The video game "Manhunt 2", which was originally banned in the United Kingdom and given the "Adults Only" rating from the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) here in the states, is now finally available in England. The game attracted controversy from its brutal content. "Manhunt 2" was later toned-down content wise and given the "Mature" rating from the ESRB, but was still banned in England. Rockstar and Take-Two Interactive appealed the decision and won, but the British Board of Film and Literature Classification (BBFC), Britain's rating board that refused a rating for the game which led to its banning, appealed the decision to the English High Court. The Video Appeals Committee (VAC) lifted the ban on "Manhunt 2".
Source: GamePolitics
Showing posts with label Games. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Games. Show all posts
Friday, March 14, 2008
Thursday, March 6, 2008
"Super Smash Bros Brawl" to be Released Next Week.
"Super Smash Bros Brawl", the third game in the Super Smash Bros series, is coming out next week. The game features 20-plus fighters including Mario, Link, Bowser, Pikachu, and Samus Aran among others, some of which are new to the series, like Pit, from the NES classic "Kid Icarus", Sonic, and Snake from the "Metal Gear Solid" series. The game features many unlockables, new stages and even old ones. The game is set for release next week.
The game also features moves called "final smashes". They can be seen in this YouTube clip.
The game also features moves called "final smashes". They can be seen in this YouTube clip.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Commentary on The "Bully" Video Game Controversy
Here we go again. It is a statement, a saying, that expresses disdain for having to repeat something that one does not like, whether it be a snow storm, rising gas prices, or a once-thought extinguished controversy. A needless scandal that is all over the news outlets that makes us all say "please shut the hell up" is once again rearing its unwelcome head. Many various controversies fall into the category. One of which is the controversy that engulfed the video game "Bully" back in 2006. "Bully" attracted controversy just based on its name alone. The game had the player controlling Jimmy Hopkins, a 15-year old boy who was suspended from his school. While his parents go on vacation, he is sent to a prep school named "Bullworth Academy". Throughout the game, Jimmy fights back against the bullies that are over the campus and rids the school of wrongdoing. However, the critics of the game and the anti-game crusaders do not see it that way. They claim that "Bully" promotes bullying and puts kids, especially those who can not defend themselves, at risk of being bullied.
"Bully" is being rerelased as "Bully: Scholarship Edition" on the XBox360 and Nintendo Wii systems and the controversy and criticisms are fuming again. Now I have nothing against the critics of "Bully". They have the right to object to the game as much as Rockstar has the right to freely make and sell the game. The critics of "Bully" are good people and are well-intentioned. Some of them may have been victims of bullying themselves and would not want anyone else to go through the pain and suffering of being bullied. When complaining about the game, however, there is a line. A line that must never be crossed. It is known as the line of slander and libel. This is a line that has not only been crossed deliberately, but also spat upon by those who twist the game into something that it is not. These are the acts of the anti-video game crusaders. These people are those that blatantly distort the facts about campus shootings and crimes against law enforcement so they can make video games a scapegoat and to get their names in the paper and their faces on TV news. People like Jack Thompson, who tried to declare the sales of "Bully" a public nuisance, and watchdog groups like the Parents Television Council are well-known for this. With the rerelease of "Bully" they, along with teacher organizations, are once again spinning the game into a bully-training device. They claim "Bully" teaches its players to harass other kids. Other organizations claim this game has players "dunking pupils' heads in toilets, photographing them naked and physically assaulting them" (Source: GamePolitics).
This is false. These quotes are full of lies and defamation. This is where well intentions end. You do not lie about anything you do not like. You do not mischaractrize something you do not like. Lies, slander, and sensationalized crap are not a way to express concern. It only exposes you, those that spin the facts of "Bully", as liars. Doing this in a legislative session or in a court during trial results in perjury charges.
In an episode of "South Park", Stan answers the front door during a thunderstorm. He opens the door and sees his "future self", a homeless 30-year old who did alcohol and drugs in high school. His parents take him in and is convinced that Stan's future self is real. Later in the episode, Stan is staying after school with Butters for studying. In the scene, Butters says he also has a future self. Stan is suspicious and he, along with Butters, go to a building named Motivation Corp., a company that lies and exaggerates the facts of smoking, drinking, and drug use at an early age. When motivation corp is exposed at the episode's end. Stan's mother gives a wonderful lesson: Lies and exaggerations are no way to get your point across.
This lesson applies to those who twist "Bully" into something it is not. The activists, parent and teacher organizations, and watchdog groups could learn a lesson from Stan's parents. Lies and exaggerations are no way to get your point across. When you lie, you are jeopardizing your credibility as a person of any profession. When you lie, you are jeopardizing the credibility of your employers. When you lie, you are jeopardizing the credibility and integrity of your Alma Mater. When you lie, you jeopardize your career. Lastly and most essentially, when you lie, you jeopardize your own integrity, your financial status, your status as a role model to children, and even your house and possessions. You will be nothing more than a fraud. You could be an example of what not to be and what not to do in textbooks for years to come. Your Alma Mater could lose students and experience lower enrollment rates. Your fellow alumni of your Alma mater could also have their careers jeopardized and credibility tarnished. You could lose the respect of your children and family. There is a line between criticizing something you do not like and defamation, whether it be slander or libel. To those who deliberately cross this line without any thoughts to the consequences, get back behind that line before the aforementioned happens to you.
We have heard these lies and slander back in 2006 when the original "Bully" was released. We all heard that the game will cause bullying to skyrocket across the land. This has not happened. Why are teachers and anti-game activists afraid of the game's rerelease? No such reason exists to be afraid of the rerelease of "Bully", especially if nothing bad happened after the game's initial release. Here we go again, indeed. Haven't we been through this? Going through this controversy again makes me feel like I am in the movie "Groundhog Day".
The entire concept of history is to learn from its lessons. Apparently and obviously, the defamers of "Bully" did not learn anything. Not a damn thing at all. This is a symptom, an exhibition, of blind hatred. The people who distort the facts, or even make up the facts, of a game I doubt they even played have such a hatred against "Bully", or even Video Games in general, they do not care if they are proven wrong.
In my commentary about Fox News' distortions about the love scene in "Mass Effect", I said that those who distort the facts of the game are far worse than those who develop the game. This applies to the anti-game activists. This applies to the organizations that defame "Bully". They are far worse than Rockstar. They are shamelessly slanderizing and libeling a game that has its players fighting off bullies. What does this tell you of these groups and organizations? They have no good intentions whatsoever. They are in no position to call Rockstar, the ESRB, and the retailers irresponsible. If they had any moral forditude, they will sincerely apologize to Rockstar, the ESRB, and the retailers. Unfortunately, we will not be hearing any apology anytime soon...or ever.
I want to say one last thing to the teachers and administrators that are slanderizing "Bully". If you want to stop bullying, start enforcing the rules and begin punishing those who bully other classmates. Do not tell me that you are. I have been through the public school system. If you can not do this, then you got a problem that is far, far worse than a video game.
Good night, and good luck.
"Bully" is being rerelased as "Bully: Scholarship Edition" on the XBox360 and Nintendo Wii systems and the controversy and criticisms are fuming again. Now I have nothing against the critics of "Bully". They have the right to object to the game as much as Rockstar has the right to freely make and sell the game. The critics of "Bully" are good people and are well-intentioned. Some of them may have been victims of bullying themselves and would not want anyone else to go through the pain and suffering of being bullied. When complaining about the game, however, there is a line. A line that must never be crossed. It is known as the line of slander and libel. This is a line that has not only been crossed deliberately, but also spat upon by those who twist the game into something that it is not. These are the acts of the anti-video game crusaders. These people are those that blatantly distort the facts about campus shootings and crimes against law enforcement so they can make video games a scapegoat and to get their names in the paper and their faces on TV news. People like Jack Thompson, who tried to declare the sales of "Bully" a public nuisance, and watchdog groups like the Parents Television Council are well-known for this. With the rerelease of "Bully" they, along with teacher organizations, are once again spinning the game into a bully-training device. They claim "Bully" teaches its players to harass other kids. Other organizations claim this game has players "dunking pupils' heads in toilets, photographing them naked and physically assaulting them" (Source: GamePolitics).
This is false. These quotes are full of lies and defamation. This is where well intentions end. You do not lie about anything you do not like. You do not mischaractrize something you do not like. Lies, slander, and sensationalized crap are not a way to express concern. It only exposes you, those that spin the facts of "Bully", as liars. Doing this in a legislative session or in a court during trial results in perjury charges.
In an episode of "South Park", Stan answers the front door during a thunderstorm. He opens the door and sees his "future self", a homeless 30-year old who did alcohol and drugs in high school. His parents take him in and is convinced that Stan's future self is real. Later in the episode, Stan is staying after school with Butters for studying. In the scene, Butters says he also has a future self. Stan is suspicious and he, along with Butters, go to a building named Motivation Corp., a company that lies and exaggerates the facts of smoking, drinking, and drug use at an early age. When motivation corp is exposed at the episode's end. Stan's mother gives a wonderful lesson: Lies and exaggerations are no way to get your point across.
This lesson applies to those who twist "Bully" into something it is not. The activists, parent and teacher organizations, and watchdog groups could learn a lesson from Stan's parents. Lies and exaggerations are no way to get your point across. When you lie, you are jeopardizing your credibility as a person of any profession. When you lie, you are jeopardizing the credibility of your employers. When you lie, you are jeopardizing the credibility and integrity of your Alma Mater. When you lie, you jeopardize your career. Lastly and most essentially, when you lie, you jeopardize your own integrity, your financial status, your status as a role model to children, and even your house and possessions. You will be nothing more than a fraud. You could be an example of what not to be and what not to do in textbooks for years to come. Your Alma Mater could lose students and experience lower enrollment rates. Your fellow alumni of your Alma mater could also have their careers jeopardized and credibility tarnished. You could lose the respect of your children and family. There is a line between criticizing something you do not like and defamation, whether it be slander or libel. To those who deliberately cross this line without any thoughts to the consequences, get back behind that line before the aforementioned happens to you.
We have heard these lies and slander back in 2006 when the original "Bully" was released. We all heard that the game will cause bullying to skyrocket across the land. This has not happened. Why are teachers and anti-game activists afraid of the game's rerelease? No such reason exists to be afraid of the rerelease of "Bully", especially if nothing bad happened after the game's initial release. Here we go again, indeed. Haven't we been through this? Going through this controversy again makes me feel like I am in the movie "Groundhog Day".
The entire concept of history is to learn from its lessons. Apparently and obviously, the defamers of "Bully" did not learn anything. Not a damn thing at all. This is a symptom, an exhibition, of blind hatred. The people who distort the facts, or even make up the facts, of a game I doubt they even played have such a hatred against "Bully", or even Video Games in general, they do not care if they are proven wrong.
In my commentary about Fox News' distortions about the love scene in "Mass Effect", I said that those who distort the facts of the game are far worse than those who develop the game. This applies to the anti-game activists. This applies to the organizations that defame "Bully". They are far worse than Rockstar. They are shamelessly slanderizing and libeling a game that has its players fighting off bullies. What does this tell you of these groups and organizations? They have no good intentions whatsoever. They are in no position to call Rockstar, the ESRB, and the retailers irresponsible. If they had any moral forditude, they will sincerely apologize to Rockstar, the ESRB, and the retailers. Unfortunately, we will not be hearing any apology anytime soon...or ever.
I want to say one last thing to the teachers and administrators that are slanderizing "Bully". If you want to stop bullying, start enforcing the rules and begin punishing those who bully other classmates. Do not tell me that you are. I have been through the public school system. If you can not do this, then you got a problem that is far, far worse than a video game.
Good night, and good luck.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Jack Thompson Threatens NIU with Lawsuit.
Source: GamePolitics
Anti-game activist Jack Thompson has threatened the investigators of the Northern Illinois University shootings if they do not go into the killer's video game playing. He is citing the Illinois Freedom of Information Act as his reason.
EDITOR'S NOTE: This act by Mr. Thompson is dispicible, low, and vile. He is in no position to demand anything from the investigatiors, whether he is legally allowed to or not.
Anti-game activist Jack Thompson has threatened the investigators of the Northern Illinois University shootings if they do not go into the killer's video game playing. He is citing the Illinois Freedom of Information Act as his reason.
EDITOR'S NOTE: This act by Mr. Thompson is dispicible, low, and vile. He is in no position to demand anything from the investigatiors, whether he is legally allowed to or not.
Friday, February 15, 2008
Commentary on Jack Thompson Faulting Games on the Northern Illinois University Killings.
There are some things in life we can never predict. We can never predict where we may live or what job we have ten years from now. We may never be able to predict who we marry. We may never be able to predict what kind of children we have and how they turn out, whether they may turn out to be criminals or the president of the United States. Sadly, we may never be able to predict when someone goes on a rampage at a college campus and killing unfortunate victims. This is what happened at the Northern Illinois University yesterday. A gunman, who was an honors graduate of the university, went on a rampage killing five students before turning the gun on himself and commiting suicide. It was yet another shooting on a school campus. This nation has had too many of these campus shootings over the years...and by too many, I mean not one campus shooting should ever have happened. Sadly, we can never predict with complete accuracy when these shootings occur. These, unfortunately, are spontaneous. No one ever knows for sure when these sick acts of violence unfold.
However, we can predict with great accuracy this one sad fact. Whenever shootings occur, when gunfire rings out across a school or college campus, there will be those who capitalize on these kinds of tragedies. One of the most infamous and notorious of these massacre chasers is an attorney from Miami named John Bruce Thompson, better known to gamers as Jack Thompson. He has once again in an interview on Fox News faulted video games for the massacre that ended the lives of five innocent victims. He has, for the second time in less than a year, blamed video games for a shooting before any facts about the shooter were revealed. The shooter, according to local police, was a 27-year old honors graduate of NIU with an unknown mental condition. He, according to police, was not taking his medicine and began to act erratically recently.
I can not say for certain that the shooter's condition led to the massacre, but the fact that the shooter had some sort of mental condition along with the fact that he was off his medication should eliminate any possibility that video games were a cause of the shooting.
I am sickened, but not suprised, that Mr. Thompson would capitalize on a serious and sad massacre to push his agenda. He has taken yet another tragedy and, instead of waiting for all of the facts about the shooter to be known, he tried to fault something that has nothing to do with the tragedy. The shooter was suffering from an apparent mental condition. He was off of his medication. Does this not tell Thompson and anyone else who blames the games for these tragedies that the mental health of the killer is the real red flag for this tragedy? I would think that instead of faulting video games, any other kind of entertainment, or popular culture as a whole, we would look at what went wrong with the killer, especially if the killer was an honors graduate.
Silly me. When it comes to those who ignore the factors that are usually the cause of these campus shootings, they choose to go after entertainment, especially video games. These are the kinds of people that are wrapped up in their own ideology of a society that shuns free thought, free speech, freedom to think however the hell we want to think and to think whatever the hell we want to think. When people like Jack Thompson blame video games for campus shootings, they have an agenda. Their agenda is to stifle the content in video games and even an attempt to ban video games altogether. We have seen this again and again. They do not care if they are proven wrong. When an investigation panel, assinged by Virginia Governor Tim Kaine (D), found out that Virginia Tech shooter Seung Hui Cho did not play violent video games, Jack Thompson still claimed violent games were the cause of the April 2007 tragedy. Lyndon LaRouch accused the panel of a cover-up. To them video games are the cause of campus shootings. Do not try to convince them otherwise. They will not listen their critics and may stoop to McCarthyistic levels in their response to their critics.
I understand that we want to prevent campus shootings.These are tragedies that should never happen. We all want to know exactly how to prevent these sick and terrifying acts of violence and murder. However, when we have those who look for a scapegoat that had nothing to do with the massacre and stick with that scapegoat even when proven wrong and accuse their critics of being "on the take", we do not move forward in the steps needed to prevent further massacres. Cho was not found to be playing violent video games. Despite that finding by the Virginia Tech panel, Thompson and LaRouch still accuse video games for the shootings that took place ten months ago. Does this not sound dangerous? We are trying to find out how to prevent campus shootings and we have those who bring up something that was not a factor in the shooting. By the way, if the "theories" of Mr. Thompson and other anti-game activists were true, then why aren't campus killings widespread? Why don't we have campus shootings taking place at all of our nation's schools, colleges, and universities? More than half of this nations' people are gamers like myself. We need to make all campuses safer and blaming things that are repeatedly found not to have been a factor in these shootings does not help.
Why do you do this Mr. Thompson? Why do you ignore the mental health of the killer and instead bring up the "video games made him do it" card, thus capitalizing on a serious tragedy in which five innocent people are dead just to push your agenda and to make yourself a bigger media whore? You may sugarcoat it as protecting the public or acting in the name of God, but gamers, including myself that you put down, humiliate, insult, and defame have followed you throughout your so-called crusade and we know better than that. While you are out on your "media tour", why don't you stop by Chris Matthews' show instead of a channel that is known to sensationalize these acts of violence? And speaking of Fox News, did you, Fox News, not learn anything from Jack's lies? Did you not learn ANYTHING from the recent "Mass Effect" controversy? I look forward to the day when both of you, Fox News and Jack Thompson, learn from your past distortions. I am not holding my breah though. One more thing to Fox News: Why do you name Jack Thompson a "campus shooting expert"? He is an expert in something. That something is being a massacre chaser and if he is a "campus shooting expert", then I am an expert...in quantum physics.
I once heard this quote: "Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it". I don't know who said that or when, but when Jack Thompson and other anti-game activists capitalize on the killings at the Northern Illinois University, I can't help but to think of that quote. They have done this before and have been proven wrong. They did not learn from the past. They are doomed to repeat it. They will be doomed to repeat it again until they learn from the past. I hope that happens someday...but I am not holding my breath.
Good night, and good luck.
However, we can predict with great accuracy this one sad fact. Whenever shootings occur, when gunfire rings out across a school or college campus, there will be those who capitalize on these kinds of tragedies. One of the most infamous and notorious of these massacre chasers is an attorney from Miami named John Bruce Thompson, better known to gamers as Jack Thompson. He has once again in an interview on Fox News faulted video games for the massacre that ended the lives of five innocent victims. He has, for the second time in less than a year, blamed video games for a shooting before any facts about the shooter were revealed. The shooter, according to local police, was a 27-year old honors graduate of NIU with an unknown mental condition. He, according to police, was not taking his medicine and began to act erratically recently.
I can not say for certain that the shooter's condition led to the massacre, but the fact that the shooter had some sort of mental condition along with the fact that he was off his medication should eliminate any possibility that video games were a cause of the shooting.
I am sickened, but not suprised, that Mr. Thompson would capitalize on a serious and sad massacre to push his agenda. He has taken yet another tragedy and, instead of waiting for all of the facts about the shooter to be known, he tried to fault something that has nothing to do with the tragedy. The shooter was suffering from an apparent mental condition. He was off of his medication. Does this not tell Thompson and anyone else who blames the games for these tragedies that the mental health of the killer is the real red flag for this tragedy? I would think that instead of faulting video games, any other kind of entertainment, or popular culture as a whole, we would look at what went wrong with the killer, especially if the killer was an honors graduate.
Silly me. When it comes to those who ignore the factors that are usually the cause of these campus shootings, they choose to go after entertainment, especially video games. These are the kinds of people that are wrapped up in their own ideology of a society that shuns free thought, free speech, freedom to think however the hell we want to think and to think whatever the hell we want to think. When people like Jack Thompson blame video games for campus shootings, they have an agenda. Their agenda is to stifle the content in video games and even an attempt to ban video games altogether. We have seen this again and again. They do not care if they are proven wrong. When an investigation panel, assinged by Virginia Governor Tim Kaine (D), found out that Virginia Tech shooter Seung Hui Cho did not play violent video games, Jack Thompson still claimed violent games were the cause of the April 2007 tragedy. Lyndon LaRouch accused the panel of a cover-up. To them video games are the cause of campus shootings. Do not try to convince them otherwise. They will not listen their critics and may stoop to McCarthyistic levels in their response to their critics.
I understand that we want to prevent campus shootings.These are tragedies that should never happen. We all want to know exactly how to prevent these sick and terrifying acts of violence and murder. However, when we have those who look for a scapegoat that had nothing to do with the massacre and stick with that scapegoat even when proven wrong and accuse their critics of being "on the take", we do not move forward in the steps needed to prevent further massacres. Cho was not found to be playing violent video games. Despite that finding by the Virginia Tech panel, Thompson and LaRouch still accuse video games for the shootings that took place ten months ago. Does this not sound dangerous? We are trying to find out how to prevent campus shootings and we have those who bring up something that was not a factor in the shooting. By the way, if the "theories" of Mr. Thompson and other anti-game activists were true, then why aren't campus killings widespread? Why don't we have campus shootings taking place at all of our nation's schools, colleges, and universities? More than half of this nations' people are gamers like myself. We need to make all campuses safer and blaming things that are repeatedly found not to have been a factor in these shootings does not help.
Why do you do this Mr. Thompson? Why do you ignore the mental health of the killer and instead bring up the "video games made him do it" card, thus capitalizing on a serious tragedy in which five innocent people are dead just to push your agenda and to make yourself a bigger media whore? You may sugarcoat it as protecting the public or acting in the name of God, but gamers, including myself that you put down, humiliate, insult, and defame have followed you throughout your so-called crusade and we know better than that. While you are out on your "media tour", why don't you stop by Chris Matthews' show instead of a channel that is known to sensationalize these acts of violence? And speaking of Fox News, did you, Fox News, not learn anything from Jack's lies? Did you not learn ANYTHING from the recent "Mass Effect" controversy? I look forward to the day when both of you, Fox News and Jack Thompson, learn from your past distortions. I am not holding my breah though. One more thing to Fox News: Why do you name Jack Thompson a "campus shooting expert"? He is an expert in something. That something is being a massacre chaser and if he is a "campus shooting expert", then I am an expert...in quantum physics.
I once heard this quote: "Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it". I don't know who said that or when, but when Jack Thompson and other anti-game activists capitalize on the killings at the Northern Illinois University, I can't help but to think of that quote. They have done this before and have been proven wrong. They did not learn from the past. They are doomed to repeat it. They will be doomed to repeat it again until they learn from the past. I hope that happens someday...but I am not holding my breath.
Good night, and good luck.
Jack Thompson Faults Video Games in Northern Illinois Shootings (as usual) in an Interview on (where else?) Fox News.
Watch this.
He said this before an investigation was finished. He actually said this before the press conference was underway. Jack Thompson, in my opinion, is nothing more than a massacre chaser. Also, Fixed News did not learn anything from Jack's lies about a video game connection with the Virginia Tech massacre and their own debacle with "Mass Effect". This was a student, who according to police, was off his medication for a condition. Not to mention the shooter was 27 years old.
Does Jack Thompson and Fox News not have any shame...at all?
He said this before an investigation was finished. He actually said this before the press conference was underway. Jack Thompson, in my opinion, is nothing more than a massacre chaser. Also, Fixed News did not learn anything from Jack's lies about a video game connection with the Virginia Tech massacre and their own debacle with "Mass Effect". This was a student, who according to police, was off his medication for a condition. Not to mention the shooter was 27 years old.
Does Jack Thompson and Fox News not have any shame...at all?
Friday, January 25, 2008
Brief Commentary on Electronic Arts' Resopnse to Fox News "Mass Effect" Smear.
Earlier this week, the XBox 360 game "Mass Effect" was unfairly slammed and defamed by author Cooper Lawrence and Fox News. In a debate on the midday show "The Live Desk", guest Cooper Lawrence and host Martha MacCallum sensationalized the game and its tastefully done love scene. They claimed the game featured full nudity and graphic sex. The segment was even titled "'SE'XBOX? New Video Game Shows Full Digital Nudity And Sex". Spike TV's Geoff Keighley did a tremendous job defending the game, but was not given much time to give his response. In all, it was a sad and disgraceful display from Cooper and Fox News. Cooper, Martha, and the "A-List" panel slammed "Mass Effect" unfairly. Adding to the disgrace and the lack of credibility on the issue is that Cooper Lawrence, during the debate, said she never played the game. Just sad, but not suprising from Fox News. Yesterday, Electronic Arts, parent company of "Mass Effect" developer BioWare, called out Fox News and demanded them to correct themselves about the game. VP Jeff Brown also called out Fox for their hypocrisy, pointing out that Fox Television Network shows like "Family Guy" and "The O.C." have more sexual content than "Mass Effect".
It is about time.
It is about damn time that someone in the industry called out Fox News on their lies. When games are slammed, it is not the game itself that feels the heat. Game companies are painted as those who push porn on kids. They are portrayed as sick individuals, smut peddlers, those who target law enforcement. Gamers themselves are portrayed as perverted, twisted, and violent. Brown finally did something that should have been done a long, long time ago. He fought back against Fox News and Cooper Lawrence. He took a stand. The rest of the industry need to follow suit when a game is unfairly slammed.
Fox News as well as the rest of the mainstream media needs to take more responsibility and to check their facts. Back in 2004, former CBS Evening News host Dan Rather ran a story about President Bush's National Guard service record. When he reported the story incorrectly, Rather lost his job and an accomplished jounalist had his reputation wrecked. If Dan Rather gets fired for not fact-checking, then Martha MacCallum and Cooper Lawrence should be admonished and disciplined for their lies about "Mass Effect". This is a sign that the game companies are not going to be slanderized and bullied around anymore.
Good night and good luck.
It is about time.
It is about damn time that someone in the industry called out Fox News on their lies. When games are slammed, it is not the game itself that feels the heat. Game companies are painted as those who push porn on kids. They are portrayed as sick individuals, smut peddlers, those who target law enforcement. Gamers themselves are portrayed as perverted, twisted, and violent. Brown finally did something that should have been done a long, long time ago. He fought back against Fox News and Cooper Lawrence. He took a stand. The rest of the industry need to follow suit when a game is unfairly slammed.
Fox News as well as the rest of the mainstream media needs to take more responsibility and to check their facts. Back in 2004, former CBS Evening News host Dan Rather ran a story about President Bush's National Guard service record. When he reported the story incorrectly, Rather lost his job and an accomplished jounalist had his reputation wrecked. If Dan Rather gets fired for not fact-checking, then Martha MacCallum and Cooper Lawrence should be admonished and disciplined for their lies about "Mass Effect". This is a sign that the game companies are not going to be slanderized and bullied around anymore.
Good night and good luck.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Commentary on Fox News' Sensationalistic Deceptions and Hypocritical Outrage Over "Sex" Scene in Mass Effect.
It should be no surprise and no mystery that Fox News is neither fair nor balanced. Their deceptive tactics and rampant sensationalism are well-known among their former viewers like myself. Fox News has sensationalized hostage situations and school shootings. They added inappropriate and gratuitous sexual imagery when they covered a serial killer prowling around the beaches of Florida near Spring Break. In fact, Fox News adds gratuitous sexual images in almost any story they cover, especially sexual-themed stories. When Bill O'Reilly devoted a segment of his show to a Carl's Jr. television advert staring Paris Hilton, he displayed the ad for 19 seconds running. Instead of responsibly showing the ad to his viewers for only five seconds, he shown the ad for nearly a third of a minuet. If you are showing an ad you are outraged at for only five seconds, I would not mind. When you do that for almost twenty seconds, you are using that ad gratuitously and it makes you a hypocrite. This is what Fox News does best. Spin the story to make whatever they do not like look bad. They take what democrats say and twist it into something negative. It is wrong and is not reflective of what I thought Fox News was...fair and balanced.
The tactics of Fox News was on display again yesterday on their midday show "The Live Desk". The segment was on the supposed sex scene in the Xbox 360 game "Mass Effect". Hosted by Martha MacCallum, the segment featured a debate between author Cooper Lawrence and Spike TV's game reporter Geoff Keighley (transcript and YouTube video here). The segment was titled "Se"Xbox? New Video Game Shows Full Digital Nudity and Sex". Keighley defended the game well, but it was obvious the game along with Keighley himself was not going to get the "fair and balanced" treatment. Geoff was not given much time to give his replies while Cooper Lawrence was misrepresenting the game, a game she admitted that she never played, and was just being rude to Keighley, even telling Martha to "Let me at him".
Geoff should be praised not only for defending the game, but for even going on Fox News, which is never kind to video games or the industry itself. He had tremendous poise and kept his cool while he was being rudely interrupted by Lawrence along with being bombarded with sensationalized exaggerations of the scene and the game itself. Full nudity? Explicitly graphical sex? This could not be further from the truth. The scene (which is in the YouTube clip here) only features a bare backside and one breast. No full nudity. No graphic sex. Cooper Lawrence, along with Martha and the "A-List" panel, made the false claims of graphic sex without even playing the game. Does this sound fair and balanced? Were the words of Lawrence about the game as a whole and the way Martha moderated the debate reflective of that slogan? Look at the title of that segment. "Se"Xbox? New Video Game Shows Full Digital Nudity and Sex". That alone should be a red flag not only for sensationalizing a story, but also for slander. Microsoft and BioWare should call an attorney.
When Martha interviewed the panel about the scene, one of the panelists criticized the ESRB for not giving the game the Adults Only rating, which would get the game pulled from store shelves. If Mass Effect should get such a rating for the "graphic scene", then Fox News should be declared obscene and be available only through the adult pay-per-view channels. The sexual images they shamelessly exhibit while covering news stories are more graphic and more gratuitous than the supposed sex scene in Mass Effect and are on the screen longer on all of their shows than the scene in the game. Fox News is being hypocritical in their outrage. Not only do they display sexual images without any qualms, but their salaries are paid by the same man who owns the Fox Television Network, which has shows like The Simpsons, Family Guy, House, and 24 among other shows that are not suitable for children. These shows feature more sexual content than Mass Effect. Fox News is owned by the same company that owns MySpace. I do not need to tell you about the stuff one can view on the social networking site. Fox News and their employees are in no place to criticise those who develop games with any sexual content. If they want to go after adult content, they should start with their own channel. How about if they not show sexual content gratuitously and inappropriately?
Fox News' coverage of the "sex scene" in Mass Effect is nothing short of sensationalism and a complete distortion of facts. The so-called graphic nudity is nothing more than a brief shot of a woman's rear and a bare left breast. This is not pornographic. This is not AO content. Fox News is doing what they do best. They sensationalize. They spin the facts. They are not fair to who they do not agree with. Fox News is lying to their viewers. Their viewers are not getting all sides of any story they "report". This is fear-mongering. The act of deliberately twisting facts and research to scare viewers and to defame anyone or anything is a violation of journalistic ethics. We have seen this from Fox News so many times. This is the same network that gave anti-game crusader and lawyer Jack Thompson air time during their coverage of the Virginia Tech massacre. Fox did nothing but listen to this massacre-chasing monster blaming video games for the shooting before any investigation took place, before the identity of the shooter was known, before the final body count was known, while students were worried sick about the well-being of fellow students and professors, while family members were waiting for the conditions of their loved-ones. Just sad and disgraceful. No one at Fox News objected. No one at Fox News had any qualms about Jack Thompson capitalizing on a tragedy that was still going on. DO THEY NOT HAVE ANY SHAME?
My anger with Fox News is not a right-wing issue or a left-wing issue. This is about holding journalists who sensationalize and spin the facts responsible. The journalists at Fox need to take a long look in the mirror. They need to look at themselves and take stock. When they do that, they should ask themselves this question: Who is worse, the game developers who make the games or those in the media who sensationalize and distort the facts about the game to scare the viewers and to fit an agenda? If you think the former is worse, I got these six words to say:
YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS BEING JOURNALISTS!
Good night and good luck.
The tactics of Fox News was on display again yesterday on their midday show "The Live Desk". The segment was on the supposed sex scene in the Xbox 360 game "Mass Effect". Hosted by Martha MacCallum, the segment featured a debate between author Cooper Lawrence and Spike TV's game reporter Geoff Keighley (transcript and YouTube video here). The segment was titled "Se"Xbox? New Video Game Shows Full Digital Nudity and Sex". Keighley defended the game well, but it was obvious the game along with Keighley himself was not going to get the "fair and balanced" treatment. Geoff was not given much time to give his replies while Cooper Lawrence was misrepresenting the game, a game she admitted that she never played, and was just being rude to Keighley, even telling Martha to "Let me at him".
Geoff should be praised not only for defending the game, but for even going on Fox News, which is never kind to video games or the industry itself. He had tremendous poise and kept his cool while he was being rudely interrupted by Lawrence along with being bombarded with sensationalized exaggerations of the scene and the game itself. Full nudity? Explicitly graphical sex? This could not be further from the truth. The scene (which is in the YouTube clip here) only features a bare backside and one breast. No full nudity. No graphic sex. Cooper Lawrence, along with Martha and the "A-List" panel, made the false claims of graphic sex without even playing the game. Does this sound fair and balanced? Were the words of Lawrence about the game as a whole and the way Martha moderated the debate reflective of that slogan? Look at the title of that segment. "Se"Xbox? New Video Game Shows Full Digital Nudity and Sex". That alone should be a red flag not only for sensationalizing a story, but also for slander. Microsoft and BioWare should call an attorney.
When Martha interviewed the panel about the scene, one of the panelists criticized the ESRB for not giving the game the Adults Only rating, which would get the game pulled from store shelves. If Mass Effect should get such a rating for the "graphic scene", then Fox News should be declared obscene and be available only through the adult pay-per-view channels. The sexual images they shamelessly exhibit while covering news stories are more graphic and more gratuitous than the supposed sex scene in Mass Effect and are on the screen longer on all of their shows than the scene in the game. Fox News is being hypocritical in their outrage. Not only do they display sexual images without any qualms, but their salaries are paid by the same man who owns the Fox Television Network, which has shows like The Simpsons, Family Guy, House, and 24 among other shows that are not suitable for children. These shows feature more sexual content than Mass Effect. Fox News is owned by the same company that owns MySpace. I do not need to tell you about the stuff one can view on the social networking site. Fox News and their employees are in no place to criticise those who develop games with any sexual content. If they want to go after adult content, they should start with their own channel. How about if they not show sexual content gratuitously and inappropriately?
Fox News' coverage of the "sex scene" in Mass Effect is nothing short of sensationalism and a complete distortion of facts. The so-called graphic nudity is nothing more than a brief shot of a woman's rear and a bare left breast. This is not pornographic. This is not AO content. Fox News is doing what they do best. They sensationalize. They spin the facts. They are not fair to who they do not agree with. Fox News is lying to their viewers. Their viewers are not getting all sides of any story they "report". This is fear-mongering. The act of deliberately twisting facts and research to scare viewers and to defame anyone or anything is a violation of journalistic ethics. We have seen this from Fox News so many times. This is the same network that gave anti-game crusader and lawyer Jack Thompson air time during their coverage of the Virginia Tech massacre. Fox did nothing but listen to this massacre-chasing monster blaming video games for the shooting before any investigation took place, before the identity of the shooter was known, before the final body count was known, while students were worried sick about the well-being of fellow students and professors, while family members were waiting for the conditions of their loved-ones. Just sad and disgraceful. No one at Fox News objected. No one at Fox News had any qualms about Jack Thompson capitalizing on a tragedy that was still going on. DO THEY NOT HAVE ANY SHAME?
My anger with Fox News is not a right-wing issue or a left-wing issue. This is about holding journalists who sensationalize and spin the facts responsible. The journalists at Fox need to take a long look in the mirror. They need to look at themselves and take stock. When they do that, they should ask themselves this question: Who is worse, the game developers who make the games or those in the media who sensationalize and distort the facts about the game to scare the viewers and to fit an agenda? If you think the former is worse, I got these six words to say:
YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS BEING JOURNALISTS!
Good night and good luck.
Monday, January 21, 2008
Did a Rush to Beat Sony Cause the Red Rings of Death Controversy?
According to an anonymous inside source who was involved in the testing of the system, the Xbox 360 had "purposefully cheap heat sinks" and was rushed just to beat Sony. The sinks were the reported cause of many RROD problems. Also adding to the pain is the chance that Microsoft may run out of replacement systems for those who had the dreaded rings.
This is of right now a rumor. If it is true, then Microsoft should be ashamed.
Source of article: Joystiq
This is of right now a rumor. If it is true, then Microsoft should be ashamed.
Source of article: Joystiq
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Thoughts on Game Publishers Blacklisting Game Outlets for Bad Reviews.
Honesty. Integrity. The ability and value of accurate, fair, and balanced reporting on the stories that shape our world to those who read or listen to those stories. This is the essence of journalism. The connection of trust that reporters and writers have with their viewers and readers is paramount in the profession. The apex, the top essence, the utmost requirement, the peak importance among other peak importances of that sacred trust is the integrity that the journalist has when reporting or writing about news stories, sporting events, or even tragedies and hostage situations. The integrity of a journalist means that the he or she will report the story with no bias. The journalist will cover elections without any sign of party siding, which means he or she will not show any sign of joy or disappointment while announcing the results of an election. The journalist will never take payment from an oil company that is abusing the environment if said journalist reports only on the good in which said oil company does. The journalist understands the essence of the sacred trust between the news company, whether it be a newspaper or a news channel, and the viewer, who pays for the newspaper subscription and the news channel. It is a trust that is sacred as the trust between spouses in a marriage. It is NEVER to be violated.
Sadly, journalistic integrity is hard to come by. They will only report on good things a company does because they are paid by said company or only report on the negative things a company does because they pay their rivals. A conservative newspaper, magazine, or news channel will cover scandals affecting liberals more than covering scandals on conservatives. Vice-versa applies to liberal journalistic outlets. The lack of journalistic integrity has detrimental consequences not only to the news organizations, but to those who trust said outlets. The viewers, listeners, and readers trust journalists like they trust a home security system with their possessions, their homes, their families, and their lives. Readers, listeners, and viewers depend on the news. They do not know what is exactly happening in Iraq. They do not know what is exactly happening with global warming. They do not know what is exactly going on with the economy. This is why we all depend on journalists to give us the news. The lack of integrity in a journalist is a violation of that sacred trust within the viewer.
One last stallion of integrity in journalism is the video game journalist and, more specifically, the video game reviewer. The video game reviewer is like a movie critic. They play the games and give a score based on many aspects of the game, which includes graphics, control, design, story, and audio. The game reviewer has a tall responsibility. They are responsible with honest and accurate critiques of the games so that no one wastes money on a video game with horrible gameplay or that no one misses out on a blockbuster that is game of the year noteworthy because a reviewer falsely claimed the overall gameplay was terrible. That is the paramount task game reviewers undertake. A vast number of gamers, including myself, consult game review scores in a purchase of a game. They claim that review scores are a chief factor in a purchasing decision. Game journalists understand this. They are gamers too. They, just like you and I, cringe at the thought of wasting money on a video game with graphics that give players eye strain. They lament the thought of spending fifty dollars of hard earned money on a game with controls that are more sluggish than FEMA was when Hurricane Katrina hit the gulf coast. They especially wince at the idea of spending money on a game that is plagued with glitches that make the game unplayable.
The video game companies see things a different way.
Sadly and unfortunately, the integrity of game reviewers are now under attack. Not from the head of game magazines, game websites, or game channels, but from the developers and publishers of the games. I am not talking about all game companies. Just those who can not accept criticism, low scores, and the fact that the game is just not any good or any fun to play. This started last fall with the now-overhyped Playstation 3 dragon flight game "Lair". When the game received scores that ranged from mediocre to terrible, developer Factor 5 and publisher Sony sent a guide on how to review the game to nearly every outlet, whether it be magazine, website, or channel. Factor 5 and Sony were bashed for this childish act. The fact that they would stoop to such a low level is ridiculous and is the trigger, a cause, of public relations hell. The lengths of what a game company will do to game reviewers who truthfully give bad scores to games came to a head last month when long time Gamespot reviewer Jeff Gerstmann, the reviewer who gave "The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time" a perfect 10, which is the first and only game to get such a paramount honor from the website, was terminated when he gave the game "Kane & Lynch" a mediocre score. The publishers Eidos interactive, who had adverts for the game on Gamespot, threatened to pull their ads if Jeff was not terminated. This triggered a massive and vast anger from the entire gaming community, whether they be journalists or players. Many Gamespot readers gave abysmal reader reviews for the game as a protest against Gerstmann's termination. Those were quickly tarnished as well as Gerstmann's review. Many Gamespot subscribers ceased their subscriptions and even their staffers started to depart.
The game companies are in no position to bully game reviewers. They do not have the right nor the privilege to force a reviewers termination because of their honesty. This is the equivalent of a petulant little brat who does not take no for an answer. This is the equivalent of a child losing in a game and demanding a two out of three or a three out of five. This is the equivalent of one who responds to criticism in an inappropriate fashion. If game companies want good reviews or some of the hard-earned money of those who shell out the fifty dollars for such games, then they perhaps need to take a long look in the mirror and come to a realization. A realization in which a game company needs to accept the fact that in order to get great reviews and millions of copies of a game sold, they need to develop and tune the game to meet such lofty goals. The game companies are not to force game reviewers to sacrifice their integrity, the integrity that is essential for the trust between the reviewer and the reader. The reviewer should never have to lose his or her job because he or she was being honest, fair, and balanced. That is what Eidos did. Instead of taking criticism as a learning experience, they instead decided to go after Jeff, costing him his job in the process and giving Gamespot, CNet, and Eidos a publicity nightmare so treacherous, the publicists of Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton, and Brittany Spears would be unenviable of such a task. Even the PR department of Take-Two Interactive would not undergo such a hellish...well...hell. Jeff Gerstmann is an unfortunate victim of a company's ego vastly over-inflated and pride more foolish than that of our president.
To the game reviewers: stay strong and never budge. Your integrity is paramount in our trust we put in you. Your fairness and honesty is the peak difference in buying a game that is one of the greatest ever or a game that is one of the worst ever. Also to the CEOs of the gaming outlets: never give in to the demands of a game company. They are not to tell you how to run the magazine, website, or network. You run the ship, they do not. What the game companies do to your employees is nothing short of wrongful termination, which results in lawsuits. You can not fire journalists for being honest, fair, accurate, and balanced. That is what you hire your employees for. You do not fire your employees for doing their jobs. You do not fire them for what they do. They play a game thoroughly and give an honest critique of the game. The importance of integrity is something that can never...NEVER...be stressed enough. If you give in to the demands from a game company that is too egotistical to accept the fact that their game is bad, you will go through what Gamespot has to go through. The protests, the PR hell, the sudden departures of fellow co-workers who feel that if they do not lie and say a game is good when in fact it is a complete 180 from good, and paramount of all the loss of readers and viewers that are vital to your company as much as gasoline is vital to an automobile, as vital as oxygen and a heartbeat is to a human being. Do not do what Gamestop and CNet did to your employees.
The journalism profession has a sacred trust between the reporter and the listener, reader, or viewer. The utmost factor in that trust is integrity. The sacred trust is NEVER to be violated in any way imaginable. The game companies extorting good game reviews, holding reviewers hostage with their jobs for high scores and have no qualms for their termination, is nothing short of a dispicalbe and selfish act.
Good night and good luck.
Sadly, journalistic integrity is hard to come by. They will only report on good things a company does because they are paid by said company or only report on the negative things a company does because they pay their rivals. A conservative newspaper, magazine, or news channel will cover scandals affecting liberals more than covering scandals on conservatives. Vice-versa applies to liberal journalistic outlets. The lack of journalistic integrity has detrimental consequences not only to the news organizations, but to those who trust said outlets. The viewers, listeners, and readers trust journalists like they trust a home security system with their possessions, their homes, their families, and their lives. Readers, listeners, and viewers depend on the news. They do not know what is exactly happening in Iraq. They do not know what is exactly happening with global warming. They do not know what is exactly going on with the economy. This is why we all depend on journalists to give us the news. The lack of integrity in a journalist is a violation of that sacred trust within the viewer.
One last stallion of integrity in journalism is the video game journalist and, more specifically, the video game reviewer. The video game reviewer is like a movie critic. They play the games and give a score based on many aspects of the game, which includes graphics, control, design, story, and audio. The game reviewer has a tall responsibility. They are responsible with honest and accurate critiques of the games so that no one wastes money on a video game with horrible gameplay or that no one misses out on a blockbuster that is game of the year noteworthy because a reviewer falsely claimed the overall gameplay was terrible. That is the paramount task game reviewers undertake. A vast number of gamers, including myself, consult game review scores in a purchase of a game. They claim that review scores are a chief factor in a purchasing decision. Game journalists understand this. They are gamers too. They, just like you and I, cringe at the thought of wasting money on a video game with graphics that give players eye strain. They lament the thought of spending fifty dollars of hard earned money on a game with controls that are more sluggish than FEMA was when Hurricane Katrina hit the gulf coast. They especially wince at the idea of spending money on a game that is plagued with glitches that make the game unplayable.
The video game companies see things a different way.
Sadly and unfortunately, the integrity of game reviewers are now under attack. Not from the head of game magazines, game websites, or game channels, but from the developers and publishers of the games. I am not talking about all game companies. Just those who can not accept criticism, low scores, and the fact that the game is just not any good or any fun to play. This started last fall with the now-overhyped Playstation 3 dragon flight game "Lair". When the game received scores that ranged from mediocre to terrible, developer Factor 5 and publisher Sony sent a guide on how to review the game to nearly every outlet, whether it be magazine, website, or channel. Factor 5 and Sony were bashed for this childish act. The fact that they would stoop to such a low level is ridiculous and is the trigger, a cause, of public relations hell. The lengths of what a game company will do to game reviewers who truthfully give bad scores to games came to a head last month when long time Gamespot reviewer Jeff Gerstmann, the reviewer who gave "The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time" a perfect 10, which is the first and only game to get such a paramount honor from the website, was terminated when he gave the game "Kane & Lynch" a mediocre score. The publishers Eidos interactive, who had adverts for the game on Gamespot, threatened to pull their ads if Jeff was not terminated. This triggered a massive and vast anger from the entire gaming community, whether they be journalists or players. Many Gamespot readers gave abysmal reader reviews for the game as a protest against Gerstmann's termination. Those were quickly tarnished as well as Gerstmann's review. Many Gamespot subscribers ceased their subscriptions and even their staffers started to depart.
The game companies are in no position to bully game reviewers. They do not have the right nor the privilege to force a reviewers termination because of their honesty. This is the equivalent of a petulant little brat who does not take no for an answer. This is the equivalent of a child losing in a game and demanding a two out of three or a three out of five. This is the equivalent of one who responds to criticism in an inappropriate fashion. If game companies want good reviews or some of the hard-earned money of those who shell out the fifty dollars for such games, then they perhaps need to take a long look in the mirror and come to a realization. A realization in which a game company needs to accept the fact that in order to get great reviews and millions of copies of a game sold, they need to develop and tune the game to meet such lofty goals. The game companies are not to force game reviewers to sacrifice their integrity, the integrity that is essential for the trust between the reviewer and the reader. The reviewer should never have to lose his or her job because he or she was being honest, fair, and balanced. That is what Eidos did. Instead of taking criticism as a learning experience, they instead decided to go after Jeff, costing him his job in the process and giving Gamespot, CNet, and Eidos a publicity nightmare so treacherous, the publicists of Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton, and Brittany Spears would be unenviable of such a task. Even the PR department of Take-Two Interactive would not undergo such a hellish...well...hell. Jeff Gerstmann is an unfortunate victim of a company's ego vastly over-inflated and pride more foolish than that of our president.
To the game reviewers: stay strong and never budge. Your integrity is paramount in our trust we put in you. Your fairness and honesty is the peak difference in buying a game that is one of the greatest ever or a game that is one of the worst ever. Also to the CEOs of the gaming outlets: never give in to the demands of a game company. They are not to tell you how to run the magazine, website, or network. You run the ship, they do not. What the game companies do to your employees is nothing short of wrongful termination, which results in lawsuits. You can not fire journalists for being honest, fair, accurate, and balanced. That is what you hire your employees for. You do not fire your employees for doing their jobs. You do not fire them for what they do. They play a game thoroughly and give an honest critique of the game. The importance of integrity is something that can never...NEVER...be stressed enough. If you give in to the demands from a game company that is too egotistical to accept the fact that their game is bad, you will go through what Gamespot has to go through. The protests, the PR hell, the sudden departures of fellow co-workers who feel that if they do not lie and say a game is good when in fact it is a complete 180 from good, and paramount of all the loss of readers and viewers that are vital to your company as much as gasoline is vital to an automobile, as vital as oxygen and a heartbeat is to a human being. Do not do what Gamestop and CNet did to your employees.
The journalism profession has a sacred trust between the reporter and the listener, reader, or viewer. The utmost factor in that trust is integrity. The sacred trust is NEVER to be violated in any way imaginable. The game companies extorting good game reviews, holding reviewers hostage with their jobs for high scores and have no qualms for their termination, is nothing short of a dispicalbe and selfish act.
Good night and good luck.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
A Timeline of "The Legend of Zelda" Video Game Series According to The Outlet. *SPOILERS*
The Legend of Zelda chronological timeline is one of the most debated topics in video games. Fans of the series have always debated which game came first, second, or last. Many rumors abounded and suggestions have been made.
After lengthy and strong consideration and thinking, I have came up with my own chronological timeline of the series. This is my own thought and you may disagree.
Before I begin, "The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time" has two endings. One ending takes place when the adult Link going back to his own time. Another ending has young Link leaving the temple of time and the fairy Navi flies away. This results in a dual-timeline: one after the end of the game and another after the older Link is transported back to his original time. Another reason why the "Ocarina of Time" is first is because Zelda and Link did not know each other.
Without further ado, here is "The Legend of Zelda" series timeline.
1. The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (end of game)
2. The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask
3. The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening
4. The Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap
5. The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures
6. The Legend of Zelda
7. Zelda 2: The Adventure of Link
8. The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past
9. The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Ages/Seasons.
10. The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
1. The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (after Link is sent back to original time)
2. The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
3. The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass
This is my iteration of the Zelda timeline. You may agree or disagree. This is still an open debate and will be for some time to come.
Maybe Nintendo did not intend a chronological story for the series and put gameplay ahead of a story line.
After lengthy and strong consideration and thinking, I have came up with my own chronological timeline of the series. This is my own thought and you may disagree.
Before I begin, "The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time" has two endings. One ending takes place when the adult Link going back to his own time. Another ending has young Link leaving the temple of time and the fairy Navi flies away. This results in a dual-timeline: one after the end of the game and another after the older Link is transported back to his original time. Another reason why the "Ocarina of Time" is first is because Zelda and Link did not know each other.
Without further ado, here is "The Legend of Zelda" series timeline.
1. The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (end of game)
2. The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask
3. The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening
4. The Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap
5. The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures
6. The Legend of Zelda
7. Zelda 2: The Adventure of Link
8. The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past
9. The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Ages/Seasons.
10. The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
1. The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (after Link is sent back to original time)
2. The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
3. The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass
This is my iteration of the Zelda timeline. You may agree or disagree. This is still an open debate and will be for some time to come.
Maybe Nintendo did not intend a chronological story for the series and put gameplay ahead of a story line.
Friday, January 4, 2008
Mega Man-Themed Parody of Vancouver Taser Tragedy Sparks Outrage from RCMP.
Look at this story on GamePolitics.com and watch the video.
The RCMP is in no position to be outraged at this. They tasered an innocent Polish immigrant, who could not understand English, to death. Instead of using restraint or getting the help of a translator, one of which was in the airport, the over-zealous airport security and law enforcement simply decided to get trigger-happy with their tasers and killed an innocent man.
The RCMP needs a long look in the mirror.
The RCMP is in no position to be outraged at this. They tasered an innocent Polish immigrant, who could not understand English, to death. Instead of using restraint or getting the help of a translator, one of which was in the airport, the over-zealous airport security and law enforcement simply decided to get trigger-happy with their tasers and killed an innocent man.
The RCMP needs a long look in the mirror.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
New York Governor Elliot Spitzer (D) Uses Hoax Site in Presentation.
Read this article on GamePolitics. The article has a link to the presentation.
In a nutshell, the presentation is nothing more than propaganda and scare-tactics, not to mention that one of the sources used, a website called "Mothers Against Videogame Addiction and Violence", is a hoax site created by an NYC design school student.
Politicians going this low not only to scare parents and to take advantage of single-parents, but also to pass legislation (Governor Spitzer backs a game sales restriction bill) that has been declared unconstitutional nearly ten times is not only unacceptable to the people that elected said politicians, but is also defamatory of the enitre videogame industry and gamers themselves. Tens or hundreds of thousands of the hard-working citizens' tax dollars have been wasted on excessively-flawed bills, most of them being passed with false information and scare tactics that Governor Spitzer is using. It is just sad that the people we trust, those who we elect, those who have heard the people say we believe in you and we trust you with our future are stooping to this level.
Governor Spitzer should know better.
Good night, and good luck.
In a nutshell, the presentation is nothing more than propaganda and scare-tactics, not to mention that one of the sources used, a website called "Mothers Against Videogame Addiction and Violence", is a hoax site created by an NYC design school student.
Politicians going this low not only to scare parents and to take advantage of single-parents, but also to pass legislation (Governor Spitzer backs a game sales restriction bill) that has been declared unconstitutional nearly ten times is not only unacceptable to the people that elected said politicians, but is also defamatory of the enitre videogame industry and gamers themselves. Tens or hundreds of thousands of the hard-working citizens' tax dollars have been wasted on excessively-flawed bills, most of them being passed with false information and scare tactics that Governor Spitzer is using. It is just sad that the people we trust, those who we elect, those who have heard the people say we believe in you and we trust you with our future are stooping to this level.
Governor Spitzer should know better.
Good night, and good luck.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Thoughts on XBox 360 hardware failures, other design flaws, and a lack of common sense.
Microsoft's video game console the Xbox 360 has hit games like Gears of War and Halo 3, It also has reported frequent hardware failures, including, but not exclusive to, the Red Rings of Death, a 3/4 ring around the switch that is indicative of a fatal hardware error. If this occurs, the system will not operate again and must be sent to repair services. Seems simple enough, but when your second 360 fails (this has happened), you have to wonder to yourself what the hell is going on? If Microsoft says they fixed the system or sent you a replacement, then why does it crap up again? Even the Elite 360s get the rings of death. I thought the XBox 360 Elite would've had this problem fixed, but I guess I was wrong.
Another thing I find agonizing is that 360 owners had their console die after the warranty expires. That means the owners would have to pay for repairs or for a replacement. The cost could be from $100 to $150. What the hell?! My Gamecube cost me $100 (without game and RF switch), my PS2 (thin unit) and my Nintendo DS (the original) cost me $150 each. Even my DS Lite, which I purchased less than a year after release, cost me $130. I bought four systems at a price range from $100 to $150 individually. A basic 360 costs $270. If it fails after warranty (which to Microsoft's credit they extended), you are screwed. You will have to pay anywhere from 37% to 55% of the basic unit's price. If the complaints from 360 owners are true and the replacement or repaired units are also crashing, who will pay such a price again and again. What the hell is going on Microsoft?
The 360's woes don't end there. The early units also scratch up discs (YouTube videos prove this). This is believed to be the result of a lack of padding around the DVD lens. Excuse me? Didn't Microsoft know this? What's up with that? Were the manufacturers drunk? This is laughable. It is truly pathetic for a rich company like Microsoft not to do anything about this before the system's initial launch in 2005. Inexcusable and unacceptable in every sense of those words. Microsoft, Peter Moore, and Bill Gates should have known better. These weren't minor scratches either. These scratches were thick, easily visible, and difficult to clean without going to a store and spending money to get it buffered. Just sad. My Gamecube and PS2 doesn't scratch discs and neither does the Wii nor the PS3. You should know damn better Microsoft.
I also have other hardware issues to take up with Microsoft. Where the hell is backwards compatability? I mean right out of the box backwards compatability. The PS3 and the Wii have backwards compatability with their past systems without the use of any on-line process. When you get your Wii or Playstation 3, as soon as you hook it up to your TV, you can put your Gamecube disc or your Playstation 2 disc in their respective systems and play right away. Why isn't it that simple Microsoft? Why can't it be?
The problems and complaints go on. Why do I have to buy extra equipment and an XBox Live subscription of $70/year while the Wii and PS3 have free online play ready out of the box? Why the hell does the richest company in the world need more money and to charge for online connectivity? What would I rather have: the ability to play Halo 3 online at a cost of $70/year or to play games like WarHawk online or online games for the Wii for free? Common sense Microsoft, please?
The Xbox 360 should be better than what it is now. It should not be scratching up discs. It should not be having hardware failures. It should be backwards compatable out of the box. It should have Wi-Fi right out of the box and for free. Had Microsoft waited a year to test the system or were not too cheap to do so, the XBox 360 would not have it's problems. I can see why Hideo Kojima won't put MGS 4 on the 360. The same goes for Square Enix with Final Fantasy XIII. Who would want to buy a game for a system that has hardware problems and design flaws? Not me.
Nintendo and Sony should be laughing at Microsoft. The PS3 has more advanced technology than the 360 and it doesn't have hardware failures (or not to the extent of the 360). It also has everything built in to the system that 360 owners will need to buy in order to take full advantage of their system. The lowering of the basic PS3's price to $400 should also be a selling point to those undecided between the 360 or the PS3. The Wii also has superiorites to the 360. The Wiimote allows for more precise aiming in FPS games than analog sticks. This is why the control and aiming in Metroid Prime 3: Corruption is better than Halo 3. Also, the Wii has free on-line play and a better download service than the 360.
I was looking forward to buying an XBox 360, but the thought of the numerous hardware failures and spending lots of money for those repairs or replacements is a turn off. I can't believe that the world's richest company is cheap enough to put out a machine with costly online play, lack of built-in backwards compatability, lack of built in online equipment, lack of other hardware built-in to the PS3 and the Wii. and an overall terrible hardware design with dated technology, costing many 360 owners money and grief. My brother has an Xbox 360 since December 2005. It was a basic unit and it hasn't had any hardware problems. He is lucky, that's all I can say.
Look, I know the PS3 has (or had) a steep price. Yes, it is expensive. However, you get all the things that the 360 owners need to take full advantage of their system and it has free on-line play. It also is a reliable system. It is also designed by a company that has far more hardware and console design experience than Microsoft. What would you, as a consumer, prefer? A $270 system that is known for and prone to hardware failures (and having a crappy customer and repair service) or a $400 system that has no widespread reports of critical failures? I'd pick the latter (if it were between the PS3 and the Wii, I'd pick the Wii, but that's another story). I was looking forward to owning an XBox360. It is a damn shame that the system, with a great game line up, has numerous design flaws. Microsoft is the richest company in the world. They had the resources, but were too damn cheap to use them.
In the words of the late Edward R. Murrow: "Good night, and good luck".
Another thing I find agonizing is that 360 owners had their console die after the warranty expires. That means the owners would have to pay for repairs or for a replacement. The cost could be from $100 to $150. What the hell?! My Gamecube cost me $100 (without game and RF switch), my PS2 (thin unit) and my Nintendo DS (the original) cost me $150 each. Even my DS Lite, which I purchased less than a year after release, cost me $130. I bought four systems at a price range from $100 to $150 individually. A basic 360 costs $270. If it fails after warranty (which to Microsoft's credit they extended), you are screwed. You will have to pay anywhere from 37% to 55% of the basic unit's price. If the complaints from 360 owners are true and the replacement or repaired units are also crashing, who will pay such a price again and again. What the hell is going on Microsoft?
The 360's woes don't end there. The early units also scratch up discs (YouTube videos prove this). This is believed to be the result of a lack of padding around the DVD lens. Excuse me? Didn't Microsoft know this? What's up with that? Were the manufacturers drunk? This is laughable. It is truly pathetic for a rich company like Microsoft not to do anything about this before the system's initial launch in 2005. Inexcusable and unacceptable in every sense of those words. Microsoft, Peter Moore, and Bill Gates should have known better. These weren't minor scratches either. These scratches were thick, easily visible, and difficult to clean without going to a store and spending money to get it buffered. Just sad. My Gamecube and PS2 doesn't scratch discs and neither does the Wii nor the PS3. You should know damn better Microsoft.
I also have other hardware issues to take up with Microsoft. Where the hell is backwards compatability? I mean right out of the box backwards compatability. The PS3 and the Wii have backwards compatability with their past systems without the use of any on-line process. When you get your Wii or Playstation 3, as soon as you hook it up to your TV, you can put your Gamecube disc or your Playstation 2 disc in their respective systems and play right away. Why isn't it that simple Microsoft? Why can't it be?
The problems and complaints go on. Why do I have to buy extra equipment and an XBox Live subscription of $70/year while the Wii and PS3 have free online play ready out of the box? Why the hell does the richest company in the world need more money and to charge for online connectivity? What would I rather have: the ability to play Halo 3 online at a cost of $70/year or to play games like WarHawk online or online games for the Wii for free? Common sense Microsoft, please?
The Xbox 360 should be better than what it is now. It should not be scratching up discs. It should not be having hardware failures. It should be backwards compatable out of the box. It should have Wi-Fi right out of the box and for free. Had Microsoft waited a year to test the system or were not too cheap to do so, the XBox 360 would not have it's problems. I can see why Hideo Kojima won't put MGS 4 on the 360. The same goes for Square Enix with Final Fantasy XIII. Who would want to buy a game for a system that has hardware problems and design flaws? Not me.
Nintendo and Sony should be laughing at Microsoft. The PS3 has more advanced technology than the 360 and it doesn't have hardware failures (or not to the extent of the 360). It also has everything built in to the system that 360 owners will need to buy in order to take full advantage of their system. The lowering of the basic PS3's price to $400 should also be a selling point to those undecided between the 360 or the PS3. The Wii also has superiorites to the 360. The Wiimote allows for more precise aiming in FPS games than analog sticks. This is why the control and aiming in Metroid Prime 3: Corruption is better than Halo 3. Also, the Wii has free on-line play and a better download service than the 360.
I was looking forward to buying an XBox 360, but the thought of the numerous hardware failures and spending lots of money for those repairs or replacements is a turn off. I can't believe that the world's richest company is cheap enough to put out a machine with costly online play, lack of built-in backwards compatability, lack of built in online equipment, lack of other hardware built-in to the PS3 and the Wii. and an overall terrible hardware design with dated technology, costing many 360 owners money and grief. My brother has an Xbox 360 since December 2005. It was a basic unit and it hasn't had any hardware problems. He is lucky, that's all I can say.
Look, I know the PS3 has (or had) a steep price. Yes, it is expensive. However, you get all the things that the 360 owners need to take full advantage of their system and it has free on-line play. It also is a reliable system. It is also designed by a company that has far more hardware and console design experience than Microsoft. What would you, as a consumer, prefer? A $270 system that is known for and prone to hardware failures (and having a crappy customer and repair service) or a $400 system that has no widespread reports of critical failures? I'd pick the latter (if it were between the PS3 and the Wii, I'd pick the Wii, but that's another story). I was looking forward to owning an XBox360. It is a damn shame that the system, with a great game line up, has numerous design flaws. Microsoft is the richest company in the world. They had the resources, but were too damn cheap to use them.
In the words of the late Edward R. Murrow: "Good night, and good luck".
Monday, December 3, 2007
IGN top 100 out; Super Mario Bros. #1
IGN. com recently released their (what I believe to be) annual top 100 games of all time list. I agree with the games listed, but I believe Final Fantasy VII was underrated. Nevertheless, a great list.
Super Mario Brothers took the top spot as well as it should. Had it not been for this game, video games would be extinct. Regardless of preferences, everyone who considers themselves a true gamer should own a copy of the game and play it every chance they get.
You can see the list here.
Super Mario Brothers took the top spot as well as it should. Had it not been for this game, video games would be extinct. Regardless of preferences, everyone who considers themselves a true gamer should own a copy of the game and play it every chance they get.
You can see the list here.
Friday, November 30, 2007
Gamespot reviewer fired for bad review? Yes, he has.
According to internet message boards and other sources, Gamespot's longtime editor Jeff Gerstmann was fired for a mediocre review of the video game "Kane & Lynch". The reasoning for the firing is rumored to be advertisement pressure from the game's developer and publisher Eidos Interactive.
If the review and advertiser pressuring are the sole reasons behind Jeff's firing, this is just a sorry episode for Eidos Interactive and for CNET, the parent company of Gamespot. It will terminate the credibility not only of Gamespot's reviewers, but the reviewers that work for other outlets. No advertiser or company has the right to push reviewers and media outlets around.
Source: GamePolitics
UPDATE: GameRevolution's Duke Ferris confirms that Jeff Gerstmann was fired due to pressure from Eidos. You can see his comments at the Gamepolitics link.
Unbelieveable. This is just a damn shame. Eidos and CNET has crushed the credibility of reviewers not only at Gamespot, but also the reviewers at other sites. I feel badly for Jeff and I hope he can take legal action against CNET and Eidos for pretty much wrecking his career and his life.
I am also sorry to say that I will no longer contribute to GameFAQs, which is connected to Gamespot. This is a protest to this sad episode.
If the review and advertiser pressuring are the sole reasons behind Jeff's firing, this is just a sorry episode for Eidos Interactive and for CNET, the parent company of Gamespot. It will terminate the credibility not only of Gamespot's reviewers, but the reviewers that work for other outlets. No advertiser or company has the right to push reviewers and media outlets around.
Source: GamePolitics
UPDATE: GameRevolution's Duke Ferris confirms that Jeff Gerstmann was fired due to pressure from Eidos. You can see his comments at the Gamepolitics link.
Unbelieveable. This is just a damn shame. Eidos and CNET has crushed the credibility of reviewers not only at Gamespot, but also the reviewers at other sites. I feel badly for Jeff and I hope he can take legal action against CNET and Eidos for pretty much wrecking his career and his life.
I am also sorry to say that I will no longer contribute to GameFAQs, which is connected to Gamespot. This is a protest to this sad episode.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Super Smash Bros. Brawl looking awesome
I trust that all of you Super Smash Bros. Brawl fanatics are keeping up with the updates from the game's website? The characters, stages, moves, music, items, and all of the game modes look incredible. I simply can't wait to get this game (and a Nintendo Wii). Another thing that is incredible (and conveiniant is the fact that you can use the GameCube controller with the game. Those who mastered Super Smash Bros. Melee will easily pick up Brawl.
The game is set for release in Febuary 2008 (hopefully).
It should also be noted that Nintendo's website has undergone a facelift. More on that later.
The game is set for release in Febuary 2008 (hopefully).
It should also be noted that Nintendo's website has undergone a facelift. More on that later.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
BBFC says no link between games and violence, but defends ban of Manhunt 2 video game.
The British Board of Film Classification, the United Kingdom's ratings board for films and video games, refused a rating for the video game "Manhunt 2" last summer. That means that the game is banned from the UK. Even the edited version, which was downgraded from an "Adult's Only" rating to a "Mature" rating by the Entertainment Software Rating Board, was refused classification. The BBFC's reasoning behind the refusal is the fear that children might imitate the violence in the game.
However, the BBFC admits there is no proven connection between video games and violence. Andrew Caldecott, the attorney for the ratings board, says, "The board's position is that there is insufficient evidence to prove, as a fact, there is a casual connection between video games and behavioural harm...".
So let me get this straight. The BBFC refuses classification to a game on the grounds that it may turn the young ones violent, but they have no factual proof. This is just the BBFC throwing their weight around and shoving their moral beliefs down the throats of the British citizens. I feel bad and sorry for Rockstar and Take-Two (the developers and publishers of the game). They deserve better than this.
Source: Kotaku
You can read about the appeal here.
However, the BBFC admits there is no proven connection between video games and violence. Andrew Caldecott, the attorney for the ratings board, says, "The board's position is that there is insufficient evidence to prove, as a fact, there is a casual connection between video games and behavioural harm...".
So let me get this straight. The BBFC refuses classification to a game on the grounds that it may turn the young ones violent, but they have no factual proof. This is just the BBFC throwing their weight around and shoving their moral beliefs down the throats of the British citizens. I feel bad and sorry for Rockstar and Take-Two (the developers and publishers of the game). They deserve better than this.
Source: Kotaku
You can read about the appeal here.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Review for "Dragon Quest VIII: Journey of the Cursed King" on GameFAQs.com.
Jack Thompson goes on ethics trial, faces disbarrment.
Controversial attorney and anti-video game activist Jack Thompson faces the Florida Bar in a hearing that can result in either a temporary or permanent disbarrment. He is on trial before Judge Dave Tunis due to his actions in court cases against the video game industry. One such action got him kicked off a civil lawsuit and a termination of his pro hac vice (license to practice law in other states) in Alabama.
In my opinion, he at least could be temporarily disbarred. Jack's actions, especially the aforementioned act and his actions after losing an attempt to get the video game Bully declared a public nuisance (which would outlaw sales), are an example of how not to act professionally. He should be glad he was not found in contempt and thrown in jail.
The story is from GamePolitics.com.
In my opinion, he at least could be temporarily disbarred. Jack's actions, especially the aforementioned act and his actions after losing an attempt to get the video game Bully declared a public nuisance (which would outlaw sales), are an example of how not to act professionally. He should be glad he was not found in contempt and thrown in jail.
The story is from GamePolitics.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)