Mid-Generation Console Failures

I am going to make a bold prediction that this mid-generation console upgrade idea is going to be a giant failure of an experiment.

Sony tried to push a Playstation 4 Pro on consumers with a higher price point to play the same group of games we already had. What was the selling point? Oh the games will look slightly better. When has this ever mattered to console gamers? When I ask you? Often the best selling console is the least powerful one. The N64 was outsold by the Playstation despite it having more power. The PS2 sold the best despite the Xbox being more powerful, arguably the Gamecube was stronger too. The Wii was easily the weakest console and blitzed passed the Xbox 360 and PS3 in sales, it wasn't even close.

But, who cares about graphics? PC gamers. PC gamers willing to put in the time to tweak and adjust their systems for maximum performance. Console gamers saw something like the PS4 Pro as a thing they didn't need and that was the extent of it.

The Xbox 1 X has just come out, and I'm predicting it will have the same problem, or worse. Who is this system for? People who have 4K TV's who want to get the most out of that maybe? It's not for the gamer looking to get the best visuals out of their games though, it can't be, because those people would have bought a PC already. This thing is $500 too...historically this is too high of a price point to expect gamers to shell out for. Especially, when you can get an Xbox One right now that plays everything the X can play for nearly $300 less than that.

So why did Sony and Microsoft attempt this mid-generational upgrade idea? Well, if you listen to their executives in interviews they did it because....Apple does it with their phones....Yep! That's why they did it...they were hoping gamers would upgrade their consoles like people upgrade their phones. Here's the problem with this idea...well there's a few problems with this. The first one is, Apple makes money on Phone sales, a good margin too. Sony and Microsoft barely break even when they sell a console. The console sales game has always been about selling accessories and games. So, what benefit do they get if you buy their shiny new console and your PS4 and Xbox Controllers still work on them? And your games still work on them? You're not rebuying the games either.

The only way these things will make money is if they expand the market then. Will they do that? Not at $500 I'll tell you that much. So then, why do this really?

I have two theories.

1.  Either they are completely stupid and made a gamble they shouldn't have.

2. They are seeking to change gaming into a service based industry entirely.

Ok, so they looked at the smart phone model right? Well, ok, they aren't making money on the hardware upgrading you so how else are they going to keep you? Transition you into someone who's dependent on your services, that's how. They already started doing that with Xbox Live and PS+, but that's not enough. It's not enough to just lock your players into certain online pools and that's it. No, you need something more than that.

So, I see Microsoft and Sony very soon, start to go into an all digital service. This has already begun actually. Both Microsoft and Sony offer a "Netflix" like service for their older games. It's only a matter of time they will put newer games on there, maybe even "channels" to subscribe to additionally such as the EA Access pass, which already exists. It's only a matter of time that these companies find a way to make this the main way they have games distributed.

Then, once they have a loyal devoted following, they'll implement yearly or bi-yearly console upgrades for you to buy. And they might subsidize it through their service fees, just like how cell phone companies do it.

I dunno, this is one man's theory.

Or they are just stupid...

*they might be stupid*

Heavenly Sword - Review

Lately, I have been scrounging up a bunch of cheap games at my local DiscReplay. Wonderful store by the way, great selections of old games at reasonable prices. Anyway, I came across Heavenly Sword one day, I was kind of keeping an eye out for it as I have always wanted to try this one. I played the demo back when it was first released and was completely put off by the writing. When Nariko tells Kai to play "twing twang" I regarded it as the dumbest thing I have ever heard in gaming since Metal Gear Solid 2's "I live through this arm!"

Years later a friend of mine randomly brought up this game, and how great it was, and that I should give it a shot. I didn't take his advice until just a few months ago, and, well, I basically regret it. This might be the worst game I've ever played, that's how much I didn't like it. Let's go through this. 

Story:

I suppose we'll begin here with the story, since this is what was sold to me as so great. Nariko (main character) is the daughter of the leader of a dying tribe of people who base their entire religion if you will around this mighty sword, that, if wielded will eventually take the life of the one using it...for some reason. The story never bothers to go into any detail what so ever about the sword, where it got its powers, why anyone in their right mind would even WANT the damn thing either. Sure, it's really powerful, ok, that part I get. But the main bad guy of the game wants this thing, really badly, he knows it will kill him though so why the hell bother with it? Seems like a worthless treasure if you ask me. He never delves into why he wants it, he just does...

Nariko is a sort of outcast in her tribe. Her father doesn't show her affection, and quite frankly he wished Nariko would never have been born, mainly because he was worried about some prophecy where Nariko would take up the Heavenly Sword, free their people, and die through the evil powers of the sword. (SPOILERS) That's what happens. But....the game never once takes the time to make us care. From the onset Nariko is treated pretty badly by everyone. Saving these people is thankless, and she's not "noble" in any way about it either. She doesn't like these people, she outwardly hates her father though still very much doesn't want him physically hurt or captured. 

She is literally going through this "quest" of hers for revenge, the satisfaction of war. Which, is interesting, don't get me wrong that is clearly what they were going for here, but never once do they ever make me care. Her vengeance is never fully realized to make me care. Compare this to God of War, Kratos is tricked into killing his own family. We see the brutal murder, we see his inner turmoil, we relate to this immediately. We care with Kratos, and want to do some murdering ourselves. We never get this moment with Nariko, and the game squanders every chance for us to care. Her father gets captured, not killed, she takes up the cursed Sword to free him. She frees him, fairly quickly after that, and then her quest continues for the majority of the game with little if no motivation at all. Her sister Kai, who as far as I can tell is autistic or something, gets captured and killed? I dunno, she gets revived at the end of the game, but the point is this happens JUST before the final mission so, again, the game isn't giving us time to breathe or care about what happens to Nariko. 

Worse yet, she never really addresses any of these things in a way that we can relate to. She monologues to herself, sparsely as it is, mainly just lamenting that the sword has taken her life. Oh, right I forgot to mention, the game STARTS at the endgame battlefield where the sword just randomly decides to take her life. Yet another poor story choice to take me out of ever giving a crap. She spends a lot of the game just bargaining with the spirit of the sword, and finally she has a whiny speech getting the sword to believe that she is all the sword has left as it will  be a museum piece if it doesn't let her use it to kill more people. Hilariously, just before Nariko dies she tells Kai to bury the sword where no one can find it....as if the evil sword is so dumb to have not known that would happen to it. Why did the sword give into her horrible logic and let her free? I have no idea, the sword never talks, it has no history presented to us, it's a useless, ill-conceived plot device. 

So...I mean that's really it. You beat the bad guy, revive your friend, and die and are given a viking funeral. The story was extremely hollow, poorly written, and my god the voice acting was bad, especially the main villain. I have heard less scene chewing from Disney villains. 

Graphics: 

Really good graphics for its time, early PS3 days after all. The frame rate on the other hand was unforgivably bad. Constant drops all around, couldn't get past this at all. 

Gameplay: 

I was hoping this would be the saving grace of the game. It's not. I was hoping for a God of War clone. It isn't. The combat in this game is...really clunky. There's no block button, just color patterns you have to react to from enemies. If they glow blue, Nariko will block if you touch nothing then hit Triangle as they hit you, orange  you have to hold R1 which is "strong stance" then hit Triangle as they hit you. That's the defense of the game. I never used it until I got to the final boss where it's just a game of throwing his Blue or Orange orbs back at him. Otherwise I just button mashed through he whole game and did just fine. 

The combat is mostly serviceable, but where the game really aggravated me was everything else. The game frequently has you control Kai...where you play the aforementioned "twing twang." So what is twing twang you ask? It just means Kai is going to go shoot people with her crossbow. These missions are god awful. This is back in the PS3 days where you have to use the Sixasis motion controls to guide her arrows and...let me tell you they do not control well at all. There is significant delay in the movements, it's not 1:1 in the slightest. This wouldn't be so bad if there weren't so MANY of these missions with Kai, or even sometimes you have to do this with Nariko too. They added this gameplay type wherever they possibly could, and I'd say it makes up about 40% of the gameplay overall. 

This is a mercifully short game thankfully. 

Sound:

Forgettable. Music was...ok? Voice acting was average to terrible, as I mentioned before the main villains are so busy chewing the scenes they likely had no idea what they were actually saying. It's insanely bad, and hard to describe. There's one villain that can fly using....uh...blades attached to his back....that don't even flap....yeah physics are not this game's strong suit either...But anyway, he is utterly ridiculous. He draws out nearly every word. Like, he'll say Nariko as....Naaaaaaaarrrriiiiiiiko in a high pitch whiny tone and he'll make a line with maybe 7 words in it last a solid minute to say. It's infuriating and takes whatever seriousness the game was going for in tone and throws it completely out the window. 

Final Thoughts: 

This game sucks. Best part of it was the credits because I knew then I'd never have to play this ever again. 

*DiscReplay was selling this for $3.99. I now understand why.*

Toxic Comment Sections

I am an avid poster on comment sections on sites like IGN and Destructiod, even Yahoo that I disparage every chance I get. More and more though, I am seeing on websites an increase in modding, and even just not having comment sections anymore at all. The reason they say, is the "toxic comments" that ruin the experience for people. I won't disagree comment sections on any site can have a lot of nonsense in them, a lot of flaming, a lot of trolling, etc. As someone who has spent a lot of time in them however, I wouldn't say this is a majority at all. I would say it's the minority, easily.

I am always surprised when I read comment sections on a controversial topic and scrolling through actively trying to find the reprehensible stuff. Interestingly, more often than not I see more comments "eye rolling" over the "cesspool" of comments they just sifted through, than I actually see bad comments myself. It's almost as if people just assume the comment section is filled with a lot of tripe.

Why do people assume this? Sure, you can always find the occasional racist comment, sexist comments, what have you in most comment sections. But, I have never seen one where the majority was just a bunch of slime, not even 50/50. So, what is it about comment sections that makes them "toxic" to people. Usually, when I get deep into comment sections I have really good conversations, or meme wars, or just joking around having lols with people I'll never meet in real life. Yeah, there's also arguments had, disagreements over things, but normally discussed cordially without the need for moderators to step in and instead of stopping "toxic" comments, instead just take sides and silence people.

I think it has to do with poisoning the well. Sure, there's a lot of good water in there, but a few drops of poison will still kill you. While that's a good comparison to the phenomena of people in general thinking comment sections are toxic, it doesn't reflect how they actually are. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater isn't the answer, but increasingly it seems as though companies running these sites don't want to see it.

It is their right to do it, but to me it makes the site far less interesting and engaging. I get why they do it. It's all a perception thing. They want control of everything, from their message and articles, to how they want you to "feel" about their website when you think about it. Sites don't like it when you disagree with the authors, or question their sources, or point out inaccuracies. These kinds of things makes your site lose credibility. Worse, something out of their control is people who have bad experiences with other users harassing them, or making troll comments to them drives them away from the site. That is out of their control mostly, unless of course they turn the comment sections off.

Again, I'm not an advocate for turning comments off anywhere. I really like being able to strike up a conversation online with anyone, especially people I disagree with. You learn the most talking with people who don't agree with you. You get to learn why they think the way they do, it can reaffirm what you believe if their evidence is sparse, or you can learn something that alters your thinking. Having no comments at all subjects you to one point of view of whatever you are reading or watching. This to me, is archaic. It's how media was consumed in the past. It just gets delivered to you and you absorb it. The internet advanced media in so many ways. One of the biggest ways has been the comment sections, and being able to react to articles with people around the world instantly.

Yeah, there's a ton of terrible people online and even if it were true that "most" people in comment sections are trolls, I'd still take that for the chance I meet someone who can give me a robust back and forth about the merits of 2D Zelda vs 3D Zelda.

My advice is just don't take it seriously, have fun with it, at least while it lasts. I can very well see eventually sites will no longer have comment sections at all. Possibly they'll evolve into only having paid comment sections where subcribers are allowed to discuss things but no one else. This happens quite a bit on Twitch now actually, which I kind of look at as a hyper fast evolved internet space where we can kinda see the future of the rest of the internet maybe.

*This final thought was moderated*