When I was growing up, me and my brother would always play video games together. As the little brother, I would have to respect the chain of command, and let my older brother take player one. I'm not upset about it, it's just how things were. It wasn't all that bad being player two, sure I got the bottom half of the screen, but at least I got to use my red controller. It wasn't such a bad thing to be growing up in the age of gaming that we did, as everything that came out had some form of splitscreen multiplayer. Though, as we grew up, my brother decided to pursue other interests, like film, music, and girls. I stayed home and played my video games.
It's all part of growing up I suppose. I still love video games, and cartoons, and all of the other things that I grew up with. I think that being the little brother, and being player two affected me in other ways. As with the cartoons that I would watch. My favorite characters in those shows like Dragon Ball Z and Digimon, my favorite character would be the one who would be the "second in command". Picallo for DBZ, and Matt for Digimon. It was the same thing for video games even. My favorite character in Star Fox 64 was Falco, the cocky jackass who would criticize everything that you did, even if you were doing well. I think it's because I left the main character open for my older brother to like. It would be fair if I took the main character from under him. If I did that, I'd be copying him, and I wouldn't be cool to him. Though while my older brother was out, I would be playing video games by myself. I would be player one.
Zelda, Metroid, Shenmue, Soulcalibur, Mario Kart 64, Jet Force Gemini and many other games filled my time. I was getting better at video games. I was starting to be better than my brother. I started to beat him at video games! I think I realized that I had become too good at video games when I beat my brother at Soulcalibur II with an 18-0 record. Video games were clearly becoming my thing, and single player games were how I would spend my time.
My crowning moment was when I picked up Borderlands 2 for my PS3. I told my brother that the game had splitscreen co-op, and that it was really good. To relive the old days, I offered him the player one spot. He turned it down, and told me that it was my game, and that I should take player one. Then we began our quest for guns and blowing stuff up. It was a great moment, and a good time. I had truly become, player one.
I started to find myself associating with the main characters of these video games, among other media. I've always been second in command. I grew to like the idea of being the one in a leadership position. I liked the idea of the lone hero who had to save the world. I was doing things on my own. I was over coming these obstacles before me, and I was winning. I was becoming player one.
As gaming progressed, so did I. My skill was improving as was my leadership skills. Mass Effect's Commander Shepard became my role model, and became a way for me to take on the role of a leader. However, my favorite character to hang out with was Garrus, the ex-cop who was very skilled though didn't care much for rules. Garrus was the second in command. He had all of the tendencies of the characters that I admired back in my youth, though now I found him to be rather immature with his disrespect for the rules. As the leader, I had to keep Garrus in line, and had to show him how to do things the right way. If the player chooses to let Garrus run free, especially in Mass Effect 2, he becomes a mad dog. Commander Shepard has a huge influence on Garrus, even making him a respected officer among his own people by the final instalment of the series. As the leader, players were forced to make decisions that wouldn't please everyone, and make decisions that would affect the outcome of missions. Mass Effect might not be a realistic portrayal of being a leader, as not everyone has to save the galaxy from a race of sentient machines that could completely annihilate the entirety of existence as we know it. However, the game definitely influenced me and encouraged me to be more of a leader in my day to day. I try to teach and to lead whenever I have the opportunity to do so. I don't needlessly take control simply because I can. Only when I know what I'm doing, can I feel confident in leading. That being said, Commander Shepard doesn't necessarily know what she's doing, but still has to take the lead. I can take a page from her book, and take the reigns on certain projects and lead the team to accomplish our goal.
I think that video games can help us in this way: to teach us to be leaders. We may not always be faced with nearly impossible odds, but we can still learn to take the lead to start moving forward. We, as gamers, need to start taking control, as we've always done with the games that we play. We can't sit back and let the game play itself. We are player one, and we can beat this game called life, all we need to do is pick up the controller.
Friday, February 21, 2014
Friday, February 14, 2014
We Don't Need No Stinkin' Points
The other day I was at my job (for the record I hate my job), and my boss was talking to me about numbers that the store was making. To make his point, he started off his lecture with "you're a gamer right?", as I stared at him with much restraint. In my head I was thinking, "you have no idea how far games have come...."
After giving it a bit of thought, my boss was still right. Video games are still all about getting our initials on that proverbial scoreboard in the sky. It's all completely pointless, when the medium has come as far as it has. Simply by having point values to these games, it trivializes all that happens in them. Achievements and Trophies are worthless.
Games like, Last of Us, The Walking Dead, Mass Effect, Deus Ex, and Bioshock all have amazing stories that engage the player in a way that no other game has ever achieved. All of these games are critically acclaimed, and for good reason, about the way that they tell their story. Yet, each one comes with a set of pointless achievements and trophies for the player to try and attain.
No one cares about your gamer score, all that is, is a quantitative way to keep track of how much of a life that you don't have. So what if you have all of the achievements for game X. I played game X, and I enjoyed it very much. I feel as though I got the full experience from it, and I still keep it around because the multiplayer is still fun to play every once in a while. Just because you have more achievements unlocked for the game doesn't make you better than me, or that you like it more.
Some would say that having achievement, and the like, in video games helps to extend the life of a video game. They suggest new things for the player to try out, and discover. This is true, but only for a certain extent. Games have a lot more than what the achievements offer to them. Say that a game has lots of achievements, and it is the person's only game: of course they will play the game to death, and will most likely score every achievement possible. Though, they will also explore other aspects of the game that were not considered during the development process or the achievement inception. People are more clever than what game developers give them credit for. Games are so linear these days that even experimentation has winstates. Achievements leave nothing up to the imagination, and instead of becoming a personal challenge, everything becomes a point value. It wasn't by my courage that I chose to take on Mass Effect 2 on the hardest difficulty, but because I wanted to get that achievement, because "why not?" I love Mass Effect 2, and it's on my top 5 list of games of all time, but I just kind of ran out of things to do with it. I did explore every nook and cranny of that game, and all that was left to do was to get all of the achievements. I've done some pretty amazing stuff in that game, that I can't really claim to anymore because no one would believe me. If there was an achievement for hooking an enemy on the other side of a wall with a biotic pull, people would see that. I would have validation.
Perhaps that is a reason as to why people achievement hunt. To be able to back up their arguments of their feats of awesomeness. I suppose that I would have no other way to prove to you that I did everything that one can possibly do in a particular video game other than to show you my gamerscore. Then again, who cares? I think what matters is that you or I played the game and enjoyed it.
Playing video games is fun. I enjoy them, and I want to share them with everyone. I don't want to intimidate others with my gamerscore, though I often show them up with my skill in video games. However, that's only because I've played so many, but I digress. Achievements and Trophies are pointless because they get in the way of what the game should be, or how they could be perceived by their audience. Games have come a long way, they can tell stories that empower us, or break our hearts, and we don't need a score to tell us how much we enjoyed that.
After giving it a bit of thought, my boss was still right. Video games are still all about getting our initials on that proverbial scoreboard in the sky. It's all completely pointless, when the medium has come as far as it has. Simply by having point values to these games, it trivializes all that happens in them. Achievements and Trophies are worthless.
Games like, Last of Us, The Walking Dead, Mass Effect, Deus Ex, and Bioshock all have amazing stories that engage the player in a way that no other game has ever achieved. All of these games are critically acclaimed, and for good reason, about the way that they tell their story. Yet, each one comes with a set of pointless achievements and trophies for the player to try and attain.
No one cares about your gamer score, all that is, is a quantitative way to keep track of how much of a life that you don't have. So what if you have all of the achievements for game X. I played game X, and I enjoyed it very much. I feel as though I got the full experience from it, and I still keep it around because the multiplayer is still fun to play every once in a while. Just because you have more achievements unlocked for the game doesn't make you better than me, or that you like it more.
Some would say that having achievement, and the like, in video games helps to extend the life of a video game. They suggest new things for the player to try out, and discover. This is true, but only for a certain extent. Games have a lot more than what the achievements offer to them. Say that a game has lots of achievements, and it is the person's only game: of course they will play the game to death, and will most likely score every achievement possible. Though, they will also explore other aspects of the game that were not considered during the development process or the achievement inception. People are more clever than what game developers give them credit for. Games are so linear these days that even experimentation has winstates. Achievements leave nothing up to the imagination, and instead of becoming a personal challenge, everything becomes a point value. It wasn't by my courage that I chose to take on Mass Effect 2 on the hardest difficulty, but because I wanted to get that achievement, because "why not?" I love Mass Effect 2, and it's on my top 5 list of games of all time, but I just kind of ran out of things to do with it. I did explore every nook and cranny of that game, and all that was left to do was to get all of the achievements. I've done some pretty amazing stuff in that game, that I can't really claim to anymore because no one would believe me. If there was an achievement for hooking an enemy on the other side of a wall with a biotic pull, people would see that. I would have validation.
Perhaps that is a reason as to why people achievement hunt. To be able to back up their arguments of their feats of awesomeness. I suppose that I would have no other way to prove to you that I did everything that one can possibly do in a particular video game other than to show you my gamerscore. Then again, who cares? I think what matters is that you or I played the game and enjoyed it.
Playing video games is fun. I enjoy them, and I want to share them with everyone. I don't want to intimidate others with my gamerscore, though I often show them up with my skill in video games. However, that's only because I've played so many, but I digress. Achievements and Trophies are pointless because they get in the way of what the game should be, or how they could be perceived by their audience. Games have come a long way, they can tell stories that empower us, or break our hearts, and we don't need a score to tell us how much we enjoyed that.
Stop Wasting Your Time
Recently there was a big ol' foofaraw (to make a big deal over something insignificant) over the game of Flappy Bird. It's a mobile game that got people really upset because it was really difficult. Similar to Super Meat Boy, it's difficulty is met with its ease of access. However, Super Meat Boy is lightyears ahead of Flappy Bird in every aspect. Super Meat Boy has time put into it, and has care, effort invested into it. The big deal behind Flappy Bird, is that it was so addicting to the masses and their smart phones, that it was taken down from the app store on iOS devices, never to be downloaded again. While there is indeed a big story there, the fact of the matter is, that everyone was just wasting their time over a game on their phones.
I don't have any mobile games on my phone. Maybe that might be a bad thing, as I tend to waste a lot of time sharing dumb pictures on Facebook. However, the whole intention of mobile phone apps, whether games or no, is to waste time. Usually they are played on the bus, or train, or while waiting on something, but they are not meant to have as much hours put into them as they have. There are better ways to spend your time. I'm not saying that you should put down your phone and start making art, or doing something productive like that. I'm saying that there is a lot more out there than the small and simple games that exist on your phone.
Handheld gaming has been around for a good while, and it has made some great strides to get to where it is today. The difference between mobile gaming and handheld, besides having buttons, is that handheld games are designed to be a fun experience. Most, if not all, mobile games are designed to help pass the time. Mobile games intentionally waste your time! This is an atrocity! Handheld games are meant to be a fun, and fulfilling experience. I'm not saying that because handheld games were made by teams of people that they are in fact better. There are plenty of games that are developed by one to two people, and they can be quite enjoyable. However, the design principles on which mobile games are built, are a waste of time.
There are many games out there for both handheld and mobile platforms, but which ones are really worth your time? Games can be a wholesome experience, that you feel as though something has been gained from playing it. Video games have evolved to become something much more than what they used to be. They are no longer a way to occupy your time, or babysit for you (nor should they have ever been). Games have story, and character, and themes, and music, and all the elements to be a true work of art.
Stop spending your time, and money, on these games that are intentionally designed to waste your time with these hollow experiences. Instead, play something that you can feel better about yourself for playing. Pick up an old game, or a new one, but play a game that has time and effort put into it, and have an experience, rather than letting others pass you by. Time is our most precious commodity, and all too often we waste it with our instant gratification of "social" interaction on our networking sites, or even just watching videos of other people playing video games that you yourself could be playing. Spend your time wisely, it's the most important thing you own.
I don't have any mobile games on my phone. Maybe that might be a bad thing, as I tend to waste a lot of time sharing dumb pictures on Facebook. However, the whole intention of mobile phone apps, whether games or no, is to waste time. Usually they are played on the bus, or train, or while waiting on something, but they are not meant to have as much hours put into them as they have. There are better ways to spend your time. I'm not saying that you should put down your phone and start making art, or doing something productive like that. I'm saying that there is a lot more out there than the small and simple games that exist on your phone.
Handheld gaming has been around for a good while, and it has made some great strides to get to where it is today. The difference between mobile gaming and handheld, besides having buttons, is that handheld games are designed to be a fun experience. Most, if not all, mobile games are designed to help pass the time. Mobile games intentionally waste your time! This is an atrocity! Handheld games are meant to be a fun, and fulfilling experience. I'm not saying that because handheld games were made by teams of people that they are in fact better. There are plenty of games that are developed by one to two people, and they can be quite enjoyable. However, the design principles on which mobile games are built, are a waste of time.
There are many games out there for both handheld and mobile platforms, but which ones are really worth your time? Games can be a wholesome experience, that you feel as though something has been gained from playing it. Video games have evolved to become something much more than what they used to be. They are no longer a way to occupy your time, or babysit for you (nor should they have ever been). Games have story, and character, and themes, and music, and all the elements to be a true work of art.
Stop spending your time, and money, on these games that are intentionally designed to waste your time with these hollow experiences. Instead, play something that you can feel better about yourself for playing. Pick up an old game, or a new one, but play a game that has time and effort put into it, and have an experience, rather than letting others pass you by. Time is our most precious commodity, and all too often we waste it with our instant gratification of "social" interaction on our networking sites, or even just watching videos of other people playing video games that you yourself could be playing. Spend your time wisely, it's the most important thing you own.
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
My Title as a Gamer is a Farce
I'm one of the few gamers of my generation that managed to skip over the Super Nintendo. It's rather unlikely considering the time that I was born, but it's just the way that it is. My Dad had a Super Nintendo, and he had some pretty important games for it. Super Mario World, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Donkey Kong Country, F-Zero, and a few others were among the games that he had to play. I would prefer to stay in and play Super Nintendo, as opposed to being out in the deadly heat of the Oregon Sun in The Dalles. My time on the Super Nintendo was limited, and I could only play for a half hour. I never beat A Link to the Past, or Super Mario World, or even F-Zero. Future experiences with the Super Nintendo consisted of going to Family Video and renting the console and a couple of games with intriguing box art, but nothing major. My memories of the Super Nintendo are that of being home sick and a couple of quirky games that only lasted for two days. I missed out.
The other night while discussing emulators with my best friend, I came to the decision that I would download a Super Nintendo emulator. I've been craving something new in my gaming life, and figured why not. I knew that there were quite a lot of monumental games for the SNES. I had to get Chrono Trigger, that's one of the best. I also got Final Fantasy III, or was it VI, I don't know it's the one with Terra's Theme. I also got Super Mario RPG, because I remember a friend back in college raving about how awesome that game was.. These games are pretty important for the system, though it doesn't even scratch the surface of what the gaming system did for the industry on the whole.
A majority of game reviewers on Youtube often refer to the Super Nintendo as their source of inspiration and love of video games. As one who never had the system, I couldn't say that I can relate, and I still can't. I just have an emulator. There's nothing quite like holding that controller in your hand. The people that played the Super Nintendo growing up, reflect upon it with glistening eyes and wondrous tales of adventure. These gamers experienced something that I never did. Thanks to modern technology and innovative minds, I can with my emulator, and OH MY GOODNESS WHERE THEY RIGHT!
I've been playing Chrono Trigger a lot, and it has absolutely blown my mind on how an RPG should be designed. Mostly I look to Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, as it is based on Dungeons and Dragons 3.0, and has an amazing moral, and dialogue choice system that I think that all modern RPGs should adhere to. However, Chrono Trigger, developed by Square Soft, takes what we know about the classic RPG and improves upon it ten fold. I've complained about Final Fantasy and the active battle system, and how it doesn't make any sense, Chrono Trigger makes sense of it all. The active battle system, where characters have a gauge that needs to fill up before making an action, is used in Chrono Trigger, but it can be modified. At the start of the game the player is asked how they would like the battles to play out. "Active" or "Wait" are the two options that are presented and each is explained. I chose wait, because I don't think that there's anything wrong with turn-based combat. While I still haven't got a firm grasp on the battle system, as it seems that enemies still attack on my turn, I've grown accustomed to use it. The ingenious thing that Chrono Trigger does which employs the active battle system, is that it uses combination attacks. Often times when in battle, two characters will be able to attack with filled gauges. The game has an option to use both of these characters to attack at the same time, or at least use a special attack at the cost of both of their magic points, respectively. Different characters have different abilities naturally, and you'll want to use one over the other. That being said, the combat moves so smoothly that players never have to wait long before the character is ready to attack. Chrono Trigger earns its title as one of the greatest games of all time, and I'm only five hours into it.
I love video games, and it's been a while since I've honestly wanted to play something for a while. This emulator gig has rejuvenated my love of video games, as opposed to wasting time on the internet. Long live video games.
The other night while discussing emulators with my best friend, I came to the decision that I would download a Super Nintendo emulator. I've been craving something new in my gaming life, and figured why not. I knew that there were quite a lot of monumental games for the SNES. I had to get Chrono Trigger, that's one of the best. I also got Final Fantasy III, or was it VI, I don't know it's the one with Terra's Theme. I also got Super Mario RPG, because I remember a friend back in college raving about how awesome that game was.. These games are pretty important for the system, though it doesn't even scratch the surface of what the gaming system did for the industry on the whole.
A majority of game reviewers on Youtube often refer to the Super Nintendo as their source of inspiration and love of video games. As one who never had the system, I couldn't say that I can relate, and I still can't. I just have an emulator. There's nothing quite like holding that controller in your hand. The people that played the Super Nintendo growing up, reflect upon it with glistening eyes and wondrous tales of adventure. These gamers experienced something that I never did. Thanks to modern technology and innovative minds, I can with my emulator, and OH MY GOODNESS WHERE THEY RIGHT!
I've been playing Chrono Trigger a lot, and it has absolutely blown my mind on how an RPG should be designed. Mostly I look to Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, as it is based on Dungeons and Dragons 3.0, and has an amazing moral, and dialogue choice system that I think that all modern RPGs should adhere to. However, Chrono Trigger, developed by Square Soft, takes what we know about the classic RPG and improves upon it ten fold. I've complained about Final Fantasy and the active battle system, and how it doesn't make any sense, Chrono Trigger makes sense of it all. The active battle system, where characters have a gauge that needs to fill up before making an action, is used in Chrono Trigger, but it can be modified. At the start of the game the player is asked how they would like the battles to play out. "Active" or "Wait" are the two options that are presented and each is explained. I chose wait, because I don't think that there's anything wrong with turn-based combat. While I still haven't got a firm grasp on the battle system, as it seems that enemies still attack on my turn, I've grown accustomed to use it. The ingenious thing that Chrono Trigger does which employs the active battle system, is that it uses combination attacks. Often times when in battle, two characters will be able to attack with filled gauges. The game has an option to use both of these characters to attack at the same time, or at least use a special attack at the cost of both of their magic points, respectively. Different characters have different abilities naturally, and you'll want to use one over the other. That being said, the combat moves so smoothly that players never have to wait long before the character is ready to attack. Chrono Trigger earns its title as one of the greatest games of all time, and I'm only five hours into it.
I love video games, and it's been a while since I've honestly wanted to play something for a while. This emulator gig has rejuvenated my love of video games, as opposed to wasting time on the internet. Long live video games.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)