of violence, it tells you something. Mind you, it seems the violence has moved to Wimbledon. Yes, Wimbledon. The tennis. Really.

Regardless, I'm still happy we're out of the World Cup, because if anything annoys me every four years, it's this. OMG WORLD CUP WE GOTTA WIN THIS YEAR CUZ WE DID IN 1966 SO WE CAN DO IT AGAIN YEAH! And of course if, like me, you couldn't give a flying toss about a bunch of "millionaires ruining a lawn" [Charlie Brooker, 2010], you get labelled as "unpatriotic" while the troglodytes all go off and binge drink and punch each other in the face in the name of the UK, therefore showing the world we're all a bunch of boozed-up, mindless thugs, which of course we're not, that's just a small minority. And they call ME unpatriotic, despite the fact that I acknowledge that England gave the world The Beatles and Shakespeare, and has two of the world's greatest educational institutions in the form of Oxford and Cambridge. THAT'S something to be proud of. Having 11 blokes who are good at kicking a bit of leather about isn't. Sure, it's nice to win competitions, but can we PLEASE, in the name of all that is good and holy, stop acting like this bloody tournament is a life or death situation.

And I don't want to see first thing in the morning when I turn on the news, a bunch of people in the studio, in the players' dressing rooms, on the plane the players are returning on, wherever, analysing every single frame of the match in minute detail just to figure out where they went wrong. I've got your reason right here. The England team? A bunch of stuck-up, overpaid, whiny prima donnas who care more about who they're shagging instead of the job they're paid to. Everyone's blaming the manager, the referee, the linesman, the bloke in the crowd second row from the left with the vuvuzela, but no one is blaming the players, ie. the guys actually playing the game they lost. It's bizarre.

Of course, it's no big deal to me whether we win or lose, and I especially don't care how. All I would like is for people to calm down and shush about the whole affair. The media, and a number of ordinary people too, need to accept that not everyone cares about this bloody game and would rather not hear about it every five seconds. Especially now we've lost, so there's no reason to bang on about it now. Thank you.

Race For The DAREing Knights Of Suburbia

Why I'm simultaneously sad and happy I'm not at Glastonbury:

On the Main Stage tonight, the Gorillaz are playing, on the Other Stage, The Flaming Lips (aka The Best Band I've Ever Seen)

Tomorrow, the Main Stage sees Muse, while the Other Stage sees the Pet Shop Boys.

Why I'm sad:
- All these bands are AWESOME and I would give anything to see them all (again in the Lips' case)

Why I'm happy:
- I'm glad I don't have to make the IMPOSSIBLE decision between Gorillaz and Flaming Lips and then the decision between Muse and the Pet Shop Boys. I can't choose! That's mean!

Not that I have to worry, I'm not there, but seriously, Glastonbury, did you do that deliberately just to make me feel so emotionally conflicted? D:

Of Retrospectively Changed Opinions and The Third Dimension

Never let it be said that what I say is gospel, that I never say things that I later regret and/or change my mind about. I quickly skimmed through some of my older posts and noticed some of my initial opinions on Final Fantasy 13, in which I called it my third favourite FF game, that I didn't get the criticism, that, well, it wasn't shit.

Then more recently I played through Valkyria Chronicles (easily the greatest PS3 RPG, seriously putting FF13 to shame) and then moved onto Final Fantasy 6, which I've yet to finish even though I've had the game since 2001.

Final Fantasy 13 is now my third LEAST favourite in the series, with VI now taking the third spot behind X-2 and IX. Why? Oh, let me count the ways.

The huge variety of what you get to do in FF6 is quite surprising. I've been swept along with this game, never knowing what comes next. The battles are great fun, allowing a huge degree of party customisation and tactical freedom. The plot is interesting, and I actually care about the characters even though they're silly-looking 16-bit sprites.

So why has my opinion on FF13 changed so drastically just by playing this number in the series? Simple. FF6 reminded me of what the series used to be like. It's got everything I liked about IX (which is pretty much deliberate, since IX took its cue from the "old skool" FFs such as VI), and how drastically things changed for FF13.

This is coupled with the fact that I gave up on the side quests in XIII. Simple fact is, the game is mostly pointless busywork. Every single sidequest is "kill something". The problem is, the battle system, which had so much promise, gets tiresome by the end of the game due to the simple fact that you have to second guess the developers ALL THE TIME. There is no room for error, there is no tactical freedom, and in fact in some instances the game is just plain malicious, causing enemies to do more damage than you can deal with to present a sort of fake difficulty. I'm not adverse to a challenge, but by the end, FF13 stopped feeling like a challenge and more like a massive "fuck you" until you throw up your hands and have to resort to a guide because everything you try fails within seconds despite being fully "levelled".

Case in point, in VI, I recently encountered the FlameEater boss, which I struggled against. I didn't realise how much damage it was capable of. A bit of levelling (not much, just enough to get some Ice 2 spells) and some equipment management sorted it. It was still a challenge, but a challenge I enjoyed. My reaction to beating it was "YES! I did it!" rather than most of the final enemies in FF13, which prompted the reaction "Thank fuck that's over!" more often that not. The final boss was an exercise in futility until I read the "correct" way of doing things.

The problem is, RPGs shouldn't have "correct" ways to beat enemies. There should be multiple ways to beat enemies, allowing a player's own personal play style to take charge. And this is why I brought up Valkyria Chronicles, which I played immediately afterwards. Whenever I got stuck, particularly early on when I wasn't used to the battle system, I'd look up guides. No two guides were ever alike. Everybody had their own solution to a problem. Indeed, the Batomys fight, which was very difficult, was won by me combining two people's solutions into a single new one. I got an A rank for it too. Much of that game felt like a real challenge, and I felt a sense of pride whenever I won a battle. I got addicted to it just as much for the gameplay as I did the plot (which, really, was the only thing keeping me going in FF13). The game was a joy from start to finish, simply because I wasn't trying to second guess Sega, the game allowed for a variety of different tactics. Unlike FF13, it seems.

So, essentially, my final verdict for FF13, at long last, is that while it looks impressive and the plot was highly enjoyable (except the ending, which was impressive on an initial viewing, but then later on I realised that...wait, it didn't actually make any sense...), the game itself was lacking something. I can only hope that Versus corrects some of the mistakes.

But on another note, it was E3 recently, as noted in my criticism of Microsoft's demonstration, which I still stick by. And now they've announced it'll cost twice as much as the Wii to buy a 360 with Kinect despite it playing largely the same games, I'm even more convinced it'll flop. Again, let me reiterate. The casual gaming market are more concerned about the price of the fun little novelty toy than the processing power. Your average casual gamer will see the Wii, with its sports sim, fitness trainer and dancing games for £100, and then see the 360 with its sports sim, fitness trainer and dancing games (and virtual pet, but let's remember, the DS has one of those too) for £200, and they'll pick the cheaper option. THAT'S HOW THE CASUAL MARKET WORKS. If Microsoft think otherwise, then they are seriously deluded. (On a similar "Microsoft are deluded" note, I've heard that the redesigned "Slim" 360 hasn't removed the overheating problems of the original model. Despite, you know, having 5 years to fix that problem and all...)

Because of this, I expected to see Sony pull a similar stunt with Move. Boy, was I surprised. Sony seem to have got the basic idea that releasing casual games for the Wii market will be a failure, especially as their console already costs £100 more as it is. So what did they reveal? There'll be a Killzone game with Move controls, there'll be an RPG that sounds very similar to Okami on the Wii, and, BEST OF ALL, Heroes On The Move, an action/adventure/platformer starring Ratchet & Clank, Jak & Daxter and Sly Cooper. If this game alone requires Move, then Sony just found a way for me to buy their overpriced Wiimote. No seriously. And there's suggestion that there may be other well loved Sony characters included too (come on, Sackboy!).

Speaking of Sackboy, LittleBigPlanet 2 is also on its way, which I never thought would happen. But apparently the creation part's been expanded significantly, and the original game will still be supported with the new one. Essentially they're tying the new game in with the existing community, rather than splitting it down the middle. This is a fantastic idea, and now I'm looking forward to more adventures with the little burlap chappies.

Another sequel to a current gen game I now class as one of my all time favourites is also on its way. Gabe Newell, a long-time critic of the PS3, stepped on stage and announced that not only is Portal 2 coming to the PS3 (despite earlier suggestions that it wouldn't be), but it's also getting all the bells and whistles of the Steam version, while the 360 will not. I don't know what's made him change his tune, but giving us what will apparently be "the best console version" of Portal 2 makes me very happy indeed. I can forgive his previous comments just for that.

Oh, and Gran Turismo 5 finally has a release date. Who saw that one coming? :p

There's a whole bunch of 3D stuff too but I'll get to that in a bit.

Nintendo revealed a few awesome things too. More Zelda, more Metroid, more Kirby, more Donkey Kong Country, this is all good. They also achieved the impossible and are apparently working on Goldeneye for the Wii too. I doubt Rare are involved though.

Problem was, Nintendo seemed to dominate much of their news with information on the 3DS, a new version of the DS that allows glasses-free 3D graphics. And this is where the rant comes in.

Am I the only person in the world who doesn't feel that 3D is the FUTURE OF EVERYTHING? Because, I don't know about you, but if something was a fad in the 50s and then came back inexplicably, I don't call that the future, I call that a recurring fad. In other words, Sony can push their £2000 3D TVs and full 3D PS3 games, while Nintendo promote their 3DS to all hell, but I'm still NOT INTERESTED.

Why should I pay £2000 for a TV that's blurrier and more desaturated than my existing TV, which was cheaper? Why should I have to wear stupid glasses to enjoy something that I currently can enjoy just by wearing my slightly less stupid prescription glasses? And that's a point, will I be able to wear those stupid glasses over the ones I already have to wear? Because, you know, it's not a REVOLUTION to me if all I see is various layers of blurry indistinct shapes. Sure, these arguments don't apply to the 3DS, but I'm still not thrilled by it. Remember the Virtual Boy? Yeah, exactly.

3D in general is a gimmick, simple as that. It doesn't improve anything. Motion controls, as awkward as they are, at least affect gameplay, but 3D just...doesn't. It can't. It can layer things and make some things appear closer than others, but at the end of the day, it's just a fancy optical illusion. HD looks better anyway (and indeed, a number of movie directors have already said they won't touch 3D with a ten-foot bargepole due to the existence of HD), and is probably just as good at immersing you in the game/film.

I genuinely can't think of a reason why we need 3D. HD made sense, as image quality has constantly been improving. But 3D is a fancy parlour trick they're charging you £2000 for. And until someone can provide a legitimate reason as to why it's so important ("immersion" doesn't count - my HDTV and surround sound do that just fine), I seriously hope the fad dies out before too long, as I'm already sick of hearing about it. And that goes for both films and games.

I Like To Move It, Move It

So Microsoft have finally revealed their Project Natal to the world, now with a name (Kinect) and a list of games.

Oddly enough, when they first announced this thing, my reaction (as a non-360 owner) was simply "that's nice, but it's a bit like the EyeToy, isn't it?" Lo and behold, what have we got? An EyeToy with Wii games. OMG THE WORLD OF GAMING HAS CHANGED FOREVER!!!!!!!!

Or not. No, you see, despite Microsoft trying desperately for the past year to convince us that in the future, we'll all be flinging ourselves around the room to control a game, all I ever saw was a knockoff. A potentially expensive failure of a knockoff at that. And now it's been officially unveiled? Well, I was right. Apart from the "failure" bit, we've yet to see that.

Now, for those who think I'm some pathetic Sony fanboy who'll just ridicule anything Microsoft do, let me explain. The reason I believe Kinect will fail (and, on that note, PS Move too) is simply because the Wii already exists. Let me give you some insight into the difference between the casual and "hardcore" gaming markets.

The hardcore gaming market tends to be more swayed by industry press, websites, forums, a multitude of sources for their desired gaming purchases. A hardcore gamer will evaluate every reason why they should buy a console. Sometimes they will own more than one, because they saw games on each they felt the need to play (and this is why the 360 is the only current console I've got no interest in - none of the games stand out to me). The core market is very likely to spend hours playing a game, immersing themselves in that world. However, more core gamers, after the Wii's now poor showing of games (well, until Metroid Other M and that new Zelda come out most likely), are bored of motion controls and therefore are likely to pass Kinect by, since the core market is Microsoft's main audience.

But, I hear you cry, it's not for the core gamers, it's for the casual market! Well yes, but let me tell you about the casual market. They're exactly that. Casual. They're not the sort of people who'll play games for hours on end. They're also less likely to spend hours browsing through gaming news to find something fun to play. They're likely to pick up games that are deemed "simple" and "pointless" by the core market. But the casual market is influenced by another factor. Money.

The Wii succeeded because it positioned itself as a fun family console, something you can gather round and make yourself look like a fool in the company of others. But it was also cheap. It's consistently been the cheapest console of this generation. Its lack of HD graphics, technical pizzazz or anything else has kept costs down, and the casual market (as well as many of the core market) bought it.

In the past 4 years since the Wii's release, its price, like all consoles, has dropped. It's now roughly £100. By contrast, the 360 is already £20 more. Not a huge difference, but in today's economic climate, the casual market will pay attention to that. And of course, that's before Kinect's separate cost is thrown into the mix, which is estimated at another £100 on top of the console.

In short, the casual gaming market, when faced with the Wii and Kinect, will buy the Wii, simply for the price tag. And that's before you realise that pretty much everyone and his dog now has a Wii, so the casual market's basically going "why should I get a Kinect? I already have a Wii, it's exactly the same, right?"

Yes, MS may argue the subtle differences between the two, but at the end of the day, the casual market they're aiming at won't notice or care. Again, they'll see similar looking games and the cheaper Wii price tag and go there. It's not rocket science, it's basic understanding of consumer tastes.

And oh, the games. Yeah, this won't help its case. We have a sports game and a fitness simulator. Hm, sounds oddly familiar to me, where've I heard of games like that before? On top of that, we have a dance sim (while the godawful sounding Just Dance has already been riding in the charts for months for, oh that's right, the Wii) and a virtual pet (didn't Sony already release exactly that only a few months back in the form of the EyePet?). There's also Sonic Riders (which was always shit) but without a controller. OOH I'M SO THRILLED!

Again, I expect to repeat the same argument with the PS Move's lineup announcement, since that's largely the same thing too. It's just further proof that motion controls really do have little to nothing left to offer the gaming world. The Wii ran out of ideas, and it doesn't seem like Microsoft or Sony are going to provide any new ones. Hopefully this is the beginning of the end for awkward fiddly motion controls and back to a focus on much more precise control pads.

And all the friends lay down the flowers

Stuart Cable has recently been found dead in his home. He was only 40 years old.

As a fan of Stereophonics, this is genuinely sad news for me, as part of the appeal of the band for me originally was their highly entertaining drummer Stuart Cable. OK, he was no longer in the band, replaced by Jose Espanol or whatever his name is (can never remember) but it's still very sad to hear he's died. He had a sizeable fanbase, both through people who liked the band and those who listened to his radio show in more recent years, so I imagine they, like me, are all shocked by this news.

RIP Mr Cable, wherever you may now be floating.

Why Britain Shouldn't Host The Olympics (From A Purely Design-Based Perspective)

Now, I know that normally I tend to discuss video games, but they're just a form of media I tend to have a lot of exposure to, and I originally wanted to cover a wider ground than just the world of polygons and joypads. And now is that time.

The London 2012 Olympic mascots have been revealed. Now, I don't really give a shit about the Olympics in any way, but I appreciate good design, and it's been all over the news, so why not pay attention to it? I wonder if the mascots are any good. I mean we could do with something to offset this...thing...

D: GET IT AWAY!

So yeah, I wonder what we've got in store. Let's see....

Oh good god what are THOSE THINGS?! D:

Yes, it seems that the Olympic committee's mountain of crack they'd been smoking when they designed the logo still has some surplus supplies because, seriously, what the hell?

The last few Olympic games (apparently) have had mascots related to the country it's been held in. So Beijing had, amongst others, a panda. Makes sense. Sydney had, amongst others, an echidna.

No, not him.

So naturally, everyone was expecting something, you know, British. A bulldog, perhaps. A kingfisher was proposed. Or the good old lion idea (even though lions were never British, but they're associated with us anyway, so let's run with it).

But no, we get what are two cycloptic blobs which seem to be the creation of some mental patient suffering terrible fever dreams. The official "story" behind them doesn't help this image.

Quoted from the BBC website, and not edited in the slightest:
"In author Morpurgo's vision, the pair begin life as two drops of steel from a factory in Bolton, taken home by a retiring worker who fashions characters out of the metal for his grandchildren.

They appear to have a single central eye, explained as a camera lens, through which they'll see the world, and respond to it."

WHAT?!

Great, in times of recession with a major sporting event that many people are concerned will financially cripple the country even more, let's remind people of the ailing steel industry up north that many people USED to have jobs in but don't anymore! Let's make something "cute" out of that! HURRAY! Also, just WHAT? So they're weird steel blobs turned into...something by some former steelworker looking to fill his time? OK...right...

I'm so glad I won't be following the event anyway, but as a former media/arts student, I have a tendency to warm to good graphic design, especially when it comes to characters. This just isn't it. I fail to see how this will appeal to children, it makes no sense in terms of national identity (sticking taxi lights on their head hardly counts) and they just generally don't catch the eye in any way, except maybe to go "what the hell are they?" I'm also mildly offended that for the duration of the contest, the rest of the world will be looking at those things as a representation of us as a country. I mean, what are they? Aliens? Robots? What?

I don't know, maybe I'm just a massive cynic. Maybe it's because some other people's suggestions of artists who could have done the job are artists I greatly admire and would actually like to see designs from (such as Nick Park, who would do a phenomenal job, and who's already proven he can create characters people of all ages love). But this? This is just...weird. I know we have a reputation for being eccentric, but this is just plain awful.

Next up - the stadium designs. A giant donut with electrified effigies of Jimmy Saville sticking out the side. I can see it now...

Head In The Clouds

Some things are inevitable in this life. Night follows day, water makes you wet, politicians lie, and the fanboys will always be foaming at the mouth for a FF7 remake.

Now, rumours of FF7's potential remake have been floating around for a while. Partially because Square, for a PS3 tech demo, no more, no less, released a remake of the intro movie made with PS3 tech. That's all it was. A tech demo. But they figured they'd use the famous FF7 intro probably because they knew it would attract attention, or just to go "compare this to the original and look how far our tech's come!" Whatever the reason for choosing that particular scene, the point still stands. It was a tech demo, no more a game than Sony's rubber duck demo for the PS2 (which I oddly remember reading about several years ago, I don't know why).

Of course, this planted a seed in the minds of everyone who just CAN'T FUCKING GET OVER FF7. Yes, it was a good game, yes, it's a classic, yes, it was amazing at the time and not a lot compared to it. But here's the fun bit, that was 1997, we're now in 2010. It's 13 years on, and people are still proclaiming it to be the best game ever despite the fact that gaming's moved on and become more sophisticated, both graphically and interactively. FF7, when not viewed through nostalgia goggles, is a flawed mess in comparison to everything that followed it. Sure, it laid the groundwork, but it's SERIOUSLY showing its age now. Just like many PS1 games are. Especially PS1 games released in 1997.

FFXIII's release brought on a ton of people who complained that it was nothing like VII and therefore shit, despite the fact that VIII, IX, X, XI and XII were all completely different to VII too. Just like VII was different to I, II, III, IV, V and VI. That's what the series does. It changes, it evolves. It tells different stories in different universes with different characters and different gameplay mechanics. There's a few links here and there (chocobos, Cid, moogle, cactuars, summons, etc.) but ultimately they're all meant to be different. XIII was different to VII. GOOD. Because I'd hope 13 years on and 6 games later that we'd be seeing something new and different and not just a rehash of an old game.

But yes, my point. These people who can't get over FF7 have now convinced themselves there will be a remake. Even when the head of Square said "no, it won't happen, it would take forever to meet all these demands", the fanboys turned round and said "that's a lie, stop sitting on it, because you know as well as we do that it'll be made" WHAT.

Seriously, if the head of the company says no to your precious little fan project, then accept it won't happen and move on. But of course, they can't get over the game and throw a tantrum until the head of Square finally turns round and says "fine, we'll look into it! GOD! SHUT UP!" like he's done recently.

Well, his actual words were more like "we're aware of the demand, so we've decided we'll look into it", but you know he was thinking my previous statement.

Of course, the fun part of this was that he included the words "we're looking into potential platforms" or something similar, suggesting it won't be the big HD PS3/360 remake everyone's demanding, and that it will in fact be a PSP patch-up job. Seriously, I would bet money on this.

Either way, as much as the fanboys are clamouring and wanking themselves senseless over the mere idea of a remake, you know that if one did happen, they'd hate it. Why? BECAUSE THAT'S HOW FICKLE FF FANBOYS ARE! If it's not exactly like the original, they'll bitch that Square changed it too much and that this is further proof that the Enix merger has killed Squaresoft and they'll NEVER EVER buy a Final Fantasy game EVER again (until the next one comes out). And if it's exactly the same with pretty graphics? They'll bitch that they spent £40 on the same game a second time.

But I have to ask. Do we NEED a FF7 remake? How is it necessary to remake it? If the original is as "perfect" as the fanboys make it out to be, then surely remaking it would be pointless, since the original game can't be improved upon (which would be the point of remaking it). Do you really want to play the same game all over again, but with prettier graphics? Do you really want to fork out full price for a game you already own just because it looks slightly different? Because if that's the case, then why did you bitch so much about how Square apparently spent more time on graphics in FF13 than anything else? Because I see that as slightly stupid. "FF13 looked pretty, but that was all, graphics aren't important" is a stupid complaint next to "I would buy FF7 a second time if it looked like FF13 crossed with Advent Children" because then it's saying you DO care about graphics. Seriously, that argument hurts my head trying to unravel.

The next argument is that it would introduce a newer generation of gamers to FF7 who never played the original back in the day. This argument falls apart when you realise that FF7's been re-released for PSN. No, it has. Go look. It's £7 to play the original game, when a remake would be £40-50 for the same game with an Advent Children filter. Hmmm...tough choice.

This of course is the argument I'll accept for remakes/re-releases of FFs 1-6, since the releases of those were all over the place, and didn't have nearly the kind of audience as FF7 and beyond have enjoyed, not to mention the fact that Europe never had any of them and America missed out on 2, 3 and 5, so releasing those again makes sense, especially since FF7 took off like it did. I have FF6 for the PS1 and FF3 for the DS, therefore proving I welcome those remakes (largely because, being in the PAL territories, they're the only way I can play them).

This one I don't. It sold like hotcakes, it was a MASSIVE hit in Japan, America AND Europe. Because it's constantly referred back to as the game that really put the series on the map, most people who came to the series later have gone back and tracked it down, and now it's release on PSN (which was heavily advertised all over the network) means that there are very few people who HAVEN'T played the game. So therefore the idea of remaking the game for those who haven't is laughable.

The only argument for a remake I can just about accept is that they could rejig the plot a little to better accomodate the events of Advent Children and the Compilation, ie. referring back to events mentioned in the prequels, and foreshadowing events in AC. This I can see as a feasible reason, but then again, if that's the best you can come up with, then really, I'm not convinced.

I don't want a FF7 remake to be honest. If one comes out, it's very unlikely I'll buy it, because I have the original, so if I want to play it again, I'll just play that (and my current Let's Play of a dated-looking PS1 game shows that I still enjoy the oldies once in a while, so its lack of HD graphics is a non-issue for me). It's not even my favourite FF. It's my 5th favourite, behind IX, X-2, XIII and VIII. It sits pretty much squarely in the middle of my preference. I don't hate it, but I don't worship it like others do either. It's OK. Not great by today's standards, but still a classic based on the enjoyment I got out of it back in the day.

But ignoring my own personal preference, let me explain why a FF7 remake is a bad idea for those who desperately want one. When FF7 came out, it was great. It cemented itself as a classic, captured the imaginations of millions of people worldwide. It showed what the PS1 was capable of (although 8 and 9 took that even further), it had an engrossing (if flawed) storyline, and the gameplay was the right level of complex. Many people do have fond memories of the game, and it's easy to see why.

This is the main reason, it seems, that people want this to happen. They remember the joy the game gave them back in the day, and with age they've become cynical and jaded about everything new and just wish they could relive the feelings they had back then by playing an up-to-date version of the game that gave them those feelings.

But that's the problem. Your memories of how great the game was back in the day can never be lived up to again. You play a remake of FF7, you're not going to get the same feelings you did back then. You'll know the plot, you'll know how to beat every boss, you'll know how to do all the sidequests. The discovery of all these things was what made the game originally so much fun to play. Sure, playing the original game now can bring back memories of the time you originally played it, but playing a remake won't. I can vouch for this. Tomb Raider Anniversary, while fun, doesn't give me quite the same nostalgic feeling that playing the original still does, even though they are essentially the same game. It will be the same with a FF7 remake.

All the fanboys will ever get out of a remake is disappointment that the game isn't quite like it was. The game's a classic for a reason, let's just leave it be. Let it continue to be a classic. If you want to experience it all again, I'm sure you still have your copy lying around somewhere. Give it a whirl. Or failing that, get it on PSN (the amount of times I've mentioned this sounds like I work for Sony/Square and trying to push the release - by the way, FF8's up too). What's more, doing this would allow Square to make some new games, rather than using up time and resources making the same game all over again.

We don't need a FF7 remake. End of.

All we hear is...

Tearing myself away from Final Fantasy XIII for a moment, I recently noticed a story about Rock Band's latest DLC. It's Lady Gaga. My reaction? Seriously, what the crap, Harmonix?

Now, I don't like Lady Gaga, as you may have guessed from said reaction. I think she's an attention-seeking, weird-looking pop tart whose songs are dire and tuneless and who puts more emphasis on her stupid outfits than she does on making music. She claims those outfits have "deep meanings", but seriously, no one cares about that when you look like a Roman candle. I'll let Eminem's expression here say it all:



















But regardless, I accept she has fans, and someone out there might actually want this stuff in their game. No problems with that whatsoever. My problem, of course, is that her songs lack anything resembling a guitar.

Normally, a lack of a guitar in a song doesn't bother me. My music collection is full of songs with no guitars. I like plenty of songs that utilise synths and turntables and other weird non-guitar instruments. However, in Rock Band, a game that simulates, well, a rock band, with vocals, guitar, bass and drums all present, I feel including a song for the DLC that lacks guitar is baffling.

I don't have an issue with the fact that Lady Gaga's been included in Rock Band because I dislike her, it's because her songs would be so dull for the "guitarists" playing the game. Seriously, why?

To put this in perspective, there are also songs I like included in the DLC that I also question the inclusion of. I like The Chemical Brothers, for instance. They've released some awesome tracks, one of which has also been included in Rock Band, as I noticed on their website, and as much as I love Let Forever Be, I don't think it should be in Rock Band. Why?

IT HAS NO GUITARS!

I accept diversification in the music of Rock Band. In fact, this is the single reason I class RB better than its cousin Guitar Hero. While Guitar Hero is "oh, more Metallica? How fun...", Rock Band is more "holy shit, Still Alive from Portal's in this!" and "Oh wow, I forgot how awesome this Fleetwood Mac song was!" and "oh, this Main Drag band are pretty good, gotta check them out!" and of course "HOLY SHIT! 10 QUEEN SONGS! BEAT THAT, GH!"

The inclusion of funk and country packs as DLC was unusual, but I could understand their inclusion. They use guitars. They're not necessarily "rock", but hell, if they have all the components for all the players to enjoy, why not? Hell, funk generally gives the bassist more to do, while retaining things for everyone else, so I'm all for that. So that shows you I like the diversification. I may not LIKE everything that's included, but I can understand it.

Including Lady Gaga, however, is like putting up a pack of instrumentals that ignore the vocalist. That's how I feel about it. Or putting in an acoustic pack, with songs without drums. It's why Yesterday wasn't put into The Beatles: Rock Band - the bassist and drummer wouldn't have had anything to do.

So no, Harmonix, don't give us Lady Gaga. It makes no sense from a gameplay perspective. Pop songs with guitars? Sure. But synth-heavy pop songs? No.

In other news, FF13 is awesome. I've reached the part where the world opens up for you, allowing much more exploration, and it's so awesome. The game's become more of a challenge, and the party's much more customisable. Plus I can kick Hope out of the team forever, which is a bonus. Not only is he an irritating little shit (although, to be fair, less so than he was before), but his HP is the lowest of all the characters, and quite frankly, I don't want to waste my components on him to upgrade his equipment.

Fun fact: the ladies seem to be the best characters. Fang and Lightning kick ass, and Vanille makes a good White Mage (there's always one). So for the first time in FF history (bar X-2, where you had no choice), I have an all-female team. And no, it's not because I like gawping at female video game characters (although, to be fair, if Lighting was real, I would...), it's because they're the most well-rounded stats-wise. In fact, I'd actually like Sazh in my team, because he's probably my favourite character, but in terms of stats, his Strength and Magic are both fairly low by default, which is disappointing. Chocobro will have to remain sidelined :(

There's been some annoying moments where I've had to spend ages levelling up my abilities because everything was kicking my arse, but hey, that was bound to happen. It's Final Fantasy.

I honestly don't get the negative reaction to this game at all. The linearity and the lack of towns makes sense in terms of the plot (I won't go into it at risk of spoiling something, even though the last part probably did have spoilers in it), and the battle system is X-2 on speed (for those keeping score at home, X-2 is probably my favourite battle system of the whole series). The characters are relatable and interesting, and the story's compelling. It's actually my third favourite Final Fantasy behind IX (which wins on art direction, characters and tone alone) and X-2 (which was just plain fun). So screw you, naysayers, go back to bumming the highly flawed and overrated FF7 and the rest of us will just enjoy the game for what it is. A lot of fun.

This will not be my final word on the game, since I have yet to finish it, but needless to say, I've said enough you need to know if you're contemplating buying it. Buy it. Buy it now, and enjoy it.

And just be glad that this time I had comments to make on a different game for once :p

Further Final Fantasy Firteen Foughts

Well, I've been playing a little while longer, and I have a little bit extra to add. There may be spoilers within, so please don't read any further if you don't want to know.

Remember in my initial thoughts, I said this:

"Hope...he's just Tidus but in child form, making him worse x1000000. I want to punch him, and half the time I'm genuinely surprised that Lightning doesn't just stab him, especially with the way she looks at him half the time"

Guess what? Since that point, I've learned to hate him even more! :D

Seriously, guys, I have never hated a video game character as much as I've hated this guy. There are villains I feel more sympathy for than this guy. Even Tidus from FFX is forgiven his sins just because of this guy. Tidus was just a cocky git with daddy issues, Hope's a whiny emo boy with parental issues, whose single-minded twatiness has meant that Lightning's attempts to stop him being a whiny self-centred fuck have turned him instead into a whiny self-centred fuck who wants to kill people who piss him off. NO REALLY.

Look, kid, I know your mum died and all, but don't you think you're being a little overdramatic about all this? I mean, come on, you can't honestly believe Snow's responsible for her death, right? Your mum wasn't forced to go with him, she went of her own accord. To protect YOU. And yet not once have you acknowledged your mother's bravery in all of this. Not to mention in a flashback you threw a tantrum at the idea of meeting your dad again, who's absent for some currently unmentioned reason. Seriously, SHUT. THE FUCK. UP.

Guys, I'm actually angered by this character. Genuinely, seriously annoyed. I'm also annoyed that the battle system doesn't allow you to target party members during battle so if he says anything in his whiny little voice I can just have Lightning stab him. Sure, it's counterproductive to the gameplay, but it'd make me feel better. He is the Scrappy Doo of video games. Here's hoping he dies later.

And honestly, I've actually gained a greater deal of appreciation for Lightning's character. She has the patience of a saint. She's been having this little weasel following her around for the past few hours and she has yet to turn her gunblade on him. I certainly would have done by now. So go Lightning. Your character has depth in my opinion just because of this. You're a moody soldier type hiding a lot of inner feelings (what moody soldier type doesn't?) but also, you can keep your cool around this...thing. I applaud you, Lightning. I liked you already, since you kick ass and you're hot, but this? This has added to all of that. Go you.

Hope aside, I am warming even more to the cast. Lightning, as mentioned above, is getting more interesting, Sazh I genuinely feel sad for and Vanille is intriguing with her mysterious past (was that really her in that flashback? What was all that about? The plot thickens...). Snow's been absent for a while, but I like what little I've seen of him. He seems like a cocky bastard, but as we find out more about him, it's easy to feel sympathy for things that have happened to him.

But seriously, Hope. He better get more likeable quickly or god help me I'm going to go hunt out his character designer and voice actor and punch them both in the face for creating him. He's the single blip on an otherwise interesting story. Why Square? Why? D:

Greased Lightning

So, Final Fantasy XIII came out yesterday and I battled the crowds to buy this momentous life-changing game. I came home and put it in my PS3 and played it and then...I WAS HORRIBLY DISAPPOINTED! D:

God, guys, this isn't a proper Final Fantasy game. GOD! It's so linear and I have such a problem with that even though all the other games bar FFX-2 were linear too when they started but I like to pretend that wasn't the case. And GOD! Nobuo Uematsu didn't do the music so I instantly hate it even though it's actually kind of good, but that doesn't matter because th victory theme isn't right and without the da-da-da-daaa-daaaaa-da-da-daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa how can I possibly enjoy this game? AND GOD! The battle system moves too fast and it's just pressing X a lot and has no strategy even though I haven't even passed Chapter 2 yet and haven't seen the battle system properly in action yet. GOD! IT'S SO SHIT!

The above is, obviously, a lie. I actually quite like the game. I think it's good. Yes. I just wanted to poke fun at some of the worst complaints I've heard about it so far.

Now, I've not played much so far (I'm just on chapter 4, I believe, which is only really because chapters 1 and 2 are shorter than a very short thing and pretty much hold your hand the whole way through), so I can't give my full opinion on the game. But my first impressions are good. The game, obviously, looks gorgeous. The characters are well-animated, the environments are stunning and there are a ton of lovely looking effects all over the shop.

Beyond this, initial impressions of the game were a little mixed from me. Yes, it's very linear at this point, but it doesn't really feel any more linear than FFX did. And the battle system, while very impressive, did start getting a little tedious after a while. Well, until Paradigms were introduced and suddenly everything improved and got a lot more tactical. Plus there is a general sense that the game is merely preparing me for something bigger and better to come. In other words, it's a bit of a slow-burner, but it's definitely worth sticking with.

And the battle system, coming back to that, is actually great fun once it really gets moving. It's basically like FFX-2's (which is probably what's got some of the unpleasable fanboys on the run) but faster and with control over one character (which draws some parallels with FF12's system, but only slightly, it's nowhere near as awful as that game). At first just bashing enemies to death gets a bit tiresome, but the Paradigms add an interesting level of strategy, basically switching character roles around for the entire battle. At first it seems like you can get away with using one system but it quickly becomes apparent that you NEED to learn how to switch, and switch tactically. As the system gets more complex, the more interesting and fun to use it gets. I highly applaud it. Sure, it's not traditional FF, but it feels like a natural evolution to me (particularly with its similarities to the aforementioned previous games' systems).

The linearity I can cope with for now. I've heard it gets more open later, and judging by the trophies, there's a few side quests awaiting me when I get there. Of course, this is no different to previous FFs (most of FF7's sidequests were unavailable til part of the way through disc 2, most of VIII's weren't available til you got the Ragnorok on disc THREE!), but try telling that to some people. Like I said before, it feels like X (with hints of X-2 in the jumping bits). Sure, the lack of towns feels a bit weird, but I can live with it.

The story is great so far. There's a lot of interesting mythology going on, and already it's making me question things and push forward to find out more. And after XII's disastrous character set, the fact that I've warmed to this cast almost instantly is a definite achievement. Well, apart from Hope, since he's just Tidus but in child form, making him worse x1000000. I want to punch him, and half the time I'm genuinely surprised that Lightning doesn't just stab him, especially with the way she looks at him half the time. Sazh is just plain awesome, Snow is surprisingly likeable despite my initial impression of him, Vanille is kinda fun (no, she actually doesn't annoy me!) and Lightning is just plain badass. Not just in character, but in game. Honestly, I missed her when she wasn't in my party recently because everyone else seemed so underpowered in comparison.

All in all, so far so good. It's certainly a grower, I can say that much, but it certainly is showing signs of becoming one of my favourite FFs, probably coming in behind IX and X-2. Even if the FF7 fanboys will probably hate it. But who really cares what they think, right? :p

OH NOES!

OMG THE PS3 IS DOWN! GUYS IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!

Yes. The PS3 is currently throwing a fit, apparently. It's got itself confused, thinking today is February 29th, when in fact it's March 1st, resetting its internal clock to NYE 1999, preventing people from logging into PSN, preventing people from accessing games, erasing trophies from the server, and other lovely things.

Sony are aware, and are in the process of fixing it. Best thing for people to do in the meantime is be patient and do something else until Sony provide an update proclaiming it to be fixed. Go read a book, leave the house, dust off the old PS2 if you must get a gaming fix, do whatever. Don't, for the love of god, do what half the PlayStation community seems to have done on the PS Blog.

Cry, and whine, and bitch.

What is it with gamers these days? Does everyone just have an overinflated sense of self-worth, that every game company must do exactly as they say and any deviation from their plan is deemed unholy and wrong, a bad business decision that proves they just screw over the consumer?

I touched on this in my Sonic 4 post, and I've also heard the Square fanboys kicking off when Yoshinori Kitase "vaguely" denied there'd be no FF7 remake (he actually said it's "highly unlikely", which sounds like a no to me), claiming that they should make one anyway, even if it takes 10 billion years. Now it's this.

People are actually demanding compensation for a glitch that, in all probability, may only last one day. ONE DAY. OMG I CAN'T GO ONE DAY WITHOUT MY PRECIOUS PLAYSTATION3! SONY GIVE ME MY MONEY BACK OR I WILL SUE!

Ugh. Just turn it off. You know how to do that, right? Seriously, if you can't go one day without the console, seek professional help. That, I believe, is called an addiction. And addictions are harmful.

I can understand some people's annoyance if they'd bought a couple of new games yesterday or something, but they're the only ones I feel sorry for, since I know how great it is to put a new game in the system and boot it up for the first time, and they have to miss out on that for a while. Well, I also feel sorry for anyone who may potentially lose data out of all of this, but with a bit of luck that won't happen.

Sony don't owe anybody money. If this glitch ends up bricking the console, then sure, free replacements PS3s all round, but right now, that seems unlikely. Sony have said they're working on it, and it will be fixed eventually.

But this has brought with it conspiracy theories. "Sony have done this deliberately to force people into buying the new slim model!" But of course! Brilliant business sense there, forcing people to re-buy something just because a new variation's been made. Remember when the PSOne and PS2 Slim came out and Sony came round to people's houses in the night, stole their original consoles, forcing people to buy the new ones?

Yes, it's frustrating, and no, it shouldn't happen, but it's technology, it's unpredictable. All you can do is wait and be patient until Sony have announced something official. The problem is still ongoing, after all. If they announce the consoles are now bricked, then commence rioting. For now, sit tight, children. Your prayers may yet be answered.

After all, do you want to be like Hitler?

Wow, this is heavy

OK, so I've played the Heavy Rain demo, and honest to god, for the first time ever, I'm still completely unsure as to whether or not the final product is worth playing. Normally when I play demos, I get a distinct sense of whether or not I'd want to play the full game. I played the Folklore demo, not knowing a thing about the game, and knew instantly I wanted the full game, and on the flipside, I played FEAR 2's demo and decided I couldn't be arsed with it.

But Heavy Rain? Well, the demo barely gets going. It feels like the opening cut scene and nothing else. What's more, my initial suspicion that the whole game is little more than an interactive movie akin to those old CD-ROM releases in the early 90s still stands. It felt like Quick Time Events without a game. Sure, there was walking around (which, it turns out, weren't as awkward to control as I feared), but it was on pre-determined paths, and therefore still didn't make it feel like a "game". Sure, it's original, but originality without a game seems a bit pointless.

But then again, the thing did seem to have a compelling plot, and I suppose I would be willing to play through the whole thing to see said plot unfold. I'm a film lover as much as a gamer, so I'd go through for that. But that's the whole problem. It appeals to the film lover in me, not the gamer. And for a "game" (I'm still using that term really loosely), that's actually not a good thing.

Sure, games have gotten more cinematic this generation (you only need to look at Uncharted, for example, to see this), but perhaps this is a step too far? I just get the feeling the producers would have been better off just making a film and be done with it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not expecting every game to be action-packed and full of shooting and explosions. I'm happy with slow-paced games. I used to love point and click games back in the day, but this doesn't even feel like that. I'd have been happy for a variation on the point and click genre, which I feel would suit this, but like I said, it's just QT Events strung together over a CG movie from what I can see.

Needless to say, I'm going to rent it. It seems like it'd be worth playing through the whole thing, but I wouldn't want to own it. And I never rent games these days, that's how divided this "game" has made me. To be honest, it seems like the kind of thing I'd look at once and then shelve. Why spend £40 for that?

Sure, it's a nice idea, and I applaud Sony for trying something so daring, but...is it worth it? I honestly can't say. Again, I'll give a better opinion one day when I eventually get round to renting it.

Rain, rain, go away, come back on another day

So, recently the gaming world has been going absolutely crazy over Heavy Rain, Sony's newest exclusive. Now, I don't know, maybe this is my usual hype aversion kicking in, but really, what's so impressive about it?

No, no, hear me out. My information has been based on previews I've read online that have described, very basically, a movie-like game that I should already know loads about. There's something about a serial killer, and a weird control system? Maybe? That's all I know. But everything I've heard so far says to me "really, this level of hype for a glorified interactive movie?"

But maybe the previews have just done a bad job of describing things to me. Maybe the weird control system I've heard about is actually surprisingly intuitive. Maybe it's not just a glorified string of quick time events and is, in fact, an enjoyable game. Maybe it isn't the tech demo it currently sounds like to me.

Only way to solve this dilemma. Since I'm not one to badmouth a game until I've played it, I'm downloading the demo. And when I've played it, I shall report back and let you know what I think.

If it doesn't take 2 hours to download like it's claiming, that is. Seriously, 2 hours? That's not right, surely?

It's-a me, Ezio!

Hey, long time no see

So I've recently found Chip & Ironicus' LP website, and watched much of their MGS2 playthrough up to where they've currently stopped. And I have probably never laughed so much watching an LP. They have now set a new benchmark for how I should do my own LPs, although I know I'll probably never reach their level.

However, it has already had an effect on how I play games. While they're pissing about making guards dance and strutting a pump, I've been playing Assassin's Creed II, which I've become horribly addicted to. In a game which is essentially MGS meets GTA infused with the DNA of the Da Vinci Code, you can forgive me for letting their attitude to playing seep through to my own style of play.

I suddenly find great enjoyment in talking to the guards as I sneak past them. I can't help but laugh at such ludicrous situations as carrying a dead guard across a huge crowd of people just to throw him in a haystack, AND NO ONE BATS AN EYELID. I suddenly have gained a grand new insight in just how fun sneaking around like Batman crossed with a ninja really can be.

Of course, it helps that AC2 is a massive improvement over its predecessor. I've been enjoying every minute of it. The world feels more alive than the Medieval Middle East. The story is so much more interesting, since it looks at Ezio's life and his motivations for becoming an assassin, rather than just "here's a list of people to kill, go kill them". Also, those "truth" sections are highly gripping in a very strange way. I don't know why, but I love them. Maybe it appeals to the puzzle lover in me, and my perverse interest in conspiracy theories (which I never believe in, I just find them fascinating to read about). And the gameplay has very few of the flaws the first game did. OK, sometimes the jumpy bits are still a little awkward (due to the semi-automatic directional system), but it's bareable.

Also, DANNY WALLACE! I've been a fan of Mr Wallace since I read his utterly brilliant book Yes Man a few years back, as well as the book he co-wrote with Dave Gorman in which they travelled the world looking for men with the same name as the latter. The man is hilarious, and weird in a wonderful way, so to have him offering advice and information on your targets is a massive plus for me. Yes, that alone is enough to elevate the sequel over the original. Weird? Maybe. But I don't care.

Apparently I get to go flying soon. This should be fun. (Also: not a spoiler, it's shown on the back of the game box and mentioned in the trophies, so there :p)

I've also been playing Resident Evil Code Veronica X, as well as Super Mario 64, two games I've yet to complete after all these years. I have very little to say on either right now, though, other than Resi always confuses me and Mario feels a little dated now, but is still good.

And that is all for now. Go away.

Seems like being a Sega employee isn't that easy

So. Sega's "Project Needlemouse" is revealed to be Sonic The Hedgehog 4. This is exactly what I expected it to be. A new, HD, Mega Drive styled game that's a direct sequel to the original games. I even expected it to be 2.5D and I expected it to be a download in the vein of Mega Man 9. The trailer only shows about 2-3 seconds of actual gameplay, but looking at that, I'm quite excited. I reckon it'll be a good fun game.

Of course, the Sonic fanbase, being the inherently broken collective entity that it is, is bitching and moaning and throwing their toys out of the pram. Why? "BECAUSE IT'S NOT WHAT WE WANTED WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!"

Except it is. They pestered Sega for years to make a new Mega Drive style game for the consoles. That is exactly what they've provided. So why so upset?

Because, quite simply, it's the modern Sonic design, the sleek, slim, tall version of the 2000s as opposed to the short, fat version of the 1990s. And because it hasn't got the graphics of the original Mega Drive games.

















Oh boy.

Now, maybe I'm not a "true" Sonic fan perhaps. Perhaps I'm missing the point in thinking games progress and graphics change over time. Perhaps I'm the only one who's spotted that Nintendo have done exactly the same thing as Sega with New Super Mario Bros but no one's whinging about that. So maybe my confused reaction to this whole "IT'S NOT THE PROPER SONIC! D:" business is because I'm missing some integral point.

I'm expecting some kind of "you weren't there in the beginning, man!" type response. You know, like those Vietnam war vets who proclaim no one will ever understand the horror they went through during that conflict. Only less important and more nerdy and pathetic. Sure, it's true I never owned a Mega Drive when I was a kid. While I'm lucky enough to own two current gen consoles, when I was a kid this was not the case. I had a SNES, and a Mega Drive was right out. I did play the old Sonic games though. I used to play games round friends' houses, round extended family's houses, that kind of thing. I did play Sonic, and I now own the original Sonic titles on the Virtual Console and on the Ultimate Mega Drive Collection, and I maintain that they are still to this day awsome games.

But I don't want a game like that to be released now. I don't want fat Sonic. I don't want 16 bit Sonic. I want the series to be allowed to progress gracefully, like other franchises are allowed to. Sure, there's been some hiccups along the way - Sonic Heroes was practically unplayable for me, and Black Knight was dire, and I did survive '06 simply by realising it was actually a good game that just happened to have been rushed out before it was finished - but ultimately I feel the series has to progress and change to stay interesting.

I actually welcomed the Werehog, I like Sonic in 3D as much as in 2D (bar the exceptions of Heroes and Black Knight, again, yes I liked '06 - SUE ME!), and I certainly am not getting my knickers in a twist over a character model. At the end of the day, if the game is fun to play (which, if it sticks closely to the original formula, it will be), then I will be happy. And so should all the other Sonic "fans" out there.

But this is nothing new. The Drummond/Griffith debates still rage to this day, for example. And this is only Sonic this happens with. The Tomb Raider community isn't up in arms over Keeley "Ashes To Ashes" Hawes playing Lara Croft over Judith Gibbons/Jonnell Elliot, and the Ratchet And Clank community isn't raging about James Arnold Taylor replacing Mikey Kelley as Ratchet. Sure, there's preferences over who people prefer, but flame wars don't erupt because of it. Btw, let's fuel some flames. I prefer Jason Griffith. No, really. I do. I don't really care, but if I had to pick, I'd pick him. Bring on the angry mob! I'm ready for ya! :D

All I get from the Sonic community is that there is a vocal portion of the fanbase that are just massive spoilt children. Everyone bawled about the Werehog, and yet I'd bet real money (you know, as opposed to Monopoly money) that if those sections were Knuckles instead, there'd be exactly zero complaints. Everyone bawled about '06 as if it was the worst game in the world (when in fact, the official worst game in the world is Big Rigs: Over The Road Racing. FACT) when in fact it was little more than a beta version of what could have been a better game. No one sat and looked for the good game underneath the glitches. It existed. You just weren't looking.

And now there's bawling over this. The problem is, THIS IS WHAT PEOPLE WANTED! D:

Don't get me wrong, the game could still be utterly shite, but basing your opinion of it's quality on 3 seconds of gameplay in a teaser trailer and the fact the character model doesn't look exactly like you want it? That's being spoilt children and you know it. Give it the benefit of the doubt. Accept it for what it is. And then if, when it comes out, it is crap, then you can start flinging faeces at it. And only then.

And if you're that bothered by the way the game looks to the point of rage, just don't buy it. Simple as that. Those of us sensible enough to realise there are better things to spend angry energy on will enjoy it for what it is, most likely a fun 2.5D platformer.

In other news, in my world of finishing games months and years later than everyone else, in the past few days I have finished Assassin's Creed and Half-Life 2 at long last. Those of you who follow my Backloggery (link in sidebar) will already know this. So, after my thoughts on AC1 last entry, what are my official final thoughts on it?

It's a good game, if a little frustrating at times and very repetitive. The final moments were epic and enjoyable and pushed me right onto the sequel without hesitation, but overall, there were too many fiddly moments for me to class it as a truly great game.

Like I said though, I have started the sequel now, and I must say that every single complaint I had about the first seems to have been rectified. Time will tell if it stays this way, but right now, everything's fixed. The swordfights have been made more enjoyable simply by adding a strafe button. The story is more compelling (both Ezio's and Desmond's). The gameplay is much less repetitive. Guards are easier to elude, particularly as you can now blend into a crowd. In other words, it's fantastic.

But what of Half-Life 2? Well, not being much of an FPS player, it takes a lot to get me to play them. My reaction to the hype of Modern Warfare 2 at the end of last year was met with a simple "why should I care?". So why do I even have HL2 in my collection? One word. Portal.

Ah, Portal. A game I'd read loads about and thought "this game looks awesome, I must play it!". It then turned out that, due to my lack of a decent gaming PC, in order to purchase the game for consoles was to get The Orange Box, and by extension get HL2 and Team Fortress 2 as well. I largely ignored those, until my Advent Calendar special I did on Youtube at Xmas forced me to play 10 minutes of Episode One. I thought the plot seemed intriguing, and so decided to go and play through the main game. And I actually quite enjoyed it.

I mean, it's not going to convert me into thinking FPSes are THE BEST GENRE EVA! but it was certainly a step above the majority I've encountered. It had an interesting story line, some unusual challenges here and there and the final areas were just epic. But of course, due to my lack of experience of playing FPSes, I'm a bit shit at it. But hey, what can you do?

There's not much else I can say though. It was fun, and for someone who avoids FPSes, that's an achievement to get me to say that. But I'd hardly rank it in my favourites, and I'd probably never play it again, but hey. It kept me entertained for a while and that's all that matters.

Team Fortress 2, however, will remain untouched. It just doesn't appeal.

So yeah, that's another day in my world of gaming. And yes, I missed a day, but who really cares? :p

Infidels!

So, it's 2010, and fairly recently a lot of people have been raving about Assassin's Creed II, so I feel it's a perfect time to discuss Assassin's Creed 1. Why? Because I'm slow on the uptake and have only played that one recently and I wish to finish it before starting the supposedly awesome sequel. That's why.

My initial impressions on the game were very good. It looked impressive, and the whole virtual reality/genetic memory simulator was unique, if a little strange and somewhat unexpected. And the game mechanics looked solid, although initially I thought they were complicated, going on about socially acceptable and not socially acceptable things. It made me feel like they were asking me to eat with specific types of cutlery and to do it wrongly would be a shame on my whole family. What's the difference between a salad fork and a regular fork? I don't know! I don't know why I'd ever need to know!

Of course, I digress. The game, fortunately, doesn't go to this level of complexity with "socially accepted behaviour". It sticks to the relatively simple "walking around in faux-prayer and gently pushing aside beggars" equals "socially acceptable", while climbing buildings, knocking over random people carrying pots on their heads and stabbing soldiers in the throat is generally frowned upon.

The game did seem initially quite fun, but now I'm on Memory Block 5 I can't help but get an endless sense of deja vu. Have I done this stuff before? Why, yes, yes I have. Every "chapter" of the game amounts to the following formula:

- Travel from Super Secret Assassin's Hideout In The Mountains on horseback to one of the three major cities in the area (which, of course, break all rules of geography being right next to each other despite being at different ends of Israel in reality, with Damascus actually being in Syria, but we'll let that slide)
- Visit Super Secret Assassin's Lair within city that no one has ever noticed despite the whopping great ASSASSINS sign on the roof, get mission
- Climb every large structure in the city to update your map and throw yourself off them all into conveniently placed bales of hay.
- Eavesdrop, interrogate and pickpocket various people around the city. These sections very rarely vary. Occasionally an Assassins informant may inexplicably ask you to collect a set of flags he's dropped (no, I don't know either), but otherwise you're basically getting information
- Return to SSAL and tell them everything you've heard. You get given a feather and go told to stain it with your target's blood. No, I don't know either.
- Go find your target, kill him, and then listen to him ramble on and on about how good he really was to stab his followers and wear their skins as coats and dance on their graves singing the Macarena
- Return to SSAHITM to be told you did a good job and that you're actually a better assassin than the leader thought you were.
- REPEAT ELEVENTY BILLION TIMES! :D

Now sure, this is fun initially. There's something strangely enjoyable about sneaking around on rooftops, silently slitting guard's throats (second time I've mentioned that...hmm...) and generally being a sneaky ninja type. Only with a white robe, not black. And you really feel a part of this bustling, living city. Wow, how impressive!

Except on the 50th time you do it. It quickly becomes apparent that sneaking through the streets is so much slower and more tedious than just climbing to the nearest roof and taking the quicket route to your desinations. And that bustling, living city sure enjoys repeating itself. Wandering around Damascus becomes a real chore when every other corner has some man reciting the same speech everywhere.

"Praise Salahadin! Curse the Christian king and his army of infidels! They say it's a crusade, a crusade for what? Ignorance? Violence?"

I didn't look that up, that's all from memory. BECAUSE I'VE HEARD IT SO OFTEN IT'S STUCK THERE FOREVER! D:

What's more, other residents of the city prove even more irritating. The beggars are a particularly shining example, constantly hounding you for coins, getting in your way, and reciting the same bloody speeches every time, clearly trying to make you out to be a complete bastard for not giving them a few coins. The problem is, of course, that even if they weren't irritating beyond belief and you wanted to show them some compassion and actually give them that money, YOU CAN'T! There is no monetary system in this game, so their inclusion seems to be just to infuriate the player. Punching them in the face is highly satisfying though. Shame they never learn their lesson.

The madmen are worse. You can hear them a mile away, laughing and grunting away like there's no tomorrow. Walk anywhere near them though, and they punch you in the face. No really, they PUNCH YOU IN THE FACE. For no reason other than because they're utter lunatics. And what's worse is that you're the only one they pester in this way, same with the beggars. What makes Altair so special that these people only feel it necessary to pester him and him only?

Of course Memory Block 5 makes all this worse. They appear mid mission more often than not, and they come in higher numbers. One pickpocket mission takes place in a courtyard FILLED with madmen. While you're trying to silently slip through the crowd to catch up to your target, all the while keeping out of sight, having someone punch you in the head and push you into the man you're trying to stay hidden from doesn't help. Hell, it doesn't even add challenge, it just becomes annoying. And the beggars decided to crop up in an assassination mission...IN PAIRS. Oh lord. WHY?! D:

Of course, the guards are an oddity unto themselves as well. Especially in Acre, the residence of the British and the French. Now, the game's usage of modern English in Medieval Israel is brushed off in-game as part of the Animus's translation function, saying that Nathan Drake...sorry, Desmond Miles wouldn't be able to understand it if they all talked like Chaucer (or, for that matter, like Isrealis), which I could accept if the French weren't SPEAKING FRENCH! Now, suspension of disbelief aside (let's face it, would you like it if they made everyone sound exactly as they would have done at the time? Correct answer: no), if you say everybody's been translated in English for Desmond's (and by extension, the player's) benefit, you damn well best keep everyone like that. I'll accept wildly exaggerated French accents, but "une assassin! Zut alors!" just betrays what they claimed.

Not that the English are any better. They range in vocal talents from Highly Apologetic Upper Class Type (well, they aren't apologetic, but they're tone makes me think they will just turn round and say "look, I'm terribly sorry, but you can't be here, it's not allowed. Sorry, but I have to kill you now old chap, I hope this doesn't affect your opinion of me") to Cockney Wideboy Type (who sound like they wandered off the set of Eastenders and/or any given Guy Ritchie movie to the point where I expect all their threats to end in "sunshoine") to Michael Palin. No really, I've distinctly heard a voice just like Palin's in full Python mode. I half expect him to tell me my parrot's not really dead, 'e's restin'.

Of course, guard voices are a minor point, but I mention them anyway for observation purposes. However, the repetition and poor placement of particularly irritating citizens is. Don't get me wrong, the game is still compelling. The story is interesting, and the gameplay is solid. Everything flows and there's barely a glitch in sight. And the assassinations themselves are immense fun. Just a shame the rest of the gameplay's gotten so samey.

I shall play it through to the end, just because I'm interested in the plot, and report my final thoughts before moving onto the sequel like everyone else has already done. And hopefully I'll have something more interesting to say about it then.

Let's get moving!

Well then, I figured it was time I started a blog. I've always wanted to, always wanted to write entertaining rants for people to read, but then always suffered some degree of writer's block or feeling that I have nothing interesting to write about.

Well, I'm making one anyway. I will try and write something on a daily basis, covering my thoughts on some aspect of pop culture, be it games, movies, music or just general news stories. Some of it may not be current, but hey, I'm going to endeavour to make it interesting to read nonetheless.

First proper entry will follow, I just thought I'd add a little introduction so it doesn't look strange that I started by going on some rant.

GO!