The great FIFA plea!

From the windows at the back of my house, the major facet of the view is a football pitch. It is quite the local focus at times, with days when two or three matches are played. Sometimes, when I look out, I see a practice session taking place. This proximity pleases me greatly, because I have a 5 year old son. Naturally, I would love it if he were to take an interest, and start to play football. It looks very much like he doesn't care, but he is only 5. There is time yet.

My daughter is not yet 3. She doesn't sit with me when I am watching a match on TV. But, she does like to stand on her blanket box and watch when there are matches taking place outside. I truly don't know if she really likes it, or if she would just do anything rather than go to bed. I strongly suspect it is the latter, but just in case I tend to let her get away with it for a while.

A girl who is interested in football might seem like an unusual thing to some. It isn't where I live. And this is not least because about half of the matches that I have seen played on that field have been played between two teams of female players. It is, in fact, the ground where Longhougton Rangers Ladies play their home matches.

So, my daughter is growing up in an environment where it is definitely the norm for girls to play football. She didn't really care so much during the Olympics, as she was generally in bed when the Team GB Ladies played their games, but in 4 years time this may be a different story. (Assuming, of course, that Team GB even enter the football in Rio!) By then, she may well have seen so much football on the local field that she not only wants to also watch on TV, but may even want to play for herself. Which is good, because she won't have to go too far at all.

And, as she gets older, she may even want to play football on one of the games consoles. So far, all she has ever bothered to play is Skylanders, but she does love grabbing the controller to switch them on. It is just a matter of time before she shows interest in other games as well. Her brother recently inherited his own copy of FIFA 09, which he is insistent on playing even though I actually bought FIFA 12. Since she adores her brother, I have no doubt that she will force her way into playing alongside him. Maybe they will argue over who gets to be Liverpool? (I can but hope, even though right now I question why I would want to inflict being an LFC supporter onto anybody at all, let alone two people I love.)

Sadly, what she won't be able to do is to play as a Ladies team. None of the FIFA games offer this option. This is despite the ever increasing popularity of the women's game, as well as the ever increasing amounts of females playing and buying games. For whatever reason, EA have done their internal maths and decided that the cost to implement women's football into the game would be more than they would expect to recoup.

Understandable? I thought so.

At first.

But then, I thought about it a little more. And I came to a somewhat obvious conclusion.

Dear EA Sports. You know that catcphrase you use? I think you need to stop using it.

"If it's in the game, it's in the game."

Oh dear. That desn't quite add up, really. Clearly, this is a sizeable aspect that is NOT in the game at all.

Please, EA, think about this. My daughter is already going to grow up in a world where she won't be treated the same as her brother will by many. She will be held to a different set of standards, because there is not full equality between the sexes as things stand. You show this yourselves, by simply not including females in any of your sports games. With a title that sees a new release every single year, often updating little but the playing rosters, what genuine reason is there to not push this boat out and see how many fish it catches?

Let's face it, the games industry in general could use the positive press. EA, you could especially benefit from having something positive to announce, to deflect at least a small part of the bile and hatred that the gaming community is oh so ready to throw your way.

I'll put it another way, shall I? I hereby promise to not buy another FIFA game UNTIL you include women's teams. I don't care how many litle marketing gimmicks you throw in along the way, such as making my team reflect the real version. Why the hell would I want to do that? The real version of my team is having a terrible time of things! At least my digital version can give West Brom the hammering that I was hoping to witness, thus leading to partial easing of the pain I feel when reading message boards today. My virtual team can play on, safe in the knowledge that Luis Suarez will be treated by the referees exactly they same as the other players are, and not as he is in the Premier League as if he is the actual father of all evil in the Universe. (A yellow card for waving an arm at the referee? REALLY? I'll bet £50 with ANYONE that Rooney and Terry get away with much worse before this month is out.)

Whereas, the game that does include women's teams, not only will I buy a copy on launch day, I will also buy another copy to gift to my sister. She doesn't even play games outside of fitness stuff on the Wii, but she does like football. She would NEVER buy it for herself, so you will demonstrably be gaining sales if you include this option. Take this to your accounts department, marketing teams, Mr. Riccitello, Mr. Moore, whoever you need to. Bank on this, because I am not alone. I am just one of many who wants to see this change.

The rest can be found in this petition. That's plenty for now, isn't it? And that is just from those of who actually talk about games on the internet. The vast majority of your FIFA buying fans don't. If you are ignoring this percentage of us, what about THEM?

I am aware that there is a tiny chance that some people reading this are not employed by EA. If you are one of those, then I would like to implore that you go and sign the petition yourself. Please? Ta, loves! And, spread the word.

My blog is small, and humble. It may not carry the weight of many of the big sites out there. But, it carries as much meaning as any other outlet, more so to me personally. This is a cause I am happy to champion. This is a challenge I am willing to share. Because, this is a development whose time has come. The Women's Football Gold Medal in the Olympics went to the US, which probably means that a new generation is ready to become fans. By not including women in the game ... well, you run the risk of being left behind by the first software house that does include them.

More Olympic musings!

For the last hour now I have been replaying A01, the first level in TrackMania Nations Forever. At first, I wanted to beat the time required to win the Gold Medal. (25.87 seconds.) Then, I wanted to beat the time for the Author Medal. (25.54 seconds.) And now, having surpassed both of those marks, I want to get as close to 24.04 seconds, which is the current fastest time recorded on CyberScore. Eventually, should I beat that, I will attempt to do it in less time than the 23.92 seconds that sit atop the official Nadeo leaderboard, verified by linking to a downlodable ghost file for me to race against.

My time improves by one or two hundredths of a second at a time. It doesn't improve every time I race the track, but once in a while I hit the turns just SO. I take that first corner with the optimum tightness, which enables to not lose any speed, and then carry this through into the home straight. On the occassions that I do get everything right, it is electric. And the reason it is electric? Well ...

It is because those times are rare. Increasingly so as my times get faster. I am much more likely to not improve than I am to even match my previous best time, let alone beat it by any significant margin. My hour has consisted, mostly, of failure following failure. Each failure has not been a complete waste of time, however. Many times, I have learned from the failures. I can turn a run where I don't take the first corner properly into one where I can try an alternate approach on turn 2. I can see if letting go of the accelerator leads to an overall improvement anywhere on the track. In short, I am doing more than just playing this game. I am, not to put too fine a point on it, practicing. I am training.

I am dedicating myself to getting better at the game, for the sole purpose of being better at the game. I want that name at the top of the leaderboard to be mine. I want to hold the World Record for track A01 in TrackMania Nations Forever.

Over the last couple of weeks, you may have been aware of a bit of a shindig taking place in London. From all around the world, competitors arrived to test their skills against the very best in their respective fields. Sprinters, weightlifters, gymnasts, swimmers, cyclists, rowers; we really could spend the rest of the day listing disciplines in which events took place. These athletes have spent their entire lives improving, and the last few years training specifically to be at the peak of their performance when it matters. They all wanted to win Gold Medals, and hope to set World Records.

When looked at like that, one may well be inclined to ask "What is the difference?" between what I have been doing, admittedly for only the last hour, and what they have been doing for their whole life? Some of the races were decided by hundredths of a second. Well, some of my TrackMania scores are improvements of THOUSANDTHS of a second. So, even if it can't compare to the physical demands that the marvellous Mo Farah put in during his training, the mental focus required is surely somewhere close.

Of course, the Olympic games themselves are not just about the physical at any rate. There were several different Shooting events. Shooting! The very thing that videogames are most singularly synonymous with is an Olympic sport. Please, somebody; explain to me how different Olympic shooting is from Hitman: Sniper Challenge? In both, you take aim at a target in order to score the maximum amount of points inside a time limit. The sport and the game require practically identical skillsets, and practicing for either would be a simple case of doing the same thing over and over again. An injury would impact participants in either exactly the same way, too. In fact, I would go so far as to say that we might as well just make Olympic shooting into a virtual version of itself.

Think of the advantages with this. Not only would there be less chance of equipment failure, but we could also have a mixed event. The 2012 Olympics have already seen two absolutely major equality firsts, which is reason enough to celebrate. Not only were there female athletes from all competing nations for the first time in history, but the life-affirming sight of Oscar Pistorius running against able-bodied atheletes was truly inspirational, and certainly offered hope to many around the world. So, try to imagine how inspirational it would be to see an event where there is no segregation at all? Virtual Shooting, and by extension videogames, could offer this.

As we move towards an ever more integrated society, surely this could be seen as a way forwards? I know that many will sneer, with proclamations that videogames are "For kids" or "Played by couch potatoes". To which I would respond with "And, your point is ... ?", because it is 2012 and we just don't do that sort of thing anymore. And then, I would point them in the direction of YouTube to watch a StarCraft II player with his 300 APM and ask them to do the same. APM? That means "Actions Per Minute", and is a count of key presses and mouse clicks. I could possibly reach that count if I just randomly bashed away, but to assign meaning to each action? Put it this way; I would be happy if I could achieve 40 APM, and I have years of play behind me.

Who knows what is likely to happen? Barriers have been broken in the past, and it is reasonable to expect that they will be again. Videogames keep on getting more popular, and the lines between what is and what isn't a sport keep on getting more blurred. When ESPN cover League of Legends, albeit in an article, then there are signs that things are moving in the right direction.

The 2016 Olympic Games will take place in Rio, Brazil. There, we have a gameplaying community that is growing at an incredible rate. This not inconsiderable mass of potential players could easily provide the weight required to tip the balance. I am not saying that we need virtual versions of all sports, by the way, just that I think the idea that to include videogames in some capacity is surely an idea whose time has come?

Taking the bit between the teeth.

I have a bit of a confession to make.

As I close in on the end of my 41st year on this planet, I find that there have been certain changes in my outlook over the years. Where I was once a fresh-faced teenager, filled with optimism and non-stop smiley face, the same can no longer be said to be true. I have gotten more cynical as I have gotten older. Where there was once optimism, there are now warning signs that the gathering clouds of pessimism will block my vision for ever. And, whilst I am not quite at the extremes of nostalgia that ignore all the good things that exist right now, I do often think that "things were better in my day".

I have become somewhat grumpy.

I am not just talking about in videogames, either. I am generally less patient with a lot of things these days. Let's take television, as an example. I hold out less hope for the human race with each successive plumbing of the depths that Reality TV brings us. Whereas we once had genuinely intelligent, witty, and talented people all over our screens, all it takes today is to make a tit of yourself to get invited on to the circuit of endless panel shows.

Movies, too, are much less likely to inspire than they once were. If it isn't a sequel, it's a remake. If it isn't a remake, it's a copycat. And if it is none of these, it is a vehicle for merchandising opportunities. Good movies still get made, but finding them amongst the volume that marketing generates is increasingly difficult.

And then, finally, we come to sports. Football teams are paid wages that entire countries could run on, to play fewer games than they used to. It all costs supporters more each year, as third strips are not just saved for the one possible time in a season that it may be needed, but are pushed into our faces as another essential buy.

But, suddenly, from deep in the sea of dross, we get the Olympic Games. Now, let us push aside the downright offensive sponsorship and advertising issues. These are absolute markers as to just how wrong the world has gotten, no question about that. But, let us take a look at the sports themselves.

Britain is doing quite well, it turns out. I like this, because I live in Britain. I can therefore bask in the reflected glory of some truly talented and dedicated individuals, and enjoy the "feel good" factor that is sweeping the country. I can take genuine pride in how well the Games are being handled, packaged, and displayed. For the first time in a long time, it feels GOOD to be British.

However, what I am going to take most from the Games is the sight of Oscar Pistorius competing in the Men's 400M race. Oscar had his legs amputated below the knee before he was a year old. In order to compete, he has had his feet replaced with metal strips that apparently are as close to the human foot as possible. Go, science! Ordinarily, such a person would compete in the Paralympic Games, but not Oscar. The International Olympic Committee decreed that anybody who can run the distance in a time under 54.07 seconds could compete. So, he did it.

A man with NO FEET ran 400 metres in a time that I, at my physical peak, could never have hoped to get close to! The stature of that achievement humbles me to such a degree that I can not find adequate words to describe it. If you ever want to see what human endeavour is capable of, then you need look no further. Faced with something that I am completely unable to understand, Oscar Pistorius didn't just sit back and accept his fate. Instead, he took life's challenge, and (literally) ran with it. Facing it head-on, he overcame his obstacles and ultimately competed at the very highest level.

Day after day, I have sat here and been bombarded with stories of inspiration. And it has had the effect it is meant to. The motto for these Games is "Inspire a generation", and whilst I am reasonably sure that this is meant to refer to the youngest of generations, I have decided that I will join in if nobody minds.

Oscar Pistorius does what he loves. He had a built-in excuse to just not try, but was not interested in that solution. I am trying to do what I love, but not anywhere near as hard as I should be. My excuses are all external, but I fear that I am just too ready to grab hold of them.

I need to work harder, and I need to be better. I have been quite slack as of late in my writing, and incredibly slack through my life at promoting it. If I really want to do this, I need to DO THIS. So, I write this by way of publicly shaming myself into action.

If you read this blog and think "I wish he would write more often", then this is for you. I am sorry. I will work harder in future. I will give you more.

My first steps into a brave new world.

The other day, I read a claim that League of Legends is currently the most played game on PC. When I looked into it, it seemed entirely credible. Naturally, with Between Continues being such a bastion of the zeitgeist, this meant that I had to finally stop thinking about it, and start doing it. Playing it, that is. I have had the game installed for ages, and was originally hoping to record footage of my first game, but life circumstances have put that on the back burner for a while. So it was that I started the game, and faced the first of MANY decisions that were put my way.

My username in just about everything online is CheekyLee. If you Google that name, then most of what you will find is me. (Apart from some bloke who has done a tumblr and that fetish model, that is.) I should have just tried to use that name in LoL, too, but the game threw a challenge at me. It told me that names containing the word 'Riot' were not allowed, so my first instinct was to try and subvert that. I think, on reflection, that I wasted my time. I couldn't be "Judas Iscariot", and I couldn't be "Chariots Offiah", so I gave up chasing that dream. Instead, I just went with the comedy "Beans". Except that was taken, as was the extension of "Magic Beans". I didn't foresee this, and in a moment of madness I decided to try my luck with a comedy name. I did not expect it to work; otherwise I wouldn't have even tried.

Thus, "Mighty Wang" was born.

The game, rather kindly I might add, offered me the chance to play a tutorial. Yeah, I'll go for that. The tutorial itself was basic stuff, where I was introduced to my Summoner, a Hero named Ashe. She is an ice archer, and if I am honest I didn't really pay an awful lot of attention to the rest of it. It was all about moving cameras and selecting skills, and all that stuff that anybody who has ever played a game on the PC should already be able to get to grips with.

League of Legends looked, and played, very much like a multiplayer Tower Defence game. And I don't really consider Tower Defence to be a genre worth getting excited about. Plenty of people love them, but I have always thought that they are just puzzles that you eventually win by sheer time investment. So, so far I was unthrilled.

Upon completion of the Tutorial, though, I was surprised to be offered ANOTHER Tutorial. This one was for "Battle Training", apparently, which got me wondering what the hell I had just been through. Still, I figured it best to give it a shot, and see what all the fuss is. I am not writing off something so popular without having good reason to sneer, after all!

Battle Training started off by letting me choose from one of three Summoners. There was Ashe, who I already knew, and then there was a fighter guy and a magic guy. I chose the fighter, I think his name was Garen, and really should have stuck with my rules that shout out loud as possible to "ALWAYS GO FOR THE MAGE CLASS, NUMB NUTS!", because the melee is generally such a dull way to play. Especially since in order to hit someone I need to be right in their face. The AI doesn't like to be hit, and runs away as soon as you do hit it, and that means that I got the following interruption at least 100 times during the game:

This Battle Training tutorial taught me the difference between "laning", which is staying in the lanes where the Minions that are automatically spawned go, and "jungling", which seems to be the name for going anywhere else. After a while, I discovered that I much prefer to play using a technique that I call "junglaning", which consists of just going any and everywhere trying to stop that stupid picture from popping up. Also, it didn't help that any time I got anywhere near to the enemy Maphite Bot ran in and slapped me into insta-death. No matter how many Minions I had, or even if Master Yi Bot and Sivir Bot were alongside me, that bastard rock thing took great pleasure in causing me an entire otherworld of pain.

For about the next hour, there was a pattern of my spawning, running towards wherever a fight was taking place, before Rocky came and laid the smackdown on me big time. Every so often, I was told of other things to do in the "jungle" areas, and I quite enjoyed them. But it rally felt like the tutorial would last the REST OF MY GOD DAMN LIFE. So, I quit out of it. "Sod it.", I thought, "Let's take this puppy online.”

This turned out to be a mistake. For two reasons. The first one being that, when it came to the lobby where I got to select my Summoner, a fresh torture was placed in front of me:

WHO IN THE HELL ARE THESE GUYS? Giving me limited time to select from such a wide range of characters that I know nothing about? ARE YOU CRAZY? I need to check stats, to see who is cool, and to make sure that I avoid the melee class at all costs. But, the clock was ticking, so I went with faith and clicked on the pirate guy. I figured with his having guns, he was bound to be ranged.

I figured wrong. I don't actually know WHAT Gangplank is meant to be, but I know that he is not for me. One of his skills is the ability to remove debuffs from himself. Great. I'm sure that would be useful if I had any clue as to what was going on. Now, I KNOW that Gangplank can be useful, because someone on the other team was playing as him. That guy killed me no less than 10 times during the match. My 2 partners must have realised that we were on a hiding to nothing, as after about 5 minutes they just stood at the spawn point. I just kept on running between lanes, "junglaning" my way about, before the other Gangplank inevitably came to release me from the tedious business of living.

By the time the match ended, I was sure of one thing; that I SUCK at League of Legends. However, despite my repeated batterings, I also saw more of the potential in the title. It turns out that I was correct in thinking it is a multiplayer Tower Defence game, but that does not mean it is not fun. The moment when I killed one of the other Summoners, Annie, I realised that even though my pirate guy was a bit non-fun, he still had stuff he could do as he levelled up a bit.

I headed back to the Battle Training tutorial next, this time determined to finish it. I tried with the Mage guy, but didn't really gel with him at all, so I went and gave Ashe another shot. And I discovered that I liked her, and it didn't take long to realise that if I only targeted Minions when near enemy Turrets that I wouldn't get dragged into the Turret's range. It didn't take long to win the match.

And that is where I currently stand. I still have no freaking idea what the hell "Masteries" are, or why I have no Runes of any description, or even if all the crap I bought during my games stays with me between games. But, I have some kind of concept as to what I am meant to be doing now, which is more than half the battle. And, I took a look into the store and saw that there are literally more Heroes to play as than there are atoms in the Universe. Give or take. I am sure that somewhere amongst them will be one that matches my own playstyle, which could best be described as "Reckless" but would be more accurately titled "Suicidal".

I will play more. I will learn. I will suck less. I will eventually be on a winning side, even if they win despite having me. And, eventually, I am sure that I will pick up DOTA 2. Thanks to my new-found experience with the MOBA genre (Multiplayer Online Battle Arena, because Multiplayer Tower Defence would require MuToDe as an acronym and even internet nerds like to sound cool), I may even LIKE DOTA 2, and might even play it TWICE! But, for now, I am quite happy to be a small fish in an immense pond, and I would honestly suggest you give it a try as well.

Surviving the Steam Summer Sale

"Rejoice, cheer. The day is here!
The day your wallet knows to fear.
Affordable gaming will prevail,
In the face of the latest STEAM SUMMER SALE."

Oh dear. Times are hard, and if you are anything like me then your expenditure on games this year has been decimated somewhat. Admittedly, a large part of this is due to just how few games released are inspiring in any way, at least in the AAA realm. The HD consoles have been fed a diet of so much more of the same that they are now to all intents and purposes bloated twins, with only the existence of downloadable titles to save them. PC gaming has been increasingly aiming towards digital only for a long time already, and Steam has been so far ahead of the curve for so long that the curve now resembles a flat line with a dot several miles above it.

Part of Steam's success is down to how bloody useful it is. Digital Rights Management may be universally hated, yet nobody minds the Steam version. Because it has a friends list, achievements, and facilities that allow your titles to be automatically updated. You can log in on any machine, and your entire account exists in "The Cloud", which means that even your save files can be stored there. This may seem like magic if you are a console-only player, but it is the reality that has been around for the last few years.

By far the best thing about Steam, though, is the sales. Twice a year at least, the entire catalogue gets discounted to almost obscene levels. Big titles are frequently sold at 75% off. The general format is that everything is discounted, but every day a selection get highlighted with further discounts. This year, they have added some new ideas in to the mix. We now get to vote on which title from a selection of 3 gets featured, as well as the new "Flash Sales". These are available for 8-12 hours, which means that as well as checking the store at the start of the day (6pm GMT), WE NOW NEED TO BE LOOKING SEVERAL TIMES A DAY! The obvious effect of this is that more people look, which means more people buy, and everyone makes more money.

Cheaper games leads to better sales. PLEASE read that sentence, games publishers everywhere. (Particularly YOU, EA!)

Of course, seasoned customers have learned to worry. This is because when we see some of the incredible bargains that are available, we just can't resist. Impulse purchases are probably responsible for three-quarters of the titles in my own Steam library. I can get a bit silly, and because of this I feel I need to help my fellow gamers. So, with that in mind, here are my 5 rules for making the most of a Steam Sale.

1.) BE PATIENT

Most of the entire catalogue is discounted. However, some of them are discounted even more during any given day. The new votes and Flash Sales mean that there are even more opportunities to get a game cheaper than it costs RIGHT NOW. Which means that the wise person will not buy a game unless it happens to be featured as a Daily Deal or a Flash Sale. If it never reaches this state, then simply buy it on the last day. You lost nothing but a few days.

2.) BUT NOT TOO PATIENT

Often, a game is available at a frankly unbelievable price. If you see it, GET IT IMMEDIATELY. It has been known in the past for games to go on sale, only for the price to rise during the day. Perhaps it was incorrectly priced, perhaps the publishers got greedy. The reason is irrelevant. You pay the price on the screen, and if it changes later you won't be charged the extra. So there is no reason to delay, provided of course that you are following Rule 1.

3.) BE BRAVE

There are many games that you have looked at and thought "I like the looks of that one, but can't afford it today." Well, here is your chance. Set yourself a pricepoint, and look at EVERYTHING that it includes. There are some gems on Steam that don't get the attention they deserve. When they cost £1.49, you owe it to yourself to try it out.

4.) BUT DON'T BE STUPID

Conversely, there are many games out there that you have already written off as "Not my kind of thing." and have therefore not even looked at the price. Well, keep that mindset. No matter how cheap Railworks gets, if you already know you'll never play it, DON'T BUY IT. Stick to your guns, even if it goes down to £0.01. That's money you don't need to spend, and money you may need by the last day.

5.) SHARE THE LOVE

One of the beautiful things about Steam is the friend integration. If you buy a game, all your friends will see this. It also has a Wishlist feature, and when looking at a game's product page, you can see which of your friends want it. Multiplayer games, in particular, are generally sold in packs of 2 or 4, so that you can give a "Gift" copy to anyone with a Steam account. (Or even just an email address if they don't have one.) Which means that, should you be able to afford it, you can make someone very happy. This is behaviour that should be encouraged, because it ALWAYS comes back to you. I frequently gift my friends, and they gift back. Make sure your wishlist is full, as well, because there are usually promotions taking place that allow you to win games from your wishlist. And there are sites that allow you to talk to others looking to trade Steam Gifts. So, take advantage. You might spend £2 on something today only to get something much more valuable to you in the future.

So, go forth. Consume. Multiply! Most of all, have fun. There is a world of gaming out there that you may not be utilising to its fullest. (Most importantly of all, remember the Wishlist thing!)

Day 1 in Day Z.

My error was one that could be referred to as "A rookie mistake".

Until then, everything had been going so well. I found myself on a beach, quite near to the city of Elektrozavodsk. This is one of the two largest population centres in Chernarus, which means that it is where I am most likely to find supplies. Food, tools, and weapons; none of which my backpack currently held. My friend was also fairly near to the city, and he had managed to find a gun. We decided to meet up, as the likelihood of surviving in this place was much greater if we pooled our resources.

Of course, actually getting to my friend was not altogether easy. For a start, neither of us knew the area at all, both being new. We communicated by way of describing various nearby landmarks. "Can you see a lighthouse?" "I'm heading towards three cranes." Several times he asked me if that was me he saw, going into a building, or crawling past a wrecked vehicle. At one point, he only realised that he was watching somebody else when I was able to confirm that I hadn't in fact just been killed.

Slowly, but surely, I made way to the docks. There were some big buildings there, and I felt sure that this would offer more safety. I had to freeze once or twice, not wanting to risk being seen in such a vulnerable state. If they see you, they come for you. You do not want this. For they are fast, angry, and they simply never give up. I also saw at least two other survivors, but they either didn't see me, or decided to ingore me. It is possible that they just hoped that I didn't see them. For, they were as in the dark about me as I was them. At a time when everybody is potentially a great ally or a deadly enemy, it pays not to be too ready to trust.

Slowly, carefully, and as quietly as possible, I ventured into the large disused warehouse. I still had no weapon, but I at least had cover now. There was only one direction that I needed to watch, because even though those ... things ... are dangerous, at least they don't break through walls.  I decided to check out the rest of the building, to head upstairs in the hopes of finding something, anything, that I could use. In one of the siderooms I saw a sight that filled me with joy. A hatchet, right there in the middle of the floor! Immediately, I grabbed hold of it. This was no longer just a mere tool, this was now a conduit for life itself. Finally, able to defend myself, I decided to head back to the door.

Almost immediately, as if to prove to me that the very thought of happiness was a crime here, I heard the telltale growl which indicates that one of THEM has discovered you. It is a sound that fills you with a singular dread, and leaves you hoping that you can stop it quickly. Noise is folly, too much noise is suicide. But, I have caught a break. He is shambling towards me, and I manage to end it with one clean and precise blow to the head.

I think better of going back out. After all, I still have a friend to find somewhere around here. Logic tells me to go to the roof, where I will have a better view of my surroundings. So, up I go. Just as soon as I step onto the roof, my friend asks me "Did you just go out onto the roof?"

He is on the building opposite me. He had had the same plan. Against the odds, we had managed to find each other.

He tells me to wait there, he is coming over to me. I can't let him do that alone, so I go down to help him. We have one encounter, but short work is made of it. We head back up to the roof, in order to make our plans. We are safe up there.

We thought.

See, the mistake we made was in assuming that they can't climb ladders. It turns out that they can. And, not only can they climb ladders, but they can climb them en masse if they want to. Without our even knowing it, there are 4 of them heading towards us right now. By the time we realise it, they are right on top of us. I stand at the top of the ladder, swinging wildly. My friend is shooting. Perhaps he shoots me, I honestly don't know. What I do know is that by the time they are dead I am bleeding. I bandage myself up, and we change our plan to "Let's go somewhere else, see if we can find another gun and some more ammo." Unfortunately, the 4 that attacked us are not the only 4 in the building. Another encounter leaves him without ammo, and the two of us bleeding to death without any way to bandage ourselves. At this point, it is just a matter of time before we die. I do the only thing left open to me.

I bury my hatchet in his head, and he drops down dead. With the dissipating strength that remains to me, I go back up to the roof. Taking a look around, I allow the power of this place to sink in. And then I throw myself off the edge. It is a far, far better thing that I do now, ending it when it is still my choice, than it would be to let one of THEM finish me off.

GAMERS! Draw your battle lines TODAY!

I'm troubled, loves.

Diablo III has done something rather unexpected in a recent update. Nope, it wasn't the introduction of the real-money auction house which is the actual reason why Blizzard insist you are always online in the first place, a feature bafflingly missing from the product at launch. (Which is a huge part of the reason why so many were so angry, because when something they didn't give a shit about that didn't even exist yet was STILL getting in the way of them playing, they were quite rightly pissed off.) Oh, they did finally bring that in, but that is not the only new thing introduced.

The new feature that I am talking about is the trial system. Apparently, a player in their first 72 hours is potentially disruptive, and so these players are not allowed in to the full game. (That they bought and paid for.) Instead, they are restricted to the first act, and can only interact with other players who are in their 72 hour trial period. None of the content in Act 2 onwards (that they bought and paid for) is available to them.

HAS THE WORLD GONE STUPID ... sorry ... MORE STUPID WHILE I WASN'T PAYING ATTENTION?

Somebody thought this was a good idea. Somebody, somewhere, floated this suggestion. What is most astonishing about this is that somebody else agreed, and gave it the green light.

What astonishes me the most of all is that the internet isn't going batshit about it. Possibly because it doesn't affect all those millions who pre-purchased the game and thus already endured reception of Blizzard's shaft? I can only imagine this is the case.

If you are one of those who aren't making a fuss about this, then you are one of those that will ultimately allow more of this crap to happen to us. And, instead of just endlessly click-click-clicking, you should be calling your comrades to arms over this. An injury to one of us is an injury to us all.

WHERE do Blizzard get off thinking they can treat people like this? On what mandate can they arbitrarily decide to cut people off from the game THAT THEY BOUGHT AND PAID FOR until Blizzard say "Heh, it's ok, you can go in now."? The answer is unsurprisingly obvious.

We did this to ourselves.

Right now, I am not seeing anything like the levels of hatred thrown Blizzard's way that I did when Diablo 3 was released. I should be seeing a lot more. Any and all complaints about Diablo III that relate to the way Blizzard are treating the customers are entirely justified. Customers in Korea are still getting errors when trying to connect, to the extent that Blizzard are being forced to refund them.

If you went out for a meal, you would expect the place to bring whatever you ordered from the menu to your table. If they were to say to you something along the lines of "I'm sorry, you are a new customer. You will only be able to order the steaks after you have finished a meal with us today." then you would not only make the entirely justifiable decision to not tip that waiter, you would also never eat steak in that restuarant because you would never go there again. You would not allow them to treat you that way, so why is it different when games companies do it?

Perhaps I may seem unusually angry towards Blizzard? Well, just so you know, I am merely angry towards companies who display such outwards contempt to their customers. Polytron, for example, find themselves in a similar boat.

They first came onto my radar for hatred when Phil Fish made his now infamous comment that "Japanese games suck" shortly before the release of Fez. To mere ripples of dislike from the internet in general, which is surprising considering how borderline racist the statement is. He apologised, naturally, and it seems that this is fair enough. (It isn't.) So, duly, everybody bought Fez and then raved about it. I bought it too, but I am not as enthralled as the rest of the world is, despite it being exactly my kind of thing. Maybe it being exactly my kind of thing is the problem, as I have played plenty of stuff that does what Fez does. Apart from the QR code stuff, which REALLY doesn't sit well with the style of game, in my opinion.

But all of this is taking me completely off-topic, because as much as Phil Fish deserves hatred for being such a cock, the latest development in the Fez saga doth truly taketh the caketh. As is increasingly the way these days, games are released on a set date regardless of what state they may actually be in. Such old-fashioned concepts as "Making sure the thing works before releasing it" are seen as quaint traditions that are just not needed in these days where everybody has an internet connection. Fair enough, Fez is currently ONLY available online, but even so it is a poor choice of ways of doing business.

I honestly can't remember the last time I bought a game on XBox 360 that didn't eventually get an update of some sort. Generally, these updates happen on day 1, so there is a pretty good chance that any game you play on the console will require the update. And you see others doing it all the time, too, with them coming online about 30 seconds after they last came online. It is so accepted that it has in fact become ubiquitous. We just know that games get updated, often for seemingly no real reason at all.

Fez has just been updated. Updated into actual uselessness. It seems that the new version renders save files from the old version corrupt and unplayable. Polytron first advised people not to download it, and then MicroSoft pulled it from the XBox Marketplace.

WHAT. THE. ACTUAL. FUCK?

It completely amazes me that a situation like this can ever possibly come about. For a start, Polytron should have picked this up during testing. Shouldn't they? Is it wrong of me to want people to do the job that they are supposed to be doing? That they didn't makes me think ... did they even have QA on this? And, once they failed to spot it, isn't MicroSoft supposed to have additional teams to pick up on stuff like this in order to allow certification? If so, how did they not spot this?

How did Bethesda not spot when a Skyrim save file larger than 6Mb became unreadable?

How was Mass Effect 3 allowed to leave the warehouses with an inability to faithfully import a custom Shepherd that was built in the first game?

It is not unreasonable to expect games to ship without problems. It is not entitlement to want what you paid for. It is entirely justifiable if we get cross as a result of these errors. Particularly in the case of disc-based games. Yes, most of us are connected and can probably update, but when the updates cause further problems, WE ARE RIGHT TO DEMAND TO KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON.

The games industry has a bunch of problems, some big and some small. One of the biggest it faces in the years to come is to stop making us all feel like we are nothing more than a number to them. There is an apparent lack of CARE in the way that the big games publishers are treating us. From the outside, all we ever seem to be are revenue streams, and when we demand our money's worth, well ... they don't seem to like it.

Instead of inventing yet more schemes to squeeze the very lifeblood out of us, publishers need to instead start focusing on ways to win us back. Other industries realise the power and importance of brand loyalty, why don't games? If you went into a car dealership showroom, and were told that your car would be ready tomorrow but you will have to wait a week before you could open the windows, then you simply would not buy that car. Games publishers, however, seem to actively loathe their customers to the point where that analogy is not only accurate, but could actually be extended.

We have got to stop tolerating this behaviour, guys! For every millimetre we willingly give to them today will mean that we have more to fight for when they finally cross the line. For some of us, that line is already a memory, and it is those vocal souls that we need to start getting behind. If we fight amongst ourselves, spouting such patently ridiculous rhetoric as "It's a big game, there are bound to be some bugs." instead of "This is unacceptable, don't buy Dawnguard until you know for sure it works.", then we will ultimately have only ourselves to blame.

We should not be paying to beta test. PLEASE, I beg you, stop doing it. Or else, instead of downloading a free ending for Mass Effect 3, in the future you'll be paying to download better endings for all your games. You just spent 3 games uniting the entire universe against a common threat, surely you can join in with this much more straightforward cause?

The love that dare not speak its' name.

Apple are missing a trick, you know?

Their adverts show that the iPhone is a truly marvellous machine, able to answer all the queries that we already know the answer to ("Siri, who is my brother?"), as well as making it exceptionally easy for us to spend a small fortune on games we already played for free on flash websites. It does this because it is such an unobtrusive little device, a portal directly into our bank accounts that somehow manages to bypass all that messy "Should I actually be buying this?" malarkey that our brains usually bother us with. It has a hardwired connection to our pleasure centres, and once you get one in your possession it becomes borderline impossible to imagine life without one.

Where you once sneered that mobile games were no substitute for the real thing, you now celebrate the latest mini-masterpiece. All your friends are playing it, after all, so it would be rude to not join in. Be it flinging furious avians at porcine egg-thieves, escaping the clutches of some very nasty simians, or just building an aeronautical empire, at some point we have all found ourselves deep in the clutches of the kind of games that seemingly ONLY phones can provide. We play them at every spare moment; whilst semi-watching TV, or waiting for the bus. Or, in one other locale.

Of course, nobody ever mentions this last place. Nobody seems to admit to it readily at all. Everybody goes there, multiple times daily, and yet it as is this is some esoteric secret area, with ceremonies known only to the lucky few. I do it, you do it, and he does it. Yet, it as if nobody does it.

What the HELL are you talking about, Lee?

I'm talking about the toilet.

If you have had your iPhone for more than about 3 days, then by now you may well have succumbed to the temptation. It starts off innocently enough, at first. You are JUST shy of a new high-score, or 3-starring that level that has been bugging you all night. Even worse, perhaps you need to wait 3 more minutes to be able to build something else, but if you wait 2 more minutes you will make a horrible mess? Whatever the actual gateway is, sooner or later, you walk through.

And then, sheer bliss. Beautiful relief. Heaven in hand-held form.

It's not actually the phone, you know? It's that holding it in and the resultant adrenaline hit that is the real biggie. However, if this just happens to be combined with the dopamine hit from completing whatever task you just broke your personal barrier for, then the result is deadly.

For, now, you realise that you can just do this every time you go to the loo!

It's a slippery slope, my friends. A slippery, smelly, and sometimes sticky slope. Gone are the days when you went in, evacuated, and then left. They are replaced with a whole new routine. Suddenly, visits to the bathroom are that little bit more ... welcomed. They last that little bit longer. Before you know it, you are unable to go into the room without taking your phone, even if you weren't actually playing something already. You enter into a trance-like state, where you are no longer aware of the passage of time until your other half bangs on the door saying "HURRY UP, I NEED TO GO!"

Beware, mobile gamer, for this is an inevitability. This will happen to you, the same as it happened to everyone else. Pretty soon, you will start to plan around it. At work, you look at the clock and think "This is a reasonable enough time to nip off and get a couple of shots of Bejewelled Blitz in". And so, off you go. Because the phone is always with you, no pantomime is needed. You just go, and ... uh ... go.

Your colleagues all know what you are up to, naturally. But, a silent and unwritten pact has been entered into. We all stay quiet about it, possibly due to some mutual shame. We KNOW that when we read a tweet from any app that the person who sent it had their pants around their ankles at the time, but we never think of it this way. We may even realise that our latest Draw Something picture was done this way. (SOMETHING has to explain the sheer amount of penises.) But we block this behaviour from our minds, thus making it acceptable. Each and every one of us thinks it is their own dirty little secret.

Apple never mentions this on the ads. The App Store keeps it under wraps. Even your friends, back when they first started evangelising the phone itself, kept this one to themselves. The conspiracy of silence is so complete that you may not even be aware it is there at all. Which is odd, because when you think about it, it is pretty damn awesome that you can game whilst taking a dump. Even more awesome once you think about the sheer convenience of it, because if you grab your DS then everybody knows what you are up to, but your phone is so natural that even though everybody secretly knows, they publicly don't even suspect.

Yup. Apple sure are missing a trick. Ads that convey this idea. "Top Crapper Apps" lists*. As all-pervading as they now are, there are still sectors of society that look at anything Apple and think it is somewhat above them. But, if this cat were let out of the bag, well ... there would be no reasons left. How could you hate a company with that level of honesty?

Oh, and just in case you go this way, Apple; I accept cheques, BACS, PayPal, or even good old-fashioned cash.

*Angry Birds, unquestionably. Without the bathroom, I would never have gotten 3 stars on any levels beyond the first few.

I call this disease "Games".

At times, I am driven to despair by the games industry.

Games ... are ... great. They really are. I know that this is a gaming blog, and the temptation is naturally to search the entire lexicon for superlatives and similes, but there is no need when a word that describes how good games are perfectly already exists. I use the word "great" because of how "great" games are, and how "great" great is. Sometimes, it pays to stick with the classics.

What is less great, however, is the whole circus that surrounds videogames. It really does run an entire gamut of archetypes, almost all of whom are clueless. From publishers who think that we all have hedge funds we can siphon off of to pay over the odds for never-ending pools of pointless DLC, through marketing teams who think that only 15 year old boys play videogames, to the writers who refuse to accept that games are an entertainment medium, and as such should be treated as AN ENTERTAINMENT MEDIUM. With all the bonuses and drawbacks this entails.

Perhaps it would be best if I were to illuminate more clearly what I am hoping to get at.

Let us take a look at the cinema industry, and the way it is treated. This is a world that appears to be completely out of touch with reality, paying stupendous amounts of money to the stars at the top of the tree. Arnold Schwarzenegger once got a Lear Jet as part of his fee. This sounds insane, but the people making the movie thought that Arnie's presence in it was worth whatever he asked for. It is no surprise, then, that cinema budgets are obscene. However, they still know that no matter what it costs to make a blockbuster movie, the viewing public don't care about that. All they want to do is to see it for less than 20 local currency units. Avatar cost well over $200 million to make, and yet I paid £7.50 to see it in the cinema, and then paid £10 for the DVD. It remains the highest grossing movie of all time, having raked in over $2 BILLION.

Games, however, take this attitude that they are somehow different, and that we should pay more for them because they, apparently, cost a lot to make. Well, I still don't know of any game that has cost more than $100 million, although by now some the of the Modern Warfare games might be getting close. But I still need to pay £40 to play most of the bloody things, and that is before they pile on the inevitable useless tat. It seems that in order to access one of the classes in Borderlands 2, I will be required to pre-purchase the game. Now .... hold on a cotton-pickin' minute, there. What if the game isn't worth buying? (I don't doubt that I will adore it, but I have an aversion to handing over money on promises alone. I call this disease "Not being stupid".)

The movie industry doesn't do this. There is no benefit to me if I choose to go and watch a film at Vue, Warner, or ... ummm ... some other cinema chain. They all show the same film. And, even though some stores do pack bonus content in with it in the shape of extra discs, THEY ALL STILL SELL THE SAME MOVIE TO ME!

Games think they are different.

Marketing is another problem area. Recently, the trailer for Hitman: Absolution rattled a few feathers. You can see why, below:

Oh, we were all up in arms about this one! "SEXISM" and "MISOGYNY" were seen everywhere. "GLAMOURISATION AND SEXUALISATION OF VIOLENCE TOWARDS WOMEN" was a particular favourite of mine. It seems that we didn't like that trailer. Or rather, after a little bit of research, it turns out that we are being TOLD to not like that trailer.

I honestly couldn't give a shit, myself. I have only ever played about an hour or so of one of the Hitman games, because I have an aversion to stealth games in general. (I call this disease "Liking to have fun".) In Hitman, the whole point is to get through the games without anyone ever being aware that you even exist. The trailer misses this aspect most spectacularly, trying to sell it as an all-out action game. That just happens to have women in lingerie who were originally dressed as nuns, because manchildren LOVE THAT KIND OF THING.

I didn't see exploitation, though. I saw Agent 47 defending himself from enemies who were trying to kill him. The nuns did not pack Rosary beads, they packed serious weaponery. What was he supposed to do? "I'm sorry, I don't hit ladies."

The trailer was low class, high impact, eye-candy. It was meant to get people excited about the game. It did that by doing what Hollywood has done for years. However, when movies do it, there isn't some army of self-important hacks telling us that the art form should be above this, and that movies need to do more to appeal to women. By and large, the world has accepted the "Chick flick" and the "Bro movie", and they are happy for movies to just be taken at face value.

Games think they are different.

And, finally, we come to the current Tomb Raider furore.

This time, we are faced with a game that dares to allude to an attempted rape on young Lara. OH, MY! The twitterati love this one, alright.

It all stems from this Kotaku article, in which, whilst discussing the aims to make players want to invest more emotionally into Lara, Ron Rosenberg stated that enemies will try to rape her. Naturally, the shit hit the fan pretty much instantly, and now there is a whole world of back-pedalling going on from Eidos, and several universes of anger from the internet in general.

That single word, rape, changed everything. The context of the interview is not remarkably different to one from December 2010.
What IS different, though, is the uptake and reaction.

The thing is, though, why not include such material in a videogame? Are we not mostly adults these days? Are we incapable of deciding for ourselves if this makes for interesting character development? Movies and books have covered this ground plenty of times. Even comics are allowed to explore these areas without being accused of outright sexism and misogyny.

Games think they are different.

The rape thing? It's just bad writing. It is the idea of somebody who thinks that the only way to get strong is by overcoming adversity, and when said somebody is female then the most adverse thing that could possibly happen is rape. If it were in a movie or book it would be cast aside as such. A B-movie. A pulp novel. But, because it is in a game, it is seen as some sort of sacred cow and therefore we can't touch it. There is this bizarre idea that games all need to be worthy in some way. They don't. Sometimes, entertainment can be pure escapist fantasy. Sometimes, it can be mindless and throwaway. Sometimes, it can be utter rubbish that is still entertaining to some.

We decry that games get singled out. We say that we want them to accept us, and join in with us. But, when it comes right down to it, we don't. We want to be unique. We want to be different. We take every opportunity we can to exclude ourselves, to differentiate ourselves, to alienate ourselves. The cake that we want to have is that games are no different to movies or books, which precludes us from eating the cake labelled "Games are no different to movies or books".

We can be JUST LIKE THEM, we really can. But, in order to do that, we have to be JUST LIKE THEM. This means allowing games developers to explore areas that other media are free to. This means accepting that there will sometimes be things that we don't like. And this also means allowing adult themes to be discussed in an adult manner. I can read books about tortured souls agonising over their decisions. I can watch movies about spiritual journies and growth. But, I can only play games where big men and women do things that strong people do. It's pathetic, I want to be able to do more than just shoot stuff. (I call this disease "Being an adult".)

Games are great. To anyone who plays them, we already know this. To the outside world, though, they will never achieve greatness until we allow them to. We may never get a videogame equivalent of Lolita, mostly because the second somebody were to try it they would be torn apart. Not by the rest of the world, though, but by US. We need to ease up on ourselves, and let games stand on their own two feet. If the world hates Tomb Raider because it is a bad game, then that is fine. But to not even give it a chance because we ourselves assume the worst whenever anything like this is mentioned? I can't understand why we are doing it. We are not all kids, you know?

E3, Day 1. Or, How I learned to stop giving a shit about E3.

It's that time of year, loves. The Electronic Entertainment Expo, or E3. The annual orgy of self indulgence that our "industry" hypes us towards for the other 51 weeks of the year, which amounts to a hype train the likes of which no other "industry" gets anywhere near. For the next few days, news will not trickle onto your favourite website the way it normally does. Instead, you can expect a deluge of the damn stuff, as the entire output of an entire year is squeezed into 4 days. Vidyagames, eh? Gotta love them.

Not to mention all the blogs, which will all do their bit to tell you what they thought of the press conferences. I'm no different in that respect. That's what this will be. Do read on, and I will educate you as to what I think of I what I saw yesterday.

The day started really well with the Microsoft conference. Immediately, they hit us smack in the centre of the face with some Halo 4 footage. And it was good. VERY good. All looked in place for a good show, and then ... oh dear, it all went a bit sour after that.

Where to start with the MS problems? How about DO YOU LIKE SPORTS? If you have a body, you are an athlete. A new approach to fitness. Dance Central, and Usher. ALL of that. Know how much of that anybody watching on the streams liked?

None of it.

Then there was the focus on entertainment partners. ESPN, UFC, and others that I don't remember because people mocking the show were much more interesting. XBox Music, which looks like attempt #2537625362 to copy iTunes, was another reason to not care. Internet Explorer on XBox might have been something to be excited about 5 years ago.

Smart glass. WHAT IN THE HELL ARE THEY TALKING ABOUT? As far as I can tell, it is as if I am watching TV with my netbook on my lap. Um ... that is something I can, and frequently DO, already do. I've been doing it for the last few years. I am not going to spend anything extra to do it in a Microsoft branded walled garden, so this is a dead concept unless it gives me something gamey to do. The evidence suggests that it won't.

And then we had the most mind-numbing end imaginable, where we sat through 11 minutes worth of Black Ops 2 footage. Ironically, at one point they skipped forwards "IN THE INTEREST OF TIME", and yet, even amongst the audience that should care about it, we all wanted it to end at least 3 minutes ago.

EA were up against the last episode of Game of Thrones. Sorry, EA, that was a no contest. I didn't watch, but apparently didn't miss too much anyway.

Ubisoft, on the other hand ... well played! The first act was Flo Rida on stage, and by this point I was beginning to wonder if I hadn't accidentally tuned in to the wrong E3. But things got onto the right track shortly after, with some footage of Rayman Legends on ... YES, a Wii U gamepad! And then the Assassin's Creed gameplay, which did the almost impossible and made an AC game look remotely interesting. Shootmania was entirely laughable, and people seemed to like Far Cry 3, but the conference ended on the absolute and undeniable star of the show to date; Watch Dogs. A new cyberpunk looking .... thingy ... which set everyone chattering. It seems that the rest of the industry have forgotten that announcing new things is what gets us excited. So good did it look, that everybody just assumed that it was running on next gen technology, and the subsequent revelation that it will be out on the consoles we currently have made everyone suddenly think it would be less good than it looked to be. (Such is the thoroughness of the hype we face these days, we are seemingly unable to appreciate a single thing we have access to today.)

And finally, at the horrendous time of 2am, came the Sony show. First on stage was David Cage, showing off his latest tedious non-game Beyond. Having made a big deal about the actrees playing the robot being Ellen Page, we were then treated to a 5 minute demo where she didn't speak, and no discernable gameplay of any kind happened at all. Next up, Chop Chop Matser Onion and friends showed off the utterly dull looking All Stars Battle Royale, which was a phenomenal trailer for Smash Bros. Melee or even Power Stone 2. There followed a Black Ops game for Vita, a version of Assassin's Creed 3 for Vita, and a co-op mode for Far Cry 3 that may or may not be PS3, or even Vita, exclusive. And then, the world went crazy and SONY showed us their big innovation; books.

BOOKS. Or, to be more accurate, WONDERBOOK. Utilising AR to make reading even more interactive. That sentence right there is what SONY failed to convey for the next 20 minutes, during which time they managed to make playing a Harry Potter spellbook look as exciting as handwashing cabbages. This was followed by another list of entertainment partners, which I nearly slept through because, and I do not want to understate this, I DON'T CARE ABOUT IT. I have a TV set sepcifically to watch TV on, computers for internet access, and music players and CDs for music. I do not want or need more things that are not games on my GAMES CONSOLES.

They ended up with The Last of Us, which some whooped and hollered about but looked for all the world to me like an Uncharted mod. Oldcharted: Drake's Violence. It was quite brutal stuff, it has to be said, but ultimately left me a bit cold.

One overpowering thought came out of yesterday, for me. The desire to actually push  any boundaries with games is clearly missing from the big publishers and at least two of the platform holders. Things are looking mighty pretty, but they are so dreadfully dull and predicatable. HERE'S GOD OF WAR 4. HERE'S GEARS OF WAR 4. HERE'S FOUR CRY. HERE'S A COPY OF SOMETHING YOU BOUGHT 8 YEARS AGO. Where is the innovation? E3 is meant to get everyone pumped, and all it is doing at the moment is giving the big boys avenues in which to embarass themselves. Sequels, sequels, violence, and sequels. A rush to be a set-top box, and all-in-one entertainment system. The idea is laudable, but the reason that the whole world bought a PLAYStation in the first place was for something to PLAY on. There is simply no need to ever use Youtube on your XBox, especially as doing that means you can't use it to play a game on.

I hope Nintendo kicks some cars over tonight, I really do. So far, it has been a very non-thrilling "Biggest week of the year" for our hobby. It is actually getting harder to give a shit about the big budget and hardcore AAA consoles by the year, and the thought of new hardware being announced is not one I welcome very much at all. If all I have to look forwards to are yearly updates to franchises I stopped caring about a few years ago, why should I sit and watch this crap at all?

My hope is that I'm not alone. I am frequently ahead of the curve on these things, and am used to being laughed at one year and then paraphrased two years later. But, at least according to the people I was interacting with while watching these conferences, in the delighfully old-fashioned way that didn't require my games console at all no less, the attitude seemed to be shared. This can, of course, mean that I am just getting old. But, it could also mean that E3 is.

Doing it wrong. (How my 5 year old taught me a life lesson.)

Life changing events are, possibly by their very nature, incredibly rare creatures. For one thing, they can only definitively appear once per life, else they find themselves incorrectly monikered. "Dude, I had so many life-changing events last night that I think I'm dead now." Yeah, you're not really likely to hear that any time soon, are you? (Unless you drink in some of the dives I have done in the past...) Epiphanies are so powerful purely because you don't get one per day.

When they do come along, then, it is essential to listen to them. This is the position I find myself in right now, although if I am entirely honest I am not fully sure how to deal with it.

It stems from playing a game with my son on the 360 the other night. The game in question was Dead Pixels on XBox Live Indie Games, which is 80 MS point worth of brilliance and DEFINITELY worth your money. I was pointed in its direction by Indie Gamer Chick, who, despite the atrocious site name, runs a blog that is at least noble and at times well worth reading. At the time, it sat at #1 in her Top 10, and that was what prompted me to download the trial. I have been off zombies in recent months, mainly because you can't switch a game on without encountering shambling bastards these days, so I admit that it passed me by at time of release.

Anyway, it is a very good game, being more than just the mindless wave shooter the screenshots make it out to be. There are RPG elements in there, weapon upgrades, and it has local 2-payer co-op. Any parent knows how much this adds to a game when the possibility of playing it alongside your kids exists. Sure, the subject matter may be questionable, but he's my son and I take full responsibility for the way I am bringing him up. He plays what I think he'll be able to process, and anything that I deem too much is stored out of his reach. You know, the way it should be done?

We were having a great time, except that I ran out of bullets. There were no stores to go into, and no building s to search, so I was forced to melee the zombies. This amounts to mashing the B button, doing 5 or so HP of damage, and risking getting damaged in return. Benjie saw me doing this, and decided to do the same. Despite having a shotgun full of shells, he started poking zombies in the gut and giggling about it.

To my shame, I told him not to. TO. MY. SHAME.

Here we were, my 5 year old and I, side by side against the undead hordes. Comrades in arms with a front row centre ticket to Armageddon, and what do I do? I tell him "You're doing it wrong." Which, if this were real, would be accurate. But, this wasn't real. We were playing a game.

PLAYING. A. GAME!

What kind of sick maladjust am I to tell my 5 year old how to play a game properly? When nothing is riding on the outcome beyond some quality time with my own flesh-and-blood, what in the world possessed me to try to regulate his enjoyment? So he could live longer, and not turn into a zombie himself? That is reason enough, if he was also 41 and actually gave a shit about the outcome. But, he is 5. He has his own flowchart about playing games:

Bear in mind that this is the kid who spent an HOUR on the first track of Trials Evolution, simply pressing Y to bailout during the initial downhill part, laughing his head off whilst doing so. This is the kid who keeps on loading Dorito's Crash Course up, purely to squash his avatar flat, smack it at the screen, and eventually to make the chicken sound. It is his way of playing, and he loves it, and then some big bully comes along and tells him not to enjoy himself. Some big bully spoils his fun, in order to have his own version of fun.

It was a painful moment when I realised what I had been doing.

And then I think about my partner. She likes games where you get to make things, build things, design things. The Sims was a drug, and now Minecraft is. But, she cheats. If there is an infinite money code, IN IT GOES! She practically squealed with delight when I showed her the item duplication glitch in Minecraft, which means she can more or less have as much of any resource as she likes. I have, over the years, mocked her for this, accusing her of denying herself challenge and enjoyment.

You know what? Fuck me. Fuck me and my bullshit noise.

(Amusingly, in order to do the Minecraft glitch, we needed to kill spiders to get string. Which meant that we were no longer playing on Peaceful, so as to allow the required mob to actually spawn. I do enjoy the irony inherent in having to play the game "properly" to be able to cheat at it.)

I have long fought against the kinds of spods online that inherit the playing communities and try to police them by placing restrictions on games in the name of improving competitiveness. The single best example of this mentality I can think of is to be found in the Smash Bros. community. There exists a certain type of player who frowns upon the randomness inherent in both the items that drop onto the stages, and even some of the stages themselves. They argue that the fights should only be won by the best players, and that if the Hammer spawns next to the weaker player thus giving them an advantage that all the balance is broken. The ruleset is quite restrictive. They are joined by a very vocal group of players who want to control Pokémon, by placing all sorts of clauses onto the game that purport to eliminate luck. For example, you are not allowed to use any moves that increase your evasiveness, because ... well, to be frank, I never quite bothered to listen to their reasons. Because...

Their arguments are utter bollocks. The better players can win despite the proliferation of random bonuses. I know this because I once spent an afternoon getting my arse handed to me by a guy who knew the ins and outs of every single aspect of Smash Bros., and would beat me regardless of who I played as or what I did. I then got my own back in a couple of Pokémon battles, despite not banning anything from the matches. I have actually, despite being against clauses, built a team that is "legal" for battles against any who do, but I was happy to let my friend use whatever he liked. I was confident that my understanding and cleverness would be enough to beat him, and he was just as confident in his Smash Bros. ability.

I hate that I was telling my son to play a game "properly", even though I do realise that as a parent I have a duty to teach him things. The point is, with Benjie it isn't always easy. He is such an intelligent boy, but there are things that he just does not engage in.

Yesterday, at a hospital appointment with a specialist, we were told that he probably has some degree of Asperger's Syndrome. Whilst not necessarily being an outright diagnosis, he is on the spectrum, and we need to adjust accordingly. So, today, I find myself a little confused. Part of me feels a monstrous guilt over berating him for playing the way he does, but then another part of me feels a need to make him play things like the manual says, because I do not want him to end up unable to function in society the way other Asperger's sufferers do. (Other sufferers like the friend I played Smash Bros. and Pokémon with.) My own knowledge of the syndrome is too limited, and I need to read up about it some more.

At the end of the day, all I can really do for now is to take heart from what I did learn. Which is that he is 5 years old, and my playtime with him is something that I need to squeeze every ounce of joy that I can from. And if that means exasperatedly shooting him when he turns himself into a zombie because he would rather pokepokepoke than BOOM, then so be it.

Welcome to the future, where you are more important than you realise.

"Come gather 'round people, wherever you roam

And admit that the waters around you have grown

And accept it that soon you'll be drenched to the bone

If your time to you is worth savin'

Then you better start swimmin' or you'll sink like a stone

For the times they are a-changin'".

- Bob Dylan

They really are. The marketplace in 2012 is nothing like the one in 2000. In fact, it is barely even like the one in 2010. The games industry is an ever-evolving chameleonic freak, which moves faster than your first poop at 6am following one of the more serious nights on the town. By which I do not mean that games are like kebabs, although they do tend to move through systems quite quickly.

But, let's cast our minds back to the last generation. The chances are you bought your games at a specialist retailer, maybe having read about them first in a print magazine, and you played them on a machine designed purely for the purpose. You probably didn't play online, and you certainly didn't get too many opportunities to connect with your friends whilst playing. Well, you might have shared text messages back and forth, and possibly even spoke with friends via the magic of MSN/AIM/ICQ or their ilk if you were of a particularly futuristic inclination.

What you didn't do, probably, is blog about it afterwards. You may have chatted in an online environment, possibly a forum of some sort. You could have argued with the review that was featured on your favourite website, or maybe even wrote into your print magazine of choice. But, you were limited in your options when it came to putting the world to rights when they didn't agree with you.

In a similar vein, there was a lot less in the way of options for actually buying games in the first place. You either went to the shops, or perhaps you were brave enough to trust this whole new-fangled "shopping online" idea that was clearly never going to catch on.

In 2012, that world seems somewhat quaint and old-fashioned, does it not? Can you imagine if we were to go back to it? Simply put, we never will. The world has evolved.

We no longer need to go and find the one shop on the High Street that knows what games are, or go into the other electronics stores and be overcharged. Games are available in supermarkets, in music stores, and when it comes to online they are literally everywhere. There are as many avenues to buy games in 2012 as there are atoms in the universe. For the first time ever, we can actually buy games directly on the machines on which we can play them, without needing to leave the house at all. (This was very much a dream in the last generation, incidentally.)

There are more machines to play games on, too. It is no longer just our PlayStation or whatever Nintendo have out. There are 4 distinct Nintendo machines, 4 different PlayStations, and the XBox 360. But, even more astonishingly, mobile phones are a genuine platform now, not to mention browser-based games and social platforms like Facebook. "Gamification" is a genuinely accepted term. There are more games on the market now than any human could ever hope to play in three lifetimes.

You know what hasn't evolved so much, though? The games press. The media. And, for large parts, the whole machinery that we refer to as The Games Industry. They are still quite stuck in pre-2010 ways of thinking, with huge sectors seemingly unable to move with the times. The map is much bigger than it once was, with new ways to cross it, but they still think that the old ways are the best ways, somewhat like back when you used to think that you would never get a mobile phone.

10 years ago, a game like Minecraft would never have seen the light of day. It only exists in the format it does now because people paid for it while it was still being developed. Take the concept to one of the big publishers, and they would almost certainly have insisted on the addition of aliens, guns, and big-titted women. They would have called it Miner 2049'r, marketed it exclusively to the teenage boys that bought the magazines, and been happy if it scraped a half a million sales at a £39.99 RRP. That is nothing like what happened, when the title was released onto XBox Live Arcade to the tune of over a million downloads on the first day. It made profit in an HOUR, at an RRP of 1600 MS points, or about £15 in real money. It is of course important to realise that well over a million people had already bought it on the PC, otherwise MS would have been in absolutely no hurry to put it on their service.

Games creation has been democratised. They are all over Kickstarter, and various other Alphafunding and Crowdsourcing initiatives. Chances are, if you have an idea for a game, then you don't need a publisher to pitch it to.

Games purchasing is slowly but surely going the same way. Digital distribution is a powerful tool, mainly because it allows for dynamic pricing. Right now, the Because We May promotion is taking place, where independent developers are sticking their middle fingers up at publishers and stores who refuse to move with the times. All they want is to be able to set their own prices when they want to. It is insanity to think that they shouldn't be allowed to. Do yourself a massive favour and check it out, basically every independent hit of the last couple of years is involved.

Games writing is being democratised, too. Everyone and their dog has a blog. The problem here is that the mainstream sites seem to think that they are still more special, and somehow superior to the common voice, but the simple truth is that they are not. Nope, YOU, dear reader, are as important to this industry as any named games journalist you could care to mention. Don't allow them to let you think otherwise, either. Your blog may be as tiny as mine, although the chances are you get more readers, but your voice is infinitely more important than the publishers want you to think it is. Metacritic actually dares to remove user reviews that it thinks are harmful. Well, no disrespect is meant here, but when 4,000 people give a game an average of 4.1 against 51 giving it an average of 89%, I think I know which group SHOULD carry the most weight.

ActiVision, as an example, have recently signed a contract with Bungie for their next IP. And the details that have been leaked are staggering. The deal is for 4 games, one every two years, with expansions in the interim years. If Bungie can pull off an average of 90% or above on Gamerankings.com, then they get a $2.5 million bonus. But, if the first game sells less than 5 million copies, then Acti can terminate the contract immediately.

WHY have Bungie signed into this? They are now beholden to two remnants of a bygone age. A publisher that they don't actually need, and a rating system that is increasingly irrelevant. Yes, paid journalists, I called you irrelevant. Your sites exist entirely on the publishers terms, these same publishers who are no longer needed. They play the tune, you dance, and you are scared to rock the boat. Whereas, little Nobby Bloggocks with his Wordpress magnum opus can say what he wants when he wants and there is not a damn thing the publishers can do about it. He isn't getting free copies and expenses paid trips to visit games in exactly the conditions the publishers want them to be displayed in, so when he has a complaint IT IS MORE VALID THAN YOURS.

Diablo III has revealed to us all the differing states of our worlds. Professional critics rate it high, customers who feel they have been treated badly rate it less high. But, which is the number that draws the headlines? Which is the number the advertising money will go to? Which is the one that decides who gets their bonuses? The journalists, who have been fluffed for months prior to the games release and are now just SO eager to please? Or the little guy who has genuine anger but is being told to stop crying about it because he is nothing but an entitled brat?

I have no doubt that one day Diablo III will indeed be a brilliant game. But that day isn't here yet. Somehow, though, the games press have given it a free pass, which is what they also did with Skyrim before it, and doubtless what they will also do again before the year is through. Games that are unfinished, full of bugs, that simply don't work; these are not games that deserve 9 and 10 reviews. At the other end of the scale are games like Resident Evil Operation Raccoon City, Ridge Racer Unbounded, and Dragon's Dogma. Games that divide the critics because, and this only ever becomes clear if you read multiple reviews, THEY DID NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY WERE PLAYING.

Gentlemen, there is a clear message hidden beneath my anger. Your critics are out of touch. They sneer at you, proclaiming themselves more informed and more relevant. They don't even entertain some of that which you enjoy the most. Do you play anything on Facebook? You are scum, according to these self-aggrandising tossers, completely forgetting that in the current relationship it is actually you who hold the power. Stop clicking on every titbit they dripfeed to you, and they will once again have to start working for a living. We are in an age where the hype machine is now so well oiled that we have countdown clocks for trailers. We have bonus content locked away because you didn't pre-order at the right retailer. We have huge websites read by thousands where the reviewer has no clue what to do in a game that doesn't explicitly tell them every single thing.

And we also have the opportunity to cast it all behind us, and to reclaim the power we once held. More and more people are turning their back on traditional reviews, and instead basing their opinion upon the views of the collective. 90+ on Metacritic means nothing these days, it is no longer any kind of guarantee of success. And neither does a score in the 70's automatically mean a game is doomed to only sell a couple of months down the line when everyone drops the price because they bought too many copies in. Major websites seem to be playing a guessing game in which they are giving a score based purely on how well they think a game will sell. But the evidence is that people aren't actually reading reviews to make their decision. Nobody I know goes to one website and only one website as their news source.

The blogosphere is already a crowded area, but to be frank, there aren't enough people putting their opinion out there. The crowd has power. Your voice may not seem like much to you, but as part of a chorus it gains meaning. 10,000 people all saying "We don't like this game" means a lot more than 1 reviewer raving about it. Especially when those 10,000 paid for it and are playing it in real world conditions, rather than being plied with freebies and cooed over and told exactly what to do under the exact conditions that the publisher wants them to see it in. Faults can be more easily overlooked when they didn't set you back £30, and magic can be bypassed when you are working to a deadline.

So, don't allow them to dictate to you. Don't just take their word for it. DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE! Get your voice out there. Get loud. GET ANGRY! We are not the little people, and we are just as valid as the IGN's of this world. (Many would say more so!) We don't get the presents, we don't get the freebies, but we do get the power of veto with our wallets. If some dickhead decides, as frequently happens, that the game he is playing compares unfavourably to something else (even when it isn't meant to be anything like Game #1) and scores it down accordingly, then this is disingenuous. Conversely, scoring a game lower because it is too much like another game is also a mistake, because some people want the same gameplay in a slightly different setting.

Crap, this is turning into a thesis!

Short version! Read more. Talk more. Utilise the nature of Web 2.0. Things are changing, and the big boys need to adapt along with it or they will find themselves as small boys. The web is a great democratiser, a leveller, an equaliser.

Error #2,000,000: Diablo III, 'Unable To Play At All' Edition

You are scum.

Yes, you, dear reader. You are scum. A criminal, just waiting for your chance to take advantage of those poor hardworking videogames publishers. Be it by obtaining goods without first paying for them, or worse, playing a game the way you want to as opposed to the way you are told to. Basically, anything short of handing your money directly over to the publishers and then periodically giving them more is abberant behaviour in their eyes, and they will do whatever they can to stop you.

Their measures to retain absolute control in a world where they are increasingly irrelevant are manifold. They include such things as "Online passes", to try and stop those who sell our games to other people once we have finished with them from doing so. (Personally, I don't mind this, as I buy exclusively new copies and never trade in, so from my Ivory Tower all I ever get to see is bonus content for the same price that I was planning to pay anyway.) These take the form of codes that allow access to the multiplayer, or other aspects if the game has no multiplayer.

This doesn't really stop anybody, to be fair, and it hasn't really made the retailers drop the prices for secondhand games either. All it has done is ... effectively annoyed people who don't like paying the inflated RRPs that most games go at.

But, this hasn't stopped the publishers from plugging on with hare-brained schemes designed to make sure that NOBODY PLAYS WITHOUT PAYING! Enter the single most ludicrous of the publishers tools; Digital Rights Management (DRM) in the form of an always-online connection Take Diablo III, as the most recent example to pursue this method. Customers buy the game, take it home and install it, sit through a mandatory dlownload of additional files to update before attempting to log in, which requires an account at Battle Net, and then ....

Well, apparently, not a lot. It seems that the servers are struggling to cope with the weight of expectation of people who have patiently waited 12 yeards for the game, been good little boys and girls and ponied up the money upfront, and are now sat looking at a screen somewhat like this one:

See, Diablo III requires the player to be logged in before they can play. Any mode. Even single player. (It would be more accurate to say that there actually is no singleplayer mode, and that all you can actually do is play your multiplayer character with nobody else present.) The server handles mob spawns and loot drops, and therefore there is no way to play the game without connecting to the server.

The game you paid for. The game that sits on your HDD. You can't play it without going online. Which you can't do, because everybody else is trying to get online at the same time. Somewhere in the region of 2 MILLION of you, so at least you're amongst company.

This is so sickening that one has no choice but to burst into laughter about it. The pointless paranoia over the proliference of piracy has now reached its inevitable zenith. GENUINE PAYING CUSTOMERS are being denied the opportunity to play the game, whereas the pirates are ... far too busy not even giving a shit about Diablo III. It isn't on their radar, at all, since they know they need to always be online to play it and that is something that pirates don't actually like.

Well done, ActiBlizz. You shot yourself in the foot so specatacularly that it rebounded into your face, and now you should be the ones wearing eyepatches. DRM is stupid. Always-online DRM is even more stupid. And, the sheer amount of bad publicity this is generating is something you will have to fight against for any and all future releases. I can't see too many of your loyal customers racing to pre-order whatever expansion/DLC you release at this rate, and you are probably going have to give the first package away instead of charging for it just to get them back on your side.

DRM has never once been proven to lead to additional sales. Combatting piracy has never conclusively shown to be of benefit to ANYBODY. At best, it slows them down for a little while. At worst, it is Diablo III, and the only people who suffer are the loyal fans who were even willing to pay before the product existed. Good luck retaining them this time, ActiBlizz.

What SHOULD have happened is that the game be made in online and offline modes. Maintain them as two entirely seperate entities. Sure, some would have gotten it for nothing, and been playing it right now without piling a ton of hassle on the Battle Net servers. But, those who paid would get the service they DESERVE.

What do you do about this, then? Well, SCUM, you do as you're told. You already proved you are capable of that when you shelled out for the game in advance, despite knowing that this was likely to happen. And you moan on Twitter, where there are a million corporate shills just dying to tell you that it is only a game and you can't expect everything to be smooth. Welcome to games in 2012, and expect more of this bollocks in the future.