When I heard oh so long ago that they were making another "Die Hard" and it was going to be starring Bruce Willis, I was a bit skeptical if the old man still had it in him to pull off another performance as the grizzled veteran NYPD cop John McClane. (I was even more skeptical upon hearing that Harrison For is reprising his role as archaeologist/treasure hunter Indiana Jones, but thats a whole 'nother story) But then, as if I needed anything else to increase my skepticism about this movie, I saw that it was indeed going to be given a PG-13 rating. Now, in this day and age of needlessly violent "torture porn" (as I like to call it) like Hostel and it's equally unnecessary sequel, a PG-13 rated movie almost seems like it might as well be a G rated Disney flick. But after watching just the first 15-20 minutes of "Live Free or Die Hard," it becomes obvious that maybe a PG-13 rating doesn't instantly equal a lame movie after all.
The story goes as such: A group of high-tech hackers somehow manage to infiltrate every significant level of government and federal security and start causing havoc, like messing with telecommunications across America and basically shutting down all modes of public transportation. Once the feds figure out that all of these incidents are related, they decide to bring in every major hacker they can find and since they are short on manpower, they decide to call on local law enforcement to help them bring in some the "high value" hackers. Enter John McClane. McClane gets called to pick up the co-star of the movie Matt Farrall (Justin Long) because apparently he is one of the names on the FBI Cyber Division's watch list. Pretty much from there on, the movie is a non-stop, balls to the wall, all out action flick as McClane needs to protect Farrell while he transports him to the FBI and then find the terrorists responsible and issue a beating the way only John McClane can.
The acting in "LFDH" is fairly run of the mill with no stand out performances to speak of. Though the mere fact that Willis was able to get out of his wheel chair to play John McClane again was pretty amazing. (I kid, Willis, I kid...please don't throw me off a skyscraper) But since there weren't any stand out performances, I'll have to go the opposite direction and talk of the lackluster performances in the movie, such as Justin Long's weak attempt at side kick comic relief and Timothy Olyphant's less than frightening job playing the villain. Firstly, I don't know who keeps giving Justin Long work, but they really should stop. I mean, I liked him in "Dodgeball"...but purely for the reason that a big part of his role in "Dodgeball" was to continually get hit in the face with wrenches. But past "Dodgeball"...ehhh. Hell, I think I would've liked it better if Kevin Smith were bumped up from his cameo appearance to comic relief instead of Justin Long. Plus, Olyphant just wasn't a scary villain. Other than having tons of personality-less henchmen and being a good computer hacker, nothing about him screams "Watch out for this guy or he'll F you up" so you just knew that once McClane got his hands on him it was gonna be game over.
While the story seems like an interesting concept at first (a group of hackers decimates the federal government), the plausibility of it all becomes really suspect after a while. Because I don't claim to know pretty much anything when it comes to hacking, but it seems to me that it'd be a a step past impossible to infiltrate every level of government security as quickly and as efficiently as the villains of "LFDH" did without someone catching on sooner than they did in this film. At least in the earlier "Die Hard" movies there were villains who committed tangible crimes like random bombings and hostage taking, but this movie dealt with a topic thats so obscure to the average person that they could pretty much get away with anything without the normal movie goer being able to call them on their bullshit. But then again, one doesn't go see a "Die Hard" movie with the expectation of a concrete, bulletproof plot, does one?
But past the suspect story lies the real meat of the movie - it's intense, McClane death-defying, unadulterated action. And believe me, this movie has that in spades. Within the first 20 minutes, viewers are treated to no less than two explosions, a ridiculous firefight inside of a Camden apartment, followed by a short car action sequence, punctuated by McClane's own special brand of badass-ery and Long's feeble attempt at comic relief. But this again, brings us to one of the original points of my initial apprehension about this movie: the PG-13 rating. And after seeing it twice, I almost fully understand why it got the rating it did - and it wasn't for lack of action, no sir. This movie shares one large difference between the other three "Die Hards" and that difference is this: while many, many people die in this movie, McClane personally kills less of them (though his body count is still high) and when people get shot or dropped into or off of crazy shit, you don't see all of the gory carnage because frankly, you don't need to. If you've seen McClane shoot one terrorist henchmen a bunch of times, you've seen them all. Also, there isn't very much blood to speak of in the movie, except for McClane being covered in his own blood by the movie's end but, thats just the nature of a "Die Hard." This movie is about off the wall action sequences, car chases and McClane somehow surviving everything that is thrown his way which is people, cars (literally), and even jet fighters.
So if car chases, gun fights, and huge explosions all perpetrated by the single most grizzled, badass cop to ever live is your thing, you may want to forget your preconceived notions about the MPAA rating system and go see "Live Free or Die Hard."
Saturday, July 7, 2007
Friday, July 6, 2007
Review: "The Darkness" for Xbox 360
Wow...has it really been almost a month since I've last posted here? I don't know where the time goes but I swear I'll try and update this thing more regularly from now on - I promise. (Are his fingers crossed? We may never know)
But now, onto the real reason for today's blog:
These days in videogames, the First Person Shooting (FPS) genre (games like Halo and Call of Duty if you aren't familiar with the term) has become synonymous with trite and downright boring games that rely on nothing more than twitch reflexes and an itchy trigger finger. Due to this fact, it is so refreshing to see a game take the old tried and true FPS formula and infuse it with an intriguing original storyline as well as including new game mechanics that actually feel like they have expanded the gameplay instead of just being a tacked on afterthought. The game, to which I am referring, is one of the latest releases on the Xbox 360, "The Darkness."
The Darkness follows the life of Jackie Estacado, your run of the mill mobster hitman who also happens to have a dark secret dwelling within his soul. You see, when Jackie was very young, both of his parents were killed and Jackie was sent to live in an orphanage. While at the orphanage, Jackie meets Jenny Romano and the two are virtually inseparable. Later on in life, they also become romantically involved. But unfortunately for Jackie, he's taken out of the orphanage and sent to live with his Uncle Paulie Franchetti. Now, normally being taken out of an orphanage and sent to live with family would've been a happy occasion...but not for Jackie because you see, Paulie isn't the normal loving uncle that wants only the best for Jackie. No, instead Paulie is a vicious, insane mob boss who quickly turns young Jackie into one of his best hitmen. But Paulie isn't the most popular guy within the crime families of New York, not only because of his brutally insane methods, but also because he doesn't respect the old ways of doing business or the older members of the mob families and his biggest opponent is usually Jackie Estacado. Since Paulie obviously doesn't like people questioning his authority or the way he conducts business, Jackie is routinely getting on his nerves about the way things are run until one day, Paulie snaps. On Jackie's 21st birthday, Paulie sends him out to perform a hit but little does Jackie know, the hit is little more than a set up for Paulie to try and take Jackie out. It isn't long after Paulie's attempt on Jackie's life that a dark and mysterious being that has dwelled within Jackie since birth begins to manifest itself to, at first, seemingly only want to help Jackie take revenge on his uncle Paulie and Paulie's lapdog in the NYPD, Eddie Shrote.
From here the story appears on the surface to be the cliched "guy with a bone to pick with his former friends sets out for bloody revenge" but looking past the surface story is a quite intriguing story about the nature of the Darkness, the being within Jackie, and how Jackie came to embody this strange entity. Not wanting to give too much of the more interesting storyline away, I'll say only this - even though The Darkness seems to only want to help Jackie at first, it is more of a curse than Jackie could've ever imagined.
But beyond the semi-cliche story, the actual game is pretty spectacular all around. Pretty much everything about this game is top notch, even if it is a little on the short side and it isn't too difficult for the most part.
The graphics and lighting in this game are just amazing. First, since the Darkness can only manifest its power in the...well...in the darkness, the lighting effects from all sorts of sources such as light bulbs, street lights, fires and even some natural light are all as much of an enemy as any two bit mobster with a gun that Jackie may face. Thanks to the power of the 360, the differences between light and dark are drastic and light and shadow are used very well not only as a stylish effect but as an important part of playing the game. But beyond the lighting, the character models, weapons, and environments all are ridiculously detailed. Even filler characters are modeled and voiced very well. But perhaps the best use of the amazing graphics found in The Darkness is the game's penchant for over the top violence.
While it may seem that being a hitman for the mafia would be a brutal enough profession for Jackie, the addition of his Darkness powers pushes the violence of this game to a new level. On his own, Jackie has the ability to use all manner of ballistic weapons such as dual wielding pistols, assault rifles and even the fictional Jackhammer riot shotgun - though the amount of different guns available to Jackie is quite small. But Jackie can also perform amazingly violent execution moves with any weapon which require Jackie to get up close and personal with his prey. But guns are only half of Jackie's arsenal, as the Darkness comes with some very useful skills and attacks which are vital for Jackie's survival. Over the course of the game, Jackie will acquire 4 different, distinct Darkness powers - the creeping dark, the demon arm, the darkness guns and the black hole. First, the creeping dark is useful to scout out territory ahead of Jackie but the creeping dark also doubles as a weapon since it is able to both kill enemies and then devour their heart (eating the heart of fallen enemies will improve your darkness powers). Second, the demon arm can impale enemies but it can also remove obstacles from your path and can be used to easily and silent destroy any lights in your path (while your Darkness powers are active, you can see better in the darkness than in a well lit area). Third, the darkness guns are an interesting addition to your powers since they run off Darkness energy but are, in my opinion, the lamest darkness power. Lastly, the black hole creates a huge rift of dark energy which can be used to suck up and kill large groups of enemies but can also be used to destroy helicopters as well as airplanes. Thankfully, these darkness powers actually are very useful and practically necessary to complete the game. Without them, theres no way our anti-hero Jackie would be able to tear through half of the city's police force and all of Paulie's nameless henchmen to fulfill his tale of murderous revenge.
But these powers are not the only thing that the Darkness gives to Jackie in the way of means to take revenge on his uncle. The Darkness also gives Jackie the option of choosing from (after you unlock them during the course of the game) four different Darklings that all come with different abilities. The Darklings are usually just used for cannon fodder but their ability to act as bullet sponges can be very useful in many situations. There are four different Darkling types, each with their own special ability. The berserker is a melee combat type but this type is interesting because around the environments, Jackie can find 6 special hidden outfits for the berserkers which give them different weapons ranging from a sword to a machete to a jackhammer. The next is the gunner which, as the name implies, totes around a huge gattling gun. The kamikaze acts, again, much as the name implies and has dynamite strapped to him which he in turn uses to blow up anything in his path, which is useful not only for enemies but obstacles as well. The last, and perhaps most useful darkling, is the lightkiller. The lightkiller carries around a battery pack on his back which he uses to destroy any lights in the area so that Jackie can concentrate on taking out enemies. But the lightkiller can also act as a berserker type and help Jackie once his primary job is complete. Though the darklings sound like an indispensable help to Jackie, the AI of these darklings is actually pretty stupid and more often than not they'll stand around until they get shot up by enemies if not ordered by Jackie to attack someone.
Speaking of the AI, the enemy AI can be pretty flaky at times, too. Though enemies sometimes work like a coordinated team to try and stop Jackie, there will be other times when it seems like they're just letting you shoot them in the face. Case in point, one time during the game I was doing battle with some SWAT guys and I was using my creeping dark to silently take out foes with minimal confrontation. After I was sufficiently happy with the amount of guys I had killed, I recalled the dark and when I retook control of Jackie, I saw a SWAT member standing directly in front of me, with his back turned. I was so surprised by this I took advantage of the rare back execution before he could turn around and see what he had somehow missed when he ran right to where I was crouching, stopped and turned around.
Overall though, The Darkness was definitely a great game, if a bit short. There are side missions that you can get from the various characters throughout the game since it's set up as one flowing story rather than divided into missions. But The Darkness is a very fun game, if you like ultra-violent stories about revenge, mobsters and what appears to be demons from hell. Ultimately I'd say rent it first since the single player is a bit short and since m Xbox Live account is still out of commission, I had no way to test out the multiplayer.
But now, onto the real reason for today's blog:
These days in videogames, the First Person Shooting (FPS) genre (games like Halo and Call of Duty if you aren't familiar with the term) has become synonymous with trite and downright boring games that rely on nothing more than twitch reflexes and an itchy trigger finger. Due to this fact, it is so refreshing to see a game take the old tried and true FPS formula and infuse it with an intriguing original storyline as well as including new game mechanics that actually feel like they have expanded the gameplay instead of just being a tacked on afterthought. The game, to which I am referring, is one of the latest releases on the Xbox 360, "The Darkness."
The Darkness follows the life of Jackie Estacado, your run of the mill mobster hitman who also happens to have a dark secret dwelling within his soul. You see, when Jackie was very young, both of his parents were killed and Jackie was sent to live in an orphanage. While at the orphanage, Jackie meets Jenny Romano and the two are virtually inseparable. Later on in life, they also become romantically involved. But unfortunately for Jackie, he's taken out of the orphanage and sent to live with his Uncle Paulie Franchetti. Now, normally being taken out of an orphanage and sent to live with family would've been a happy occasion...but not for Jackie because you see, Paulie isn't the normal loving uncle that wants only the best for Jackie. No, instead Paulie is a vicious, insane mob boss who quickly turns young Jackie into one of his best hitmen. But Paulie isn't the most popular guy within the crime families of New York, not only because of his brutally insane methods, but also because he doesn't respect the old ways of doing business or the older members of the mob families and his biggest opponent is usually Jackie Estacado. Since Paulie obviously doesn't like people questioning his authority or the way he conducts business, Jackie is routinely getting on his nerves about the way things are run until one day, Paulie snaps. On Jackie's 21st birthday, Paulie sends him out to perform a hit but little does Jackie know, the hit is little more than a set up for Paulie to try and take Jackie out. It isn't long after Paulie's attempt on Jackie's life that a dark and mysterious being that has dwelled within Jackie since birth begins to manifest itself to, at first, seemingly only want to help Jackie take revenge on his uncle Paulie and Paulie's lapdog in the NYPD, Eddie Shrote.
From here the story appears on the surface to be the cliched "guy with a bone to pick with his former friends sets out for bloody revenge" but looking past the surface story is a quite intriguing story about the nature of the Darkness, the being within Jackie, and how Jackie came to embody this strange entity. Not wanting to give too much of the more interesting storyline away, I'll say only this - even though The Darkness seems to only want to help Jackie at first, it is more of a curse than Jackie could've ever imagined.
But beyond the semi-cliche story, the actual game is pretty spectacular all around. Pretty much everything about this game is top notch, even if it is a little on the short side and it isn't too difficult for the most part.
The graphics and lighting in this game are just amazing. First, since the Darkness can only manifest its power in the...well...in the darkness, the lighting effects from all sorts of sources such as light bulbs, street lights, fires and even some natural light are all as much of an enemy as any two bit mobster with a gun that Jackie may face. Thanks to the power of the 360, the differences between light and dark are drastic and light and shadow are used very well not only as a stylish effect but as an important part of playing the game. But beyond the lighting, the character models, weapons, and environments all are ridiculously detailed. Even filler characters are modeled and voiced very well. But perhaps the best use of the amazing graphics found in The Darkness is the game's penchant for over the top violence.
While it may seem that being a hitman for the mafia would be a brutal enough profession for Jackie, the addition of his Darkness powers pushes the violence of this game to a new level. On his own, Jackie has the ability to use all manner of ballistic weapons such as dual wielding pistols, assault rifles and even the fictional Jackhammer riot shotgun - though the amount of different guns available to Jackie is quite small. But Jackie can also perform amazingly violent execution moves with any weapon which require Jackie to get up close and personal with his prey. But guns are only half of Jackie's arsenal, as the Darkness comes with some very useful skills and attacks which are vital for Jackie's survival. Over the course of the game, Jackie will acquire 4 different, distinct Darkness powers - the creeping dark, the demon arm, the darkness guns and the black hole. First, the creeping dark is useful to scout out territory ahead of Jackie but the creeping dark also doubles as a weapon since it is able to both kill enemies and then devour their heart (eating the heart of fallen enemies will improve your darkness powers). Second, the demon arm can impale enemies but it can also remove obstacles from your path and can be used to easily and silent destroy any lights in your path (while your Darkness powers are active, you can see better in the darkness than in a well lit area). Third, the darkness guns are an interesting addition to your powers since they run off Darkness energy but are, in my opinion, the lamest darkness power. Lastly, the black hole creates a huge rift of dark energy which can be used to suck up and kill large groups of enemies but can also be used to destroy helicopters as well as airplanes. Thankfully, these darkness powers actually are very useful and practically necessary to complete the game. Without them, theres no way our anti-hero Jackie would be able to tear through half of the city's police force and all of Paulie's nameless henchmen to fulfill his tale of murderous revenge.
But these powers are not the only thing that the Darkness gives to Jackie in the way of means to take revenge on his uncle. The Darkness also gives Jackie the option of choosing from (after you unlock them during the course of the game) four different Darklings that all come with different abilities. The Darklings are usually just used for cannon fodder but their ability to act as bullet sponges can be very useful in many situations. There are four different Darkling types, each with their own special ability. The berserker is a melee combat type but this type is interesting because around the environments, Jackie can find 6 special hidden outfits for the berserkers which give them different weapons ranging from a sword to a machete to a jackhammer. The next is the gunner which, as the name implies, totes around a huge gattling gun. The kamikaze acts, again, much as the name implies and has dynamite strapped to him which he in turn uses to blow up anything in his path, which is useful not only for enemies but obstacles as well. The last, and perhaps most useful darkling, is the lightkiller. The lightkiller carries around a battery pack on his back which he uses to destroy any lights in the area so that Jackie can concentrate on taking out enemies. But the lightkiller can also act as a berserker type and help Jackie once his primary job is complete. Though the darklings sound like an indispensable help to Jackie, the AI of these darklings is actually pretty stupid and more often than not they'll stand around until they get shot up by enemies if not ordered by Jackie to attack someone.
Speaking of the AI, the enemy AI can be pretty flaky at times, too. Though enemies sometimes work like a coordinated team to try and stop Jackie, there will be other times when it seems like they're just letting you shoot them in the face. Case in point, one time during the game I was doing battle with some SWAT guys and I was using my creeping dark to silently take out foes with minimal confrontation. After I was sufficiently happy with the amount of guys I had killed, I recalled the dark and when I retook control of Jackie, I saw a SWAT member standing directly in front of me, with his back turned. I was so surprised by this I took advantage of the rare back execution before he could turn around and see what he had somehow missed when he ran right to where I was crouching, stopped and turned around.
Overall though, The Darkness was definitely a great game, if a bit short. There are side missions that you can get from the various characters throughout the game since it's set up as one flowing story rather than divided into missions. But The Darkness is a very fun game, if you like ultra-violent stories about revenge, mobsters and what appears to be demons from hell. Ultimately I'd say rent it first since the single player is a bit short and since m Xbox Live account is still out of commission, I had no way to test out the multiplayer.
Monday, June 11, 2007
Justice was served...then it wasn't...then it was again
If theres one thing I hate more in this world than people who are more rich and famous than me (which is most people), it's people who are more rich and famous than me for doing nothing. People, for example, like Paris Hilton. If there was ever a more perfect example of how you can be a famous celebrity in America for absolutely no reason whatsoever, it's Paris Hilton. I wish I could have millions upon millions of dollars, celebrity friends and thousands of admirers for no other reason than being ridiculously lucky enough to be born into the right family because thats all Paris has. There's no reason at all that anyone EVER should know who Paris Hilton is but because we live in a country where we treat celebrities like divine beings, people worship this worthless, egotistical, trampy, conceited, air headed bimbo.
But I bring this up because of the recent shenanigans thats been going on with the whole "Paris Goes To Jail" saga that's been "Breaking News" worthy stuff all around the internet. First, she went to jail and there was much rejoicing. Then, about a day later, she was mysteriously released from jail and put on house arrest and if the internet was a real place, the riot over this incident would've been so horrendous the government would've built a bridge commemorating it AND instated a national day of mourning for those lost in the tragic "Paris Riots". Luckily, however, in a rare instance where justice actually seemed to be served for once in America, Paris was ordered back to jail. And there was much rejoicing.
Now, I could go on and on wasting my time coming up with all sorts of obscure adjectives to describe not only Paris' surely disease infested body but also my own happiness that she will be out of sight and out of mind for at least a month...but instead I'll use this space to address a part of the whole situation that just didn't seem to fit. Though at first it was said that Paris was released to house arrest because of "medical conditions," which I'm sure is code for "withdrawal from all the drugs she no doubt takes," I was almost certain that couldn't have been the only reason she was released...but I just couldn't figure out what the other reason could've been.
But today it has come to light that "medical conditions" may not have been solely to blame for Paris' far too quick release from jail. It seems that Paris was released not because she was "sick" but because her billionaire grandfather, who is co-chairman of Hilton Hotels, donated a most likely ungodly sum of money to Sheriff Lee Baca's re-election campaign who then subsequently, released Paris to home arrest. This was almost just yet another sickening example of no matter what you do in America, as long as you have enough money, you can get away scott free but luckily for us, Paris is back in jail and will be staying there until the completion of her sentence.
Too bad she isn't in a regular prison for regular people and not in solitary in the medical jail where she is because now it seems that my dream of making "D-Block Does Debbie: Starring Paris Hilton" will have to wait until the next time that brainless, blonde waste of oxygen breaks the law...which, considering her level of intelligence, probably won't be too long.
Oh, and here's the article which spawned this post:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21884884-1702,00.html
But I bring this up because of the recent shenanigans thats been going on with the whole "Paris Goes To Jail" saga that's been "Breaking News" worthy stuff all around the internet. First, she went to jail and there was much rejoicing. Then, about a day later, she was mysteriously released from jail and put on house arrest and if the internet was a real place, the riot over this incident would've been so horrendous the government would've built a bridge commemorating it AND instated a national day of mourning for those lost in the tragic "Paris Riots". Luckily, however, in a rare instance where justice actually seemed to be served for once in America, Paris was ordered back to jail. And there was much rejoicing.
Now, I could go on and on wasting my time coming up with all sorts of obscure adjectives to describe not only Paris' surely disease infested body but also my own happiness that she will be out of sight and out of mind for at least a month...but instead I'll use this space to address a part of the whole situation that just didn't seem to fit. Though at first it was said that Paris was released to house arrest because of "medical conditions," which I'm sure is code for "withdrawal from all the drugs she no doubt takes," I was almost certain that couldn't have been the only reason she was released...but I just couldn't figure out what the other reason could've been.
But today it has come to light that "medical conditions" may not have been solely to blame for Paris' far too quick release from jail. It seems that Paris was released not because she was "sick" but because her billionaire grandfather, who is co-chairman of Hilton Hotels, donated a most likely ungodly sum of money to Sheriff Lee Baca's re-election campaign who then subsequently, released Paris to home arrest. This was almost just yet another sickening example of no matter what you do in America, as long as you have enough money, you can get away scott free but luckily for us, Paris is back in jail and will be staying there until the completion of her sentence.
Too bad she isn't in a regular prison for regular people and not in solitary in the medical jail where she is because now it seems that my dream of making "D-Block Does Debbie: Starring Paris Hilton" will have to wait until the next time that brainless, blonde waste of oxygen breaks the law...which, considering her level of intelligence, probably won't be too long.
Oh, and here's the article which spawned this post:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21884884-1702,00.html
Thursday, June 7, 2007
Shameless plug of the day
Have you been wondering just what the hell "Grizzly Gaming" really is? Well now you can find out and you don't even have to leave your chair. Just find the "Links" section on the side of the page (under About Me and above Archives) and follow the link to "Grizzly Gaming: The Column" to find all the articles I wrote while I was running Grizzly Gaming while at Shippensburg.
Plus be one of the first 100 to read and you'll receive a free "Grizzly Gaming" t-shirt! Ok...so I'm lying about the shirt but what you will find are some of the finest video game, movie and TV show articles ever written. So what in the hell are you waiting for? Get reading and don't forget to tell all your friends, family, loved ones and strangers about the two best blogs on the internet.
(Note - I'm not liable for cases of eyeballs exploding from sheer amazing intake after viewing either of my blogs.)
Plus be one of the first 100 to read and you'll receive a free "Grizzly Gaming" t-shirt! Ok...so I'm lying about the shirt but what you will find are some of the finest video game, movie and TV show articles ever written. So what in the hell are you waiting for? Get reading and don't forget to tell all your friends, family, loved ones and strangers about the two best blogs on the internet.
(Note - I'm not liable for cases of eyeballs exploding from sheer amazing intake after viewing either of my blogs.)
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Spider-Man 3: What were they thinking?
I don't know what happened to the people who made the first two Spider-Man movies but I want them to come back. Spider-Man 1 & 2 were two of the best comic book movies I've ever seen but this third movie I can barely stand talking about. Nothing, besides the action and the effects, appealed to me in this movie. The story was so poorly conveyed that the movie felt rushed at the same time that it felt very drawn out and boring - and it wasn't hard to feel that it was drawn out considering that at almost 2 and a half hours, this was the longest Spider-Man yet. There were too many characters, too many storylines, emotions, thoughts and feelings from every character to be taken in at once. Not that it was impossible to keep everything straight, but this overload of info took a lot away from the pacing of the movie. Also, I've stomached Kirsten Dunst's performances as Mary Jane Watson throughout the rest of the series, but I've about had it with her mediocre acting of one of the biggest comic book hotties of all time. But perhaps one of the most annoying things about this third movie is it's almost purposeful inability to stay faithful to the source material.
Ok before I get into any kind of long winded nerd rant about the movie, let me say that this post is practically going to be built on spoilers of the movie so if you haven't seen it and don't want any of the (horrible) plot points ruined, please avert your eyes. I might be a cynical, opinionated jerk but one thing I'm not is a douchebag who ruins movies.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Still reading? Ok cool. Since I already stated the general things I have problems with about this movie, don't be expecting any kind of sane order to the next set of ramblings because, frankly, I'm so amazed at how much they missed the mark with this movie, that I can barely keep my rants about it in any kind of sensible order in my head, let alone written in a blog post.
First off, one of the most annoying and ponderous things about Spider-Man 3 was the way Peter Parker was portrayed after coming into contact with the symbiote. I don't know if the makers of the movie ever bothered to open a Spider-Man comic before they made these movies or not, but where in the hell did they come up with Parker's personality for that section of the movie? Last time I checked, the symbiote amplified the wearer's original personality traits, most specifically aggression, and gave the wearer new abilities (such as increased strength and in the comics, the ability for Parker to generate his own webbing). So where and more importantly why did they get the idea to turn Parker into an emo dressing, John Travolta in "Saturday Night Fever" rip-off douchebag that was portrayed in the movie? Other than a hastily thrown together plot point for Parker to instigate Mary Jane, I can't see a reason for this wholly different personality change in Parker. The way he acted once he found the suit was just totally unnecessary and a waste of time. They did a similar thing to this in Spider-Man 2 when he "lost" his powers and became normal but that was well done and no where near as trite and downright stupid as it was in Spider-Man 3.
Next, keeping in line with my complaints about the symbiote, is how they handled Eddie Brock and Venom. Right off the bat, Topher Grace shouldn't have been Eddie Brock. Yes, he did play Brock's personality pretty well, but in the comics Brock is supposed to be a big, aggro, jock meathead, not a skinny little dude no bigger than Parker. Granted they did bulk him up some once he got the symbiote and became Venom, but since he wasn't a huge guy to begin with, theres really no explanation as to why Brock is jacked after he gets the suit. But perhaps the biggest question I have, well maybe second biggest only compared to the last point I'm going to make, is why the decided to make Venom and Spider-Man's symbiote outfit look different than they did in the comics. I really can't come up with a clear explanation to this quandary. In the comics, Venom's suit is flat black with a big white spider emblem on his chest - not basically Spider-Man's symbiote outfit like it was in the movie. And Spider-Man's symbiote outfit wasn't right either - his outfit his supposed to be flat black as well. Plus, one of the things that makes Venom is that in the comics, he always had strange green gooey saliva that was constantly dripping out of his mouth, which made he look even more vicious and sinister but this ooze was strangely absent from the movie version. I honestly don't know why it would've been such a hassle, considering all the money they spent on this movie, to make Venom and Spider-Man's symbiote outfits look right. But my last gripe with Venom is that they (apparently) killed him off. I just don't see any kind of reason for them to have killed off Venom and Eddie Brock. Brock is perfect for a recurring arch-nemesis to Spider-Man but what do they do instead? They have Venom show up, fight Spider-Man and subsequently killed in the span of about 30-45 minutes.
And while we're on the subject of villains, why bring back Harry as the new Goblin? It just seemed to pointless and unnecessary to me. Granted at first I didn't realize Harry actually had been one of the Goblins in the comics, that still doesn't explain why they needed to introduce him as one in the movies. I mean, they strayed from the source material so much already, why not just keep on doing it? This movie would've been sooo much better had they introduced Brock and Venom earlier and kept him and Sandman as the main villains without even worrying about Harry and the New Goblin and all the stupid, boring crap that came of him being the New Goblin. What stupid, boring crap you ask? Don't worry...I'll get to it later. Right now, I'm talking about the Goblin. Now if you don't know, the Goblin is the real perennial Spider-Man arch-nemesis. I know there is a common misconception that Venom actually is Spider-Man's biggest enemy but the truth is that the Green Goblin has been around basically since the comic was created back in the 60s while Venom has only been around since the late 80s. But why is this important? Well, since they killed off Norman Osbourne in the first movie and now they've killed off Harry in the third...theres practically no chance for any kind of Hobgoblin storyline later in the series (because I've heard they want to do Spider-Man 4, 5, and 6 and why wouldn't they considering the huge bank these movies bring in). The last problem I have with this New Goblin is again, with his outfit and his equipment. Now, it would've been perfectly fine had Harry just showed up to bug Spider-Man with his father's Goblin suit and glider...but instead he shows up with some crazy outfit no one's ever seen before, a snowboard-esque glider that he apparently pulled out of his ass since they never explain where it came from, and odd almost lightsaber-ish green sword contraptions. I really just don't know what they were thinking when they added some of this stuff.
Now, onto the problems with the plot. First, since it's relatively fresh in your mind, is the point I made earlier about the boring, stupid crap that came about because of Harry being the New Goblin. Once Harry becomes the Goblin, has his memory knocked out him by Spider-Man and subsequently regains it and remembers he hates Parker, he starts to blackmail MJ, for some reason, into leaving Parker. But surprisingly, this isn't the part I had the problem with. What I had a problem with was...MJ goes along with it! Why in the hell, when she knows her boyfriend is f'n Spider-Man for god's sake, would she go along with Harry's plan?? Why wouldn't she just tell Parker about it and let him handle Harry? But this was only one plot point I had a problem with. The next one has to do with Sandman, who I genuinely didn't have a problem with in the movie. I thought the part was acted well, his character made sense in terms of the whole story (he's a normal guy who kinda gets pushed into a life of crime because his daughter is ill and needs to find a way to pay for her treatments until one night during a job gone bad he gets stuck in some kind of crazy experiment where his cells are infused with sand, hence he can turn his body into all sorts of objects). The only part of the Sandman I thought was pointless was having it turn out the Sandman was actually the guy who killed Uncle Ben (for some reason) and not the guy who Parker accidentally killed in the first movie. I really feel like they only added this plot point to try and compensate for the other ridiculous plot themes they created (where Parker has to battle with his inner violent self thanks to the symbiote bringing that part of his personality out). I suppose it sort of makes sense, but I still feel it wasn't necessary. But perhaps the biggest plot point that annoys me comes from Bernard. "Bernard?" you ask? Yes, Bernard - Harry's butler. You see, apparently...somehow....Bernard found out about Norman Osbourne being the Goblin the night Norman died. Don't ask how cause they really don't explain it. But now that Bernard knows, he doesn't tell anyone. And why would he want to tell anyone, especially Harry who only obsesses over the fact that Spider-Man unjustly killed his father because (dun, dun, dun) Harry didn't know his father was the Goblin. (Couldn't you just smell the sarcasm in that last sentence?) So Bernard, who doesn't have more than two lines in the whole two first movies, drops this bomb on Harry out of no where that Norman was the Goblin and he accidentally killed himself. I mean, for all the money they spent on this movie, you think they could've spent just a little more time to come up with something more creative than just the random butler revealing a huge plot point.
Phew...now that I've gotten all that off my chest, I'm sure there's plenty of other problems I could find in this movie but to be honest, I'm tired of talking about why this movie sucked because I wanted it not to suck sooo badly. Theres this little nerd voice inside me that hopes all comic book movies they make will rock balls so that maybe someday comics will be taken seriously and not just viewed as kiddie stuff, much the same way video games are. But alas, this isn't the case as Spider-Man 3 let me down big. I guess all I have left to say is this - if they make a Spider-Man 4, Gwen Stacy needs to be Parker's new lady. Not only because Kirsten Dunst has overstayed her welcome as MJ, but also because Bryce Dallas Howard was soooo smoking hot as Gwen Stacy it was almost unbelievable.
Oh yeah...last point.
Bruce Campbell=best part of Spider-Man 3.
Ok before I get into any kind of long winded nerd rant about the movie, let me say that this post is practically going to be built on spoilers of the movie so if you haven't seen it and don't want any of the (horrible) plot points ruined, please avert your eyes. I might be a cynical, opinionated jerk but one thing I'm not is a douchebag who ruins movies.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Still reading? Ok cool. Since I already stated the general things I have problems with about this movie, don't be expecting any kind of sane order to the next set of ramblings because, frankly, I'm so amazed at how much they missed the mark with this movie, that I can barely keep my rants about it in any kind of sensible order in my head, let alone written in a blog post.
First off, one of the most annoying and ponderous things about Spider-Man 3 was the way Peter Parker was portrayed after coming into contact with the symbiote. I don't know if the makers of the movie ever bothered to open a Spider-Man comic before they made these movies or not, but where in the hell did they come up with Parker's personality for that section of the movie? Last time I checked, the symbiote amplified the wearer's original personality traits, most specifically aggression, and gave the wearer new abilities (such as increased strength and in the comics, the ability for Parker to generate his own webbing). So where and more importantly why did they get the idea to turn Parker into an emo dressing, John Travolta in "Saturday Night Fever" rip-off douchebag that was portrayed in the movie? Other than a hastily thrown together plot point for Parker to instigate Mary Jane, I can't see a reason for this wholly different personality change in Parker. The way he acted once he found the suit was just totally unnecessary and a waste of time. They did a similar thing to this in Spider-Man 2 when he "lost" his powers and became normal but that was well done and no where near as trite and downright stupid as it was in Spider-Man 3.
Next, keeping in line with my complaints about the symbiote, is how they handled Eddie Brock and Venom. Right off the bat, Topher Grace shouldn't have been Eddie Brock. Yes, he did play Brock's personality pretty well, but in the comics Brock is supposed to be a big, aggro, jock meathead, not a skinny little dude no bigger than Parker. Granted they did bulk him up some once he got the symbiote and became Venom, but since he wasn't a huge guy to begin with, theres really no explanation as to why Brock is jacked after he gets the suit. But perhaps the biggest question I have, well maybe second biggest only compared to the last point I'm going to make, is why the decided to make Venom and Spider-Man's symbiote outfit look different than they did in the comics. I really can't come up with a clear explanation to this quandary. In the comics, Venom's suit is flat black with a big white spider emblem on his chest - not basically Spider-Man's symbiote outfit like it was in the movie. And Spider-Man's symbiote outfit wasn't right either - his outfit his supposed to be flat black as well. Plus, one of the things that makes Venom is that in the comics, he always had strange green gooey saliva that was constantly dripping out of his mouth, which made he look even more vicious and sinister but this ooze was strangely absent from the movie version. I honestly don't know why it would've been such a hassle, considering all the money they spent on this movie, to make Venom and Spider-Man's symbiote outfits look right. But my last gripe with Venom is that they (apparently) killed him off. I just don't see any kind of reason for them to have killed off Venom and Eddie Brock. Brock is perfect for a recurring arch-nemesis to Spider-Man but what do they do instead? They have Venom show up, fight Spider-Man and subsequently killed in the span of about 30-45 minutes.
And while we're on the subject of villains, why bring back Harry as the new Goblin? It just seemed to pointless and unnecessary to me. Granted at first I didn't realize Harry actually had been one of the Goblins in the comics, that still doesn't explain why they needed to introduce him as one in the movies. I mean, they strayed from the source material so much already, why not just keep on doing it? This movie would've been sooo much better had they introduced Brock and Venom earlier and kept him and Sandman as the main villains without even worrying about Harry and the New Goblin and all the stupid, boring crap that came of him being the New Goblin. What stupid, boring crap you ask? Don't worry...I'll get to it later. Right now, I'm talking about the Goblin. Now if you don't know, the Goblin is the real perennial Spider-Man arch-nemesis. I know there is a common misconception that Venom actually is Spider-Man's biggest enemy but the truth is that the Green Goblin has been around basically since the comic was created back in the 60s while Venom has only been around since the late 80s. But why is this important? Well, since they killed off Norman Osbourne in the first movie and now they've killed off Harry in the third...theres practically no chance for any kind of Hobgoblin storyline later in the series (because I've heard they want to do Spider-Man 4, 5, and 6 and why wouldn't they considering the huge bank these movies bring in). The last problem I have with this New Goblin is again, with his outfit and his equipment. Now, it would've been perfectly fine had Harry just showed up to bug Spider-Man with his father's Goblin suit and glider...but instead he shows up with some crazy outfit no one's ever seen before, a snowboard-esque glider that he apparently pulled out of his ass since they never explain where it came from, and odd almost lightsaber-ish green sword contraptions. I really just don't know what they were thinking when they added some of this stuff.
Now, onto the problems with the plot. First, since it's relatively fresh in your mind, is the point I made earlier about the boring, stupid crap that came about because of Harry being the New Goblin. Once Harry becomes the Goblin, has his memory knocked out him by Spider-Man and subsequently regains it and remembers he hates Parker, he starts to blackmail MJ, for some reason, into leaving Parker. But surprisingly, this isn't the part I had the problem with. What I had a problem with was...MJ goes along with it! Why in the hell, when she knows her boyfriend is f'n Spider-Man for god's sake, would she go along with Harry's plan?? Why wouldn't she just tell Parker about it and let him handle Harry? But this was only one plot point I had a problem with. The next one has to do with Sandman, who I genuinely didn't have a problem with in the movie. I thought the part was acted well, his character made sense in terms of the whole story (he's a normal guy who kinda gets pushed into a life of crime because his daughter is ill and needs to find a way to pay for her treatments until one night during a job gone bad he gets stuck in some kind of crazy experiment where his cells are infused with sand, hence he can turn his body into all sorts of objects). The only part of the Sandman I thought was pointless was having it turn out the Sandman was actually the guy who killed Uncle Ben (for some reason) and not the guy who Parker accidentally killed in the first movie. I really feel like they only added this plot point to try and compensate for the other ridiculous plot themes they created (where Parker has to battle with his inner violent self thanks to the symbiote bringing that part of his personality out). I suppose it sort of makes sense, but I still feel it wasn't necessary. But perhaps the biggest plot point that annoys me comes from Bernard. "Bernard?" you ask? Yes, Bernard - Harry's butler. You see, apparently...somehow....Bernard found out about Norman Osbourne being the Goblin the night Norman died. Don't ask how cause they really don't explain it. But now that Bernard knows, he doesn't tell anyone. And why would he want to tell anyone, especially Harry who only obsesses over the fact that Spider-Man unjustly killed his father because (dun, dun, dun) Harry didn't know his father was the Goblin. (Couldn't you just smell the sarcasm in that last sentence?) So Bernard, who doesn't have more than two lines in the whole two first movies, drops this bomb on Harry out of no where that Norman was the Goblin and he accidentally killed himself. I mean, for all the money they spent on this movie, you think they could've spent just a little more time to come up with something more creative than just the random butler revealing a huge plot point.
Phew...now that I've gotten all that off my chest, I'm sure there's plenty of other problems I could find in this movie but to be honest, I'm tired of talking about why this movie sucked because I wanted it not to suck sooo badly. Theres this little nerd voice inside me that hopes all comic book movies they make will rock balls so that maybe someday comics will be taken seriously and not just viewed as kiddie stuff, much the same way video games are. But alas, this isn't the case as Spider-Man 3 let me down big. I guess all I have left to say is this - if they make a Spider-Man 4, Gwen Stacy needs to be Parker's new lady. Not only because Kirsten Dunst has overstayed her welcome as MJ, but also because Bryce Dallas Howard was soooo smoking hot as Gwen Stacy it was almost unbelievable.
Oh yeah...last point.
Bruce Campbell=best part of Spider-Man 3.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Games That Need Sequels: Fallout
Wow it feels like way too long since I posted on here last. When was it? Back when I was in school? I know some people have been wanting their fix of Grizzly Gaming goodness and I'm sorry to have kept you all waiting. Today, I'm doing the first post in what could be a series of posts called "Games That Need Sequels." I tried to come up with a wittier title but I just got the results back from the lab and apparently I'm not that funny so just bear with me here.
A long time ago, "Fallout" was released on the PC and garnered a huge cult following - so much so that entire interactive communities on the internet were created and maintained purely by people who were huge fans of the game (namely, a forum/message board on the internet called "The Unwashed Villagers" which I was a part of). This community was so popular that some of the members even got a place in the second game in the series by way of a small random encounter (of which I was not a part of, unfortunately). The game itself was set after the nuclear apocalypse which wiped out the majority of life all around the world. The story of the game progressed as such - before the war, Americans built underground "Vaults" which were completely self sustained and built to safeguard Americans in the event of a nuclear war. One vault, Vault 13, was doing fine, completely sealed off from the outside world when disaster struck. The water chip in the Vault, used for cleaning and recycling the vault's water supply, mysteriously broke one day. Being that no one in the vault would survive very long without the use of the chip, the vault overseer sent one man outside of the vault to find a new water chip - that one man is you.
Both Fallout 1 & 2 are set in Southern California and are radically different than it's present day counter part. This part of California was hit hard by the war and most of the area is now a barren wasteland populated by all sorts of dangerous mutants - both humans and animals alike. Along the way you'll find post-apocalyptic cults as well as the desolate remains of towns which once were.
The Fallout games were typical turn based RPG games which let you pick from three different character models at the games outset and let you customize your character how you see fit. Though I always favored a larger character who could carry the most firepower possible, characters could be anything from bare knuckle brawlers, snipers, stealthy ninjas or a smooth talker who could talk his way out of a fight. Plus at certain levels, you could pick special character traits which would allow for almost infinite number of character customizations.
But what really made the Fallout series special was it's outlandish characters, storylines and humor. Fallout was also fairly popular for it's multitude of pop culture references to things such as Monty Python, Star Trek, Dr. Who and Mad Max so it isn't hard to see why so many people fell in love with the series.
Unfortunately, it has been quite a number of years since the last (good) Fallout game was released. There have been other games which strayed away from the original RPG formula which is held so near and dear to the hearts of Fallout fans, but these games didn't achieve near as much popularity or notoriety as Fallout 1 or 2.
Fortunately, I've just recently found out that a third Fallout game is indeed in the works, though it is being developed by a different company. The first two Fallout games were developed by Interplay but now the series has changed hands and the developers of the award winning Elder Scrolls series, Bethesda, is now at the helm of the project. Bethesda has had more than enough experience in the world of RPGs to lead a project like a new Fallout game but the real question, will Bethesda be able to capture the unique feel of Fallout 1 or 2 remains to be seen.
Aside from a new developer, the first major difference in Fallout 3 will be that it is going take place on the East Coast, instead of the traditional West Coast setting of the first two games. Though I'm not usually one who supports changing a formula that has worked so well in the past, I'm genuinely intrigued to see what new challenges, landmarks, and creatures will be awaiting gamers in an East Coast Fallout.
Unfortunately, not much else is known about this game since it is still a long ways away from being released. Bethesda has said that though they've had the rights to a new Fallout game for a while, they were waiting until their most recent game Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion was finished before they started work on Fallout 3.
Though I am a bit wary about how well Bethesda will handle a series I've loved for so long, I just can't help but be excited that a new Fallout game is indeed in the works.
A long time ago, "Fallout" was released on the PC and garnered a huge cult following - so much so that entire interactive communities on the internet were created and maintained purely by people who were huge fans of the game (namely, a forum/message board on the internet called "The Unwashed Villagers" which I was a part of). This community was so popular that some of the members even got a place in the second game in the series by way of a small random encounter (of which I was not a part of, unfortunately). The game itself was set after the nuclear apocalypse which wiped out the majority of life all around the world. The story of the game progressed as such - before the war, Americans built underground "Vaults" which were completely self sustained and built to safeguard Americans in the event of a nuclear war. One vault, Vault 13, was doing fine, completely sealed off from the outside world when disaster struck. The water chip in the Vault, used for cleaning and recycling the vault's water supply, mysteriously broke one day. Being that no one in the vault would survive very long without the use of the chip, the vault overseer sent one man outside of the vault to find a new water chip - that one man is you.
Both Fallout 1 & 2 are set in Southern California and are radically different than it's present day counter part. This part of California was hit hard by the war and most of the area is now a barren wasteland populated by all sorts of dangerous mutants - both humans and animals alike. Along the way you'll find post-apocalyptic cults as well as the desolate remains of towns which once were.
The Fallout games were typical turn based RPG games which let you pick from three different character models at the games outset and let you customize your character how you see fit. Though I always favored a larger character who could carry the most firepower possible, characters could be anything from bare knuckle brawlers, snipers, stealthy ninjas or a smooth talker who could talk his way out of a fight. Plus at certain levels, you could pick special character traits which would allow for almost infinite number of character customizations.
But what really made the Fallout series special was it's outlandish characters, storylines and humor. Fallout was also fairly popular for it's multitude of pop culture references to things such as Monty Python, Star Trek, Dr. Who and Mad Max so it isn't hard to see why so many people fell in love with the series.
Unfortunately, it has been quite a number of years since the last (good) Fallout game was released. There have been other games which strayed away from the original RPG formula which is held so near and dear to the hearts of Fallout fans, but these games didn't achieve near as much popularity or notoriety as Fallout 1 or 2.
Fortunately, I've just recently found out that a third Fallout game is indeed in the works, though it is being developed by a different company. The first two Fallout games were developed by Interplay but now the series has changed hands and the developers of the award winning Elder Scrolls series, Bethesda, is now at the helm of the project. Bethesda has had more than enough experience in the world of RPGs to lead a project like a new Fallout game but the real question, will Bethesda be able to capture the unique feel of Fallout 1 or 2 remains to be seen.
Aside from a new developer, the first major difference in Fallout 3 will be that it is going take place on the East Coast, instead of the traditional West Coast setting of the first two games. Though I'm not usually one who supports changing a formula that has worked so well in the past, I'm genuinely intrigued to see what new challenges, landmarks, and creatures will be awaiting gamers in an East Coast Fallout.
Unfortunately, not much else is known about this game since it is still a long ways away from being released. Bethesda has said that though they've had the rights to a new Fallout game for a while, they were waiting until their most recent game Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion was finished before they started work on Fallout 3.
Though I am a bit wary about how well Bethesda will handle a series I've loved for so long, I just can't help but be excited that a new Fallout game is indeed in the works.
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
No f'n way
After the personal ordeal I had to go through in the weeks leading up to the release of "Guitar Hero 2" for the Xbox 360 (not preordering soon enough, lying asshole clerks[Nope, we aren't going to have any extra copies of GH2], and the fear that I might not get a copy the day it came out), I managed to sell all my PS2 gear and buy GH2 the day it was released (Tuesday) with some money left over from my PS2 clearance. And just when everything seemed to be going so well, disaster strikes...well not yet for me, anyway. But please, allow me to elaborate.
This newstory has been making it's way around the net today and it seems that Microsoft/RedOctane(developers of the GH series) released two different versions of the X-Plorer controller for the 360 - one with the pedal jack(accessory port) near the power cord and one with the pedal jack near the headphone jack. But what does this have to do with anything, let alone an impending personal disaster for myself, you ask? Well it seems that the X-Plorer model with the pedal jack near the power cord have some major problems with the whammy bars on those particluar controllers - most importantly, that they don't work. And surprise, surprise...the game I bought came with one of the (apparently) defective X-Plorer models.
Now luckily, my whammy hasn't shown any signs of trouble just yet, aside from it feeling a little stiff, but I'm just attributing that to it's new-ness. But I'm hearing that if enough people are experiencing problems with these controllers, RedOctane might be issuing a recall for these particular controllers. It's always crap like this that makes Dwight's(Clive Owen) line from Sin City seem so relevant to my life - "And everything seemed to be going so well."
This newstory has been making it's way around the net today and it seems that Microsoft/RedOctane(developers of the GH series) released two different versions of the X-Plorer controller for the 360 - one with the pedal jack(accessory port) near the power cord and one with the pedal jack near the headphone jack. But what does this have to do with anything, let alone an impending personal disaster for myself, you ask? Well it seems that the X-Plorer model with the pedal jack near the power cord have some major problems with the whammy bars on those particluar controllers - most importantly, that they don't work. And surprise, surprise...the game I bought came with one of the (apparently) defective X-Plorer models.
Now luckily, my whammy hasn't shown any signs of trouble just yet, aside from it feeling a little stiff, but I'm just attributing that to it's new-ness. But I'm hearing that if enough people are experiencing problems with these controllers, RedOctane might be issuing a recall for these particular controllers. It's always crap like this that makes Dwight's(Clive Owen) line from Sin City seem so relevant to my life - "And everything seemed to be going so well."
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Halo 3 and GTA IV news
First up for today's gaming news extravaganza, one of the most anticipated 360 titles to date...Halo 3. Now, it's my understanding that this hasn't officially been announced by Bungie yet, but the source is fairly reliable when it comes to information such as this. After trolling around the buried stories on Digg, I came across the release date of the Halo 3 beta...which is...(drum roll)...April 15th. Apparently, Bungie isn't officially announcing the beta's release date until later this week, but there has been rumblings that the Xbox Live maintenance, which took place most of the day on Tuesday, was to increase bandwith for their estimated large amounts of downloads for the Oblivion expansion, "The Shivering Isles," and for the upcoming release of the Halo 3 multiplayer beta test. I really hope the date is legit because, as much as I'm loving Rainbow Six: Vegas online right now, a little Halo 3 action would totally hit the spot.
http://boards.ign.com/halo/b5240/139117792/p1/
Next up on today's menu, GTA IV. First a foremost, the countdown is almost done...the day is finally here...no, the game isn't coming out anytime soon...no, the hype today is all building towards the first trailer/first look ever at GTA IV will be hitting the net today in less than 7 hours. Check out the site and watch the seconds tick down until you can get your first look at one of the most anticipated games of 2007.
http://www.rockstargames.com/IV/
Last up my list for today is most likely a completely unfounded rumor, but it is still one that's causing quite a stir around the net. Theres been a little rumor going around that GTA IV is not going to be on PS3 - and yes, it is as crazy as it sounds. I myself don't really believe it is true and why should I? GTA has been one of the Playstation's flagship series...well...practically forever and theres almost no reason why it should change now. But still, people have been stating that on Rockstar's website, they have a support page built for the Xbox 360 version of GTA IV but the PS3 page is mysteriously absent. Could it be that Rockstar has stabbed Sony right in the back...or does this rumor truly prove that internet nerds (like me) really don't have anything else better to do with their time? Only time will tell...
http://boards.ign.com/halo/b5240/139117792/p1/
Next up on today's menu, GTA IV. First a foremost, the countdown is almost done...the day is finally here...no, the game isn't coming out anytime soon...no, the hype today is all building towards the first trailer/first look ever at GTA IV will be hitting the net today in less than 7 hours. Check out the site and watch the seconds tick down until you can get your first look at one of the most anticipated games of 2007.
http://www.rockstargames.com/IV/
Last up my list for today is most likely a completely unfounded rumor, but it is still one that's causing quite a stir around the net. Theres been a little rumor going around that GTA IV is not going to be on PS3 - and yes, it is as crazy as it sounds. I myself don't really believe it is true and why should I? GTA has been one of the Playstation's flagship series...well...practically forever and theres almost no reason why it should change now. But still, people have been stating that on Rockstar's website, they have a support page built for the Xbox 360 version of GTA IV but the PS3 page is mysteriously absent. Could it be that Rockstar has stabbed Sony right in the back...or does this rumor truly prove that internet nerds (like me) really don't have anything else better to do with their time? Only time will tell...
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Command and Conquer 3
C&C 3 came out today for the PC and my god...does it look sweet or what? I myself am a huge RTS(real time strategy) game fan and have been a fan of the C&C series since the very first game. There hasn't been a C&C game released since 2005 (C&C Generals) for the PC which I didn't get a chance to play because, well, I don't have a gaming quality PC. Luckily for me, C&C 3 is coming out for the 360 within a couple of months (I'm fairly sure it's a couple of months anyway).
What is so exciting about this iteration of the C&C series is that it marks a return to the original storyline of Command and Conquer, as opposed to the alternate WWII history of the C&C: Red Alert series or the real world battles of C&C: Generals. In the future, a strange mineral/plant called Tiberium has been found on earth and it's been discovered that this substance can be used as a very effecient fuel source, unfortunately it is also a very aggressive plant and it is highly poisonous to humans. In this Tiberium filled future, two world powers struggle for dominance not only over each other, but over the world's Tiberium supply. The Global Defense Initiative, or GDI, originally started as a global defense force to work toward the elimination of terrorism and evil throughout the world while their arch-enemy, the Brotherhood of NOD, led by a mysterious man known only as Kane, seeks to rule the world and destroy the GDI by any means necessary. But as the story goes in C&C 3, times have changed and the GDI has gradually developed into a facist, worldwide government while NOD has almost seen a role reversal as the main opponents to the GDI's new world order. C&C 3 also introduces a new race of alien characters, the Scrin, that has some connection to the Tiberium which now covers most of earth.
C&C 3 also makes use of the FMV (full motion video) cut scenes that the series has become famous for and celebrities such as Billy Dee Williams, Josh Holloway(Sawyer from "Lost"), and Michael Ironside will all play characters in C&C 3. Another interesting fact about the cast of C&C 3 is that the man who played Kane in the original C&C, Joseph D. Duncan, will be reprising his role of the leader of the Brotherhood in this game.
I'm such a huge fan of the RTS genre and especially of C&C that I am more excited for C&C 3's 360 release than practically anything else right now. Even though RTS games on home console systems have historically been pretty terrible, recent games, such as Lord of the Rings: Battle for Middle Earth 2, have proven that with a little ingenuity, even a genre originally designed for only PC games have a place on home console systems. The reason behind console gaming never being a proper home for RTS games is all in the way the games are played on the PC and the 360. A point and click interface with a mouse and keyboard have traditionally been the only way RTS games were designed and being that most home consoles never had proper mouse perhipherals released for them, RTS gaming was almost non-existent on home consoles. But now that consoles have the power of gaming quality PC's and now that game developers have spent a considerable amount of time on the control scheme for console based RTS games, the genre is and will be making a huge impact on the console market.
What is so exciting about this iteration of the C&C series is that it marks a return to the original storyline of Command and Conquer, as opposed to the alternate WWII history of the C&C: Red Alert series or the real world battles of C&C: Generals. In the future, a strange mineral/plant called Tiberium has been found on earth and it's been discovered that this substance can be used as a very effecient fuel source, unfortunately it is also a very aggressive plant and it is highly poisonous to humans. In this Tiberium filled future, two world powers struggle for dominance not only over each other, but over the world's Tiberium supply. The Global Defense Initiative, or GDI, originally started as a global defense force to work toward the elimination of terrorism and evil throughout the world while their arch-enemy, the Brotherhood of NOD, led by a mysterious man known only as Kane, seeks to rule the world and destroy the GDI by any means necessary. But as the story goes in C&C 3, times have changed and the GDI has gradually developed into a facist, worldwide government while NOD has almost seen a role reversal as the main opponents to the GDI's new world order. C&C 3 also introduces a new race of alien characters, the Scrin, that has some connection to the Tiberium which now covers most of earth.
C&C 3 also makes use of the FMV (full motion video) cut scenes that the series has become famous for and celebrities such as Billy Dee Williams, Josh Holloway(Sawyer from "Lost"), and Michael Ironside will all play characters in C&C 3. Another interesting fact about the cast of C&C 3 is that the man who played Kane in the original C&C, Joseph D. Duncan, will be reprising his role of the leader of the Brotherhood in this game.
I'm such a huge fan of the RTS genre and especially of C&C that I am more excited for C&C 3's 360 release than practically anything else right now. Even though RTS games on home console systems have historically been pretty terrible, recent games, such as Lord of the Rings: Battle for Middle Earth 2, have proven that with a little ingenuity, even a genre originally designed for only PC games have a place on home console systems. The reason behind console gaming never being a proper home for RTS games is all in the way the games are played on the PC and the 360. A point and click interface with a mouse and keyboard have traditionally been the only way RTS games were designed and being that most home consoles never had proper mouse perhipherals released for them, RTS gaming was almost non-existent on home consoles. But now that consoles have the power of gaming quality PC's and now that game developers have spent a considerable amount of time on the control scheme for console based RTS games, the genre is and will be making a huge impact on the console market.
Friday, March 23, 2007
It's official: Sony's getting desperate
After reading this article (it's a short one this time), it would be hard for anyone not to admit that Sony is getting desperate.
Under the guise of "Sony giving back to it's fans," recently at a midnight release of the PS3, Sony gave away free 46" LCD Bravia TVs to the first 100 people in line. But to me, though, it didn't seem so much like Sony was trying to show their appreciation as much as it was they were just that happy that people actually showed up to buy a PS3.
It's no secret that Sony has screwed up big time in almost every concievable way with the release of the PS3 but this just feels like Sony admitting that they screwed up big time, without actually admitting just how bad of a screw up it was. Granted this give away was a one time only thing, it still absolutely shows that Sony might finally be understanding just how far back they are in the current race for console superiority.
Friday, March 16, 2007
Sweet...more memories of my youth are being destroyed
They're the worlds most fearsome fighting team...heroes on the half shell...if you still don't know who I'm talking about then just where the hell were you in the late 80's and early 90's? Because honestly, the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles were such a huge part of my young life that, to this day, I still watch the original live action TMNT movies on VHS that I'm actually really surprised still work considering they're older than some of siblings.
Now, this post was originally going to be me going on and on and on about how this new TMNT movie looks like crap and how I won't be seeing it. Well...I've done some thinking and reconsidered. No, I haven't done a complete 180 and am now going to be plugging the hell of it...but I will say I'll give it a chance.
My first impressions of this movie were not good ones, I will say that. The very first trailer I saw for this movie gave away literally nothing about the movie...so I was still cautiously optimistic.
Then things went a little south when I saw the next movie trailer. (Keep in mind these were my first thoughts after seeing the first long trailer) The Turtles themselves looked a little off, Splinter looked like a fox instead of a giant mutant rat, Splinter's voice just sounded odd, Casey Jones and April O'Neil look like they're rejected character models from the movie "The Incredibles", I didn't see the Shredder or the Foot clan anywhere, and the only villains in the movie seemed to be random ass monsters "from another dimension". After coming to those conclusions, it's pretty easy to see why my feelings for TMNT turned from cautious optimism to utter disdain rather quickly.
But then I took a step back, put down the Hater-aide and decided to take a closer look at the trailer and the movie itself. After some quick sleuthing, I found out a few things that changed a few of my first impressions.
First, I found out some more about the plot which put a few aspects of the trailer into perspective. Apparently, this movie takes place after the very first Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movie where the Shredder has been taken out by the Turtles and the Foot is in disarray. Some years after this, a billionaire tycoon starts amassing an army of other worldly monsters and uses what remains of the Foot and his army of beasts to take over the world....somehow. Now, the plot has taken shape somewhat and some of my original gripes have been answered - even though following this storyline the events of TMNT2: Secret of the Ooze never happened which is pretty lame, in my opinion. But at least is clears up just what in the hell is up with the monsters and the Foot clan.
Next, and you'll have to pardon me as I can't find the source where I got this info, but it seems that TMNT is going to be following the old comic Turtles storyline, in regards to Master Splinter anyway. It seems that in this movie, Master Splinter isn't the rat owned by Hamato Yoshi, Shredder's old adversary - rather, in this story, Splinter IS a mutated Hamato Yoshi...which doesn't really make sense to me since I've never read a single Turtles comic but whatever. Now I can't be sure if this is true or totally false but it could explain why Splinter looks the way he does.
In the end, though, I'm still not really excited for this movie. Just because I was a huge Turtles fan back in the day, doesn't mean I'm turning my back on my childhood idols by speaking ill of a movie based on a franchise that hasn't had a meaningful contribution to the series since Tokka and Rahzar (The monsters from TMNT2: Secret of the Ooze for those of you not "in the know"). I'm just sick of people giving me looks like I kicked a puppy when I say "I'm not so sure about the new TMNT movie."
Just because it's a new TMNT movie doesn't mean it will be good. Remember the third live action Turtles movie? Because I wish I didn't.
Now, this post was originally going to be me going on and on and on about how this new TMNT movie looks like crap and how I won't be seeing it. Well...I've done some thinking and reconsidered. No, I haven't done a complete 180 and am now going to be plugging the hell of it...but I will say I'll give it a chance.
My first impressions of this movie were not good ones, I will say that. The very first trailer I saw for this movie gave away literally nothing about the movie...so I was still cautiously optimistic.
Then things went a little south when I saw the next movie trailer. (Keep in mind these were my first thoughts after seeing the first long trailer) The Turtles themselves looked a little off, Splinter looked like a fox instead of a giant mutant rat, Splinter's voice just sounded odd, Casey Jones and April O'Neil look like they're rejected character models from the movie "The Incredibles", I didn't see the Shredder or the Foot clan anywhere, and the only villains in the movie seemed to be random ass monsters "from another dimension". After coming to those conclusions, it's pretty easy to see why my feelings for TMNT turned from cautious optimism to utter disdain rather quickly.
But then I took a step back, put down the Hater-aide and decided to take a closer look at the trailer and the movie itself. After some quick sleuthing, I found out a few things that changed a few of my first impressions.
First, I found out some more about the plot which put a few aspects of the trailer into perspective. Apparently, this movie takes place after the very first Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movie where the Shredder has been taken out by the Turtles and the Foot is in disarray. Some years after this, a billionaire tycoon starts amassing an army of other worldly monsters and uses what remains of the Foot and his army of beasts to take over the world....somehow. Now, the plot has taken shape somewhat and some of my original gripes have been answered - even though following this storyline the events of TMNT2: Secret of the Ooze never happened which is pretty lame, in my opinion. But at least is clears up just what in the hell is up with the monsters and the Foot clan.
Next, and you'll have to pardon me as I can't find the source where I got this info, but it seems that TMNT is going to be following the old comic Turtles storyline, in regards to Master Splinter anyway. It seems that in this movie, Master Splinter isn't the rat owned by Hamato Yoshi, Shredder's old adversary - rather, in this story, Splinter IS a mutated Hamato Yoshi...which doesn't really make sense to me since I've never read a single Turtles comic but whatever. Now I can't be sure if this is true or totally false but it could explain why Splinter looks the way he does.
In the end, though, I'm still not really excited for this movie. Just because I was a huge Turtles fan back in the day, doesn't mean I'm turning my back on my childhood idols by speaking ill of a movie based on a franchise that hasn't had a meaningful contribution to the series since Tokka and Rahzar (The monsters from TMNT2: Secret of the Ooze for those of you not "in the know"). I'm just sick of people giving me looks like I kicked a puppy when I say "I'm not so sure about the new TMNT movie."
Just because it's a new TMNT movie doesn't mean it will be good. Remember the third live action Turtles movie? Because I wish I didn't.
Monday, March 5, 2007
I can't write a title accurate enough to describe how mad I am
Everything I am about to write pertains to information I found in an article on the New York Times website. And this is the URL.
Is it just me, or are people getting dumber these days? Because honestly, after reading this article it just really seems to me that people will look for ANY excuse they can to blame the government for all of the worlds problems. Don't get me wrong, I don't really support anything our government is doing these days but honestly...comparing characters from a movie based on a graphic novel thats based on actual events from thousands of years ago to our current government and president sounds a little ridiculous.
But let me backtrack for a second and explain if you didn't read the article. Short and skinny of it is according to several sources and interviews with the director, people all over the world, not just in America, are drawing comparisons between President Bush and the current administration and Xerxes or Leonidas from the upcoming film "300." The comparisons being Bush/Xerxes as a mad invader bent on conquering a foreign land that his father could not and Bush/Leonidas in the way that both are willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of freedom. But apparently some people have gone as far to say that "300" is nothing but an American funded propaganda film. Now you may not be as psyched as I am for this movie, so let me enlighten those who may not know about "300" - the film is based on a series of comics written by Frank Miller (who also wrote "Sin City"). The story behind "300" revolves around the events which led up to the Battle of Thermopylae in 480 BC Greece. Granted, Miller took a lot of liberties in creating the world of "300" but it is still loosely based on actual, historical events.
So let me get back to the article I referenced at the top of the post. Right off the bat, I'd like to say that my quarrel is not with the writer of this article, just the occurances he is making light of. Admittedly, it will be quite hard for me to convey just how mad reading this article made me because I've felt for a loooooong time that people tend to read way too much into all forms of media. Whether it be literature, magazine or newspaper articles, paintings, TV shows, movies, whatever...I've been alive long enough to know that people always try way too hard to find some deep seeded meaning in absolutely everything. Why does everything have to have some deeper meaning? Why can't anything be taken at face value anymore and be admired for what it is and not what you think it is? Why can't a picture or a painting be admired for the skill it took to produce and not what the artist might have been trying to say? Why can't a great piece of writing be admired for being a great piece of writing instead of being inspected, torn apart, and turned inside out to try and find some kind hidden meaning which may or may not exist? Perhaps I'm alone on this one...but this practice is getting very old and annoying to me.
I suppose it was this particular topic that set me off now more than ever before. I have been going insane with anticipation to see "300." I've been reading up on the actual events that took place in history and been scouring the internet for photos from the movie, articles about how it was made, any trailers...anything I can get my hands on basically. I even recently "acquired" the entire "300" comic book but have yet to read it because I want to be totally in awe of everything I see in the movie.
But this article set me off so much because it just speaks volumes to me about how insanely idiotic most people are anymore. To insinuate that Zack Snyder, the director, or Frank Miller intended either of the main characters (Xerxes and Leonidas) to be a representation of George "Dubya" Bush is pretty insulting to both Miller and Snyder. Why is it insulting, you ask? Because for one, "300" is based on a graphic novel and an actual event that really happened a few thousand years ago and for two "300" was written TWO YEARS (1998) before George Bush was even elected! How could Miller have possibly intended for either of those two characters to portray a president who hadn't even been elected? Now you might be saying, "But Joe...perhaps the director put his own personal spin on it," and while usually in Hollywood if a movie is based on a book or god forbid a video game, the source material is usually not followed very closely. But in the case of "300", the graphic novel was used as not only story boards for the movie, but many of the lines of dialog were also taken straight from the the novel. Instead heres an idea...maybe "300" is about the graphic novel that it's based on and isn't a propaganda film with a hidden agenda. I couldn't have put it better myself than it was put in the headline of the NY Times article - "That Film's Real Message? It Could Be: 'Buy a Ticket'"
I suppose the old saying that "There's no such thing as bad publicity" could apply to this topic but still...I've tried to hold my tongue for long enough about people reading too much into anything and everything these days but after this, I just couldn't take it anymore. It's depressing, but I think humans as a species have reached a new depth of stupidity I can't even fathom anymore when people start stating that a comic book writer intended for characters in his work, which were based on real people, to be comparable to a president who wouldn't be elected for another two years. This isn't to say that the comparisons can't be drawn...but to say that the comparisons were the intentions of Miller and Snyder is ludicrous.
I don't know...perhaps I'm too much of a nerd and take stuff like comics and games too seriously when I start writing blog posts like this but hey...this is my blog and I'll voice whatever opinion I want.
Is it just me, or are people getting dumber these days? Because honestly, after reading this article it just really seems to me that people will look for ANY excuse they can to blame the government for all of the worlds problems. Don't get me wrong, I don't really support anything our government is doing these days but honestly...comparing characters from a movie based on a graphic novel thats based on actual events from thousands of years ago to our current government and president sounds a little ridiculous.
But let me backtrack for a second and explain if you didn't read the article. Short and skinny of it is according to several sources and interviews with the director, people all over the world, not just in America, are drawing comparisons between President Bush and the current administration and Xerxes or Leonidas from the upcoming film "300." The comparisons being Bush/Xerxes as a mad invader bent on conquering a foreign land that his father could not and Bush/Leonidas in the way that both are willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of freedom. But apparently some people have gone as far to say that "300" is nothing but an American funded propaganda film. Now you may not be as psyched as I am for this movie, so let me enlighten those who may not know about "300" - the film is based on a series of comics written by Frank Miller (who also wrote "Sin City"). The story behind "300" revolves around the events which led up to the Battle of Thermopylae in 480 BC Greece. Granted, Miller took a lot of liberties in creating the world of "300" but it is still loosely based on actual, historical events.
So let me get back to the article I referenced at the top of the post. Right off the bat, I'd like to say that my quarrel is not with the writer of this article, just the occurances he is making light of. Admittedly, it will be quite hard for me to convey just how mad reading this article made me because I've felt for a loooooong time that people tend to read way too much into all forms of media. Whether it be literature, magazine or newspaper articles, paintings, TV shows, movies, whatever...I've been alive long enough to know that people always try way too hard to find some deep seeded meaning in absolutely everything. Why does everything have to have some deeper meaning? Why can't anything be taken at face value anymore and be admired for what it is and not what you think it is? Why can't a picture or a painting be admired for the skill it took to produce and not what the artist might have been trying to say? Why can't a great piece of writing be admired for being a great piece of writing instead of being inspected, torn apart, and turned inside out to try and find some kind hidden meaning which may or may not exist? Perhaps I'm alone on this one...but this practice is getting very old and annoying to me.
I suppose it was this particular topic that set me off now more than ever before. I have been going insane with anticipation to see "300." I've been reading up on the actual events that took place in history and been scouring the internet for photos from the movie, articles about how it was made, any trailers...anything I can get my hands on basically. I even recently "acquired" the entire "300" comic book but have yet to read it because I want to be totally in awe of everything I see in the movie.
But this article set me off so much because it just speaks volumes to me about how insanely idiotic most people are anymore. To insinuate that Zack Snyder, the director, or Frank Miller intended either of the main characters (Xerxes and Leonidas) to be a representation of George "Dubya" Bush is pretty insulting to both Miller and Snyder. Why is it insulting, you ask? Because for one, "300" is based on a graphic novel and an actual event that really happened a few thousand years ago and for two "300" was written TWO YEARS (1998) before George Bush was even elected! How could Miller have possibly intended for either of those two characters to portray a president who hadn't even been elected? Now you might be saying, "But Joe...perhaps the director put his own personal spin on it," and while usually in Hollywood if a movie is based on a book or god forbid a video game, the source material is usually not followed very closely. But in the case of "300", the graphic novel was used as not only story boards for the movie, but many of the lines of dialog were also taken straight from the the novel. Instead heres an idea...maybe "300" is about the graphic novel that it's based on and isn't a propaganda film with a hidden agenda. I couldn't have put it better myself than it was put in the headline of the NY Times article - "That Film's Real Message? It Could Be: 'Buy a Ticket'"
I suppose the old saying that "There's no such thing as bad publicity" could apply to this topic but still...I've tried to hold my tongue for long enough about people reading too much into anything and everything these days but after this, I just couldn't take it anymore. It's depressing, but I think humans as a species have reached a new depth of stupidity I can't even fathom anymore when people start stating that a comic book writer intended for characters in his work, which were based on real people, to be comparable to a president who wouldn't be elected for another two years. This isn't to say that the comparisons can't be drawn...but to say that the comparisons were the intentions of Miller and Snyder is ludicrous.
I don't know...perhaps I'm too much of a nerd and take stuff like comics and games too seriously when I start writing blog posts like this but hey...this is my blog and I'll voice whatever opinion I want.
Friday, March 2, 2007
Sony Is Retarded
There...I said it. Sony is, without a doubt in my warped from too much metal and video games mind, retarded. It's absolutely mind boggling to watch the clear winner of the last few eras of the console wars, consistently screw up this time around with the PS3 and consistently be completely arrogant and ignorant about just how badly they've messed up. If I've already lost you...let me go back and start from the beginning...
A long, long time ago...an insidious company named Sony released a device which took control of and also destroyed many people’s lives - a device called the "Playstation". After years of industry dominance and leaving all competitors in the dust, the Playstation had a son...or maybe it was his brother...actually, I'm not sure what familial terms to put this in...soooo...lets just move on. Regardless of all that, the Playstation eventually passed on it's cape and scepter to the Playstation 2, which continued to utterly decimate everything that stood in its path.
But, like all great empires in the history of the world...the Playstation brand faltered. Though the Playstation 2 seemed like it could do no wrong and it thoroughly had its way with all its competition...things took a turn.
As the next generation of the console wars loomed on the horizon, the world waited anxiously to see just what Sony would do next. The Playstation 1 and 2 were major successes of earth shattering proportions and people expected Sony to literally blow our asses off again with the Playstation 3.
But things went awry.
Microsoft struck the first, and perhaps fatal, blow in this round of the console wars by releasing their system, the Xbox 360, almost a year before Sony planned to drop their new hardware. Though, as the Dreamcast proved, being first doesn't always guarantee victory.
Unfortunately, years of being on top had made Sony arrogant to the fact that they were not perfect and far from untouchable in the video game market. Sony assumed that they had a veritable stranglehold on the casual gaming market while still having enough games and features to sate even the most hardcore of gamers.
When the PS3 was first announced, speculation ran rampant all over the internet as fanboys and haters literally wet themselves in anticipation of Sonys new console. How much would it cost? What features would come "stock", so to speak, on the PS3? What would their line up of launch titles look like? What was going to be Sony's online strategy? As time went on and these questions were answered...support for Sony began to drop lower and lower.
Once Sony started to release information about the PS3, things only seemed to get worse. It almost felt like Sony was trying as hard as they could to ruin their storied video game franchise. And after hearing of most of these facts...I started to wonder if I'd even bother with the Playstation 3.
First off and probably most importantly, the price tag was crazy. $600? Really? That thing better know the meaning of life or be made out of gold and encrusted with jewels for that kinda price. But seriously, for that price tag it must have some amazing features. But as you probably could've guessed by now...the PS3 didn't have so much of a "wow" factor as it had a "meh" factor.
So the console is $600...what exactly are gamers getting? Well first of all they are getting graphics which hardly look better, if not exactly the same, as graphics that can be found on the Xbox 360. Secondly, Sony created a a new wireless controller for the PS3, named the SIXAXIS, which sounded great at first...until it was found out that Sony was ditching rumble functions in this new controller in favor of motion sensing capabilities similar to that of the Nintendo Wii controller. Now, this might not sound like such a horrible idea to some but it wasn't so much the fact that Sony didn't include the rumble feature, it was the way in which they handled not including the rumble feature. At the time, Sony claimed that including the rumble feature in their wireless controller would be too difficult...even though its something that the 360 seems to pull off rather easily. Plus, the SIXAXIS just doesn't feel as solid as the old Dual Shocks do. They feel flimsy, some of the shoulder buttons are slippery and just all around feel more like a third party controller than a first party, Sony made product.
So its expensive and the controller's worse? Why's it so expensive then, you ask? The answer to that lies in a decision that Sony has decided to back %100. Every now and then new, similar technologies come out almost simultaneously and eventually one wins out over the other and becomes the dominant form of media. It happened with beta and VHS, DVD and laser disc, mini disc and MP3 and now it's Blu-Ray and HD-DVD. Sony has decided to back Blu-Ray technology and included it in the PS3. From a strictly financial standpoint, buying a $600 PS3 for the Blu-Ray player is a steal considering that a stand alone Blu-Ray player starts retailing at $1000.(Even though it appears Sony may be releasing a cheaper, stand alone Blu-Ray player...buts that niether here nor there in my argument) But the 360 also has an HD-DVD perhipheral that, even at an extra $200, may prove to be more worth the buy than the PS3.
But as an avid gamer, the most important part of the PS3 puzzle is its game library. And as time went on...you can probably guess whats coming...things didn't look so good for Sony. As the days passed, Sony began to lose more and more exclusive titles. The first and foremost important title being Grand Theft Auto 4 releasing on both consoles on the same day...which is absolutely huge for Microsoft and horrible for Sony. The GTA series has sold plenty of Playstations on its own and when gamers are faced with the choice of playing GTA 4 for $400 or for $600 - I think the choice is pretty obvious. But not only GTA 4 but other games such as Assassins Creed and possibly even Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots could be coming to the 360. In my honest opinion, a console with a weak exclusive game library that has a price tag of $600 just is not worth it. I'll admit, some of Sony's upcoming games look interesting (especially Heavenly Sword and Lair) but as it stands right now, Sony's PS3 game library is seriously lacking considering that most of the PS3 library are multiplatform games that can be found on the 360 as well.
Combine all these hardware/software concerns together with the fact that Sony's PS3 online community doesn't look like it is shaping up to be nearly as strong as Xbox Live Marketplace and you have all the makings of another Dreamcast or Saturn (pardon me for picking on poor ol' Sega). And as if this wasn't enough, I wouldn't plan on seeing a PS3 price drop for quite some time, and by that I mean at the very least a year.
Oh but wait...the shenanigans don't stop there. Just to give you an idea of the kind of people who are in charge at Sony...in a recent interview with EGM magazine, Jack Tretton, Sony Computer Entertainment America's president, Tretton offered anybody who could find and take a picture of a PS3 sitting on the shelf, unbought, $1,200. I'll say that again for those of you who perhaps aren't following as closely...Jack Tretton offered anyone who could find a PS3 on a store shelf in America $1,200 for it. In fact, the fine gentlemen at Penny Arcade took Mr. Tretton up on his challenge and, surprise surprise, found many an unsold PS3 sitting lonely on store shelves. They found so many, within minutes of starting out on their quest, that if Tretton were to actually own up to his challenge he would be paying Penny Arcade over $13,000. (To see the comic of which I'm speaking, follow this URL: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/02/10 )
Mr. Tretton, along with the rest of Sony, also seem to suffer from the collective illusion that PS3s are selling like hot cakes and that Sony is having problems keeping them on the shelves. According to many video game retailors, there are plenty of PS3s to be had but Sony apparently doesn't think so. In an article I found from GWN.com, Tretton seems to think that PS3s are selling so well that they won't be able to completely restock stores until "April or May." (http://www.gwn.com/news/story.php/id/11467/
Sony_Denies_PS3_Is_Readily_Available.html )
In fact, it appears that less than half of all PS3s shipped have been sold. The importance here being that shipped only means sold to stores whereas the number of consoles sold is the actual number of consoles bought by consumers. According to VGcharts.com, somewhere around 4 million PS3s have shipped to America and Japan, but only around 1.8 million has been sold - with less than a million sold in Japan, a market which Sony usually dominates. (http://www.vgcharts.org/news/news.php?id=111)
To be honest, in writing this post I kinda feel like I'm stabbing an old friend in the back and then twisting the knife a little because over the years, my PS1 and PS2 have given me more good times than I can count. I honestly really, really, really hope that Sony can get their act together and salvage their product. I do, I really do. But Sony has just dug themselves such a deep hole and then refused to acknowledge just how deep that hole is...I don't know when or if they can get themselves out of it.
A long, long time ago...an insidious company named Sony released a device which took control of and also destroyed many people’s lives - a device called the "Playstation". After years of industry dominance and leaving all competitors in the dust, the Playstation had a son...or maybe it was his brother...actually, I'm not sure what familial terms to put this in...soooo...lets just move on. Regardless of all that, the Playstation eventually passed on it's cape and scepter to the Playstation 2, which continued to utterly decimate everything that stood in its path.
But, like all great empires in the history of the world...the Playstation brand faltered. Though the Playstation 2 seemed like it could do no wrong and it thoroughly had its way with all its competition...things took a turn.
As the next generation of the console wars loomed on the horizon, the world waited anxiously to see just what Sony would do next. The Playstation 1 and 2 were major successes of earth shattering proportions and people expected Sony to literally blow our asses off again with the Playstation 3.
But things went awry.
Microsoft struck the first, and perhaps fatal, blow in this round of the console wars by releasing their system, the Xbox 360, almost a year before Sony planned to drop their new hardware. Though, as the Dreamcast proved, being first doesn't always guarantee victory.
Unfortunately, years of being on top had made Sony arrogant to the fact that they were not perfect and far from untouchable in the video game market. Sony assumed that they had a veritable stranglehold on the casual gaming market while still having enough games and features to sate even the most hardcore of gamers.
When the PS3 was first announced, speculation ran rampant all over the internet as fanboys and haters literally wet themselves in anticipation of Sonys new console. How much would it cost? What features would come "stock", so to speak, on the PS3? What would their line up of launch titles look like? What was going to be Sony's online strategy? As time went on and these questions were answered...support for Sony began to drop lower and lower.
Once Sony started to release information about the PS3, things only seemed to get worse. It almost felt like Sony was trying as hard as they could to ruin their storied video game franchise. And after hearing of most of these facts...I started to wonder if I'd even bother with the Playstation 3.
First off and probably most importantly, the price tag was crazy. $600? Really? That thing better know the meaning of life or be made out of gold and encrusted with jewels for that kinda price. But seriously, for that price tag it must have some amazing features. But as you probably could've guessed by now...the PS3 didn't have so much of a "wow" factor as it had a "meh" factor.
So the console is $600...what exactly are gamers getting? Well first of all they are getting graphics which hardly look better, if not exactly the same, as graphics that can be found on the Xbox 360. Secondly, Sony created a a new wireless controller for the PS3, named the SIXAXIS, which sounded great at first...until it was found out that Sony was ditching rumble functions in this new controller in favor of motion sensing capabilities similar to that of the Nintendo Wii controller. Now, this might not sound like such a horrible idea to some but it wasn't so much the fact that Sony didn't include the rumble feature, it was the way in which they handled not including the rumble feature. At the time, Sony claimed that including the rumble feature in their wireless controller would be too difficult...even though its something that the 360 seems to pull off rather easily. Plus, the SIXAXIS just doesn't feel as solid as the old Dual Shocks do. They feel flimsy, some of the shoulder buttons are slippery and just all around feel more like a third party controller than a first party, Sony made product.
So its expensive and the controller's worse? Why's it so expensive then, you ask? The answer to that lies in a decision that Sony has decided to back %100. Every now and then new, similar technologies come out almost simultaneously and eventually one wins out over the other and becomes the dominant form of media. It happened with beta and VHS, DVD and laser disc, mini disc and MP3 and now it's Blu-Ray and HD-DVD. Sony has decided to back Blu-Ray technology and included it in the PS3. From a strictly financial standpoint, buying a $600 PS3 for the Blu-Ray player is a steal considering that a stand alone Blu-Ray player starts retailing at $1000.(Even though it appears Sony may be releasing a cheaper, stand alone Blu-Ray player...buts that niether here nor there in my argument) But the 360 also has an HD-DVD perhipheral that, even at an extra $200, may prove to be more worth the buy than the PS3.
But as an avid gamer, the most important part of the PS3 puzzle is its game library. And as time went on...you can probably guess whats coming...things didn't look so good for Sony. As the days passed, Sony began to lose more and more exclusive titles. The first and foremost important title being Grand Theft Auto 4 releasing on both consoles on the same day...which is absolutely huge for Microsoft and horrible for Sony. The GTA series has sold plenty of Playstations on its own and when gamers are faced with the choice of playing GTA 4 for $400 or for $600 - I think the choice is pretty obvious. But not only GTA 4 but other games such as Assassins Creed and possibly even Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots could be coming to the 360. In my honest opinion, a console with a weak exclusive game library that has a price tag of $600 just is not worth it. I'll admit, some of Sony's upcoming games look interesting (especially Heavenly Sword and Lair) but as it stands right now, Sony's PS3 game library is seriously lacking considering that most of the PS3 library are multiplatform games that can be found on the 360 as well.
Combine all these hardware/software concerns together with the fact that Sony's PS3 online community doesn't look like it is shaping up to be nearly as strong as Xbox Live Marketplace and you have all the makings of another Dreamcast or Saturn (pardon me for picking on poor ol' Sega). And as if this wasn't enough, I wouldn't plan on seeing a PS3 price drop for quite some time, and by that I mean at the very least a year.
Oh but wait...the shenanigans don't stop there. Just to give you an idea of the kind of people who are in charge at Sony...in a recent interview with EGM magazine, Jack Tretton, Sony Computer Entertainment America's president, Tretton offered anybody who could find and take a picture of a PS3 sitting on the shelf, unbought, $1,200. I'll say that again for those of you who perhaps aren't following as closely...Jack Tretton offered anyone who could find a PS3 on a store shelf in America $1,200 for it. In fact, the fine gentlemen at Penny Arcade took Mr. Tretton up on his challenge and, surprise surprise, found many an unsold PS3 sitting lonely on store shelves. They found so many, within minutes of starting out on their quest, that if Tretton were to actually own up to his challenge he would be paying Penny Arcade over $13,000. (To see the comic of which I'm speaking, follow this URL: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/02/10 )
Mr. Tretton, along with the rest of Sony, also seem to suffer from the collective illusion that PS3s are selling like hot cakes and that Sony is having problems keeping them on the shelves. According to many video game retailors, there are plenty of PS3s to be had but Sony apparently doesn't think so. In an article I found from GWN.com, Tretton seems to think that PS3s are selling so well that they won't be able to completely restock stores until "April or May." (http://www.gwn.com/news/story.php/id/11467/
Sony_Denies_PS3_Is_Readily_Available.html )
In fact, it appears that less than half of all PS3s shipped have been sold. The importance here being that shipped only means sold to stores whereas the number of consoles sold is the actual number of consoles bought by consumers. According to VGcharts.com, somewhere around 4 million PS3s have shipped to America and Japan, but only around 1.8 million has been sold - with less than a million sold in Japan, a market which Sony usually dominates. (http://www.vgcharts.org/news/news.php?id=111)
To be honest, in writing this post I kinda feel like I'm stabbing an old friend in the back and then twisting the knife a little because over the years, my PS1 and PS2 have given me more good times than I can count. I honestly really, really, really hope that Sony can get their act together and salvage their product. I do, I really do. But Sony has just dug themselves such a deep hole and then refused to acknowledge just how deep that hole is...I don't know when or if they can get themselves out of it.
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
Adult Swim: All Kids Outta The Pool
Now, even though I think most TV these days is complete trash that doesn't even deserve to exist, not all TV is garbage. Adult Swim on Cartoon Network is practically the only TV out there which is worth watching. For the most part, everything on Adult Swim is absolutely hilarious and if you don't think so, I will fight you and thats no lie. But seriously...we aren't friends if you don't watch at least some of Adult Swim.
I really admire how AS pretty much single-handedly brought "Family Guy" and "Futurama" back from the dead. I also extremely enjoy practically all of their original programming as well. Everything from classic AS shows such as "Aqua Teen Hunger Force" (look out for the movie coming soon...you got pwn3d, Boston) and "Sealab 2021" to new shows like "Frisky Dingo" and "Metalocalypse". Not only are these shows ridiculously hilarious, but they're also quite original (which is something that is not seen nearly enough on TV).
But being the metal-head I am, I must give major props to Brenden Small (of "Home Movies" fame) for creating my new, favorite show of all time "Metalocalypse". Metal has always been tradionally seen as something serious by it's fans and is far above any kind of humor. But Small has taken his love of the metal culture, turned it on it's head, and created a show which enforces the ultra-serious brutality of metal while at the same time taken the often times silly-ness of metal, put them in the most metal blender ever and "Metalocalypse" was born. The show follows the lives of the "biggest act in the universe: Dethklok" as they play shows, record albums, or just hang out in their giant house in an unspecified part of America called "Mordland" (which in German translates to Murder Land). The show also features a shadowy council of apparently high ranking officials who keep tabs on the band and always believe Dethklok is up to more sinister plans than they let on. When in reality, Dethklok is comprised of typical, dumb rock stars who would barely be able to survive on their own if not for the fact that they are outrageously rich.
Though "Metalocalypse's" season is over, AS has renewed the show for at least one more season and it has also been stated on the band's official MySpace page that "DethAlbum", a real metal album from the fictional band, will be released sometime in the summer. I plan on putting a song from the band in this blog post just as soon as I figure out how to do it.
UPDATE: For anyone who hasn't seen the show, here's the opening sequence and theme song. Be warned...if you don't like having your faced rocked by the awesome force of metal...you may want to turn your volume down.
I really admire how AS pretty much single-handedly brought "Family Guy" and "Futurama" back from the dead. I also extremely enjoy practically all of their original programming as well. Everything from classic AS shows such as "Aqua Teen Hunger Force" (look out for the movie coming soon...you got pwn3d, Boston) and "Sealab 2021" to new shows like "Frisky Dingo" and "Metalocalypse". Not only are these shows ridiculously hilarious, but they're also quite original (which is something that is not seen nearly enough on TV).
But being the metal-head I am, I must give major props to Brenden Small (of "Home Movies" fame) for creating my new, favorite show of all time "Metalocalypse". Metal has always been tradionally seen as something serious by it's fans and is far above any kind of humor. But Small has taken his love of the metal culture, turned it on it's head, and created a show which enforces the ultra-serious brutality of metal while at the same time taken the often times silly-ness of metal, put them in the most metal blender ever and "Metalocalypse" was born. The show follows the lives of the "biggest act in the universe: Dethklok" as they play shows, record albums, or just hang out in their giant house in an unspecified part of America called "Mordland" (which in German translates to Murder Land). The show also features a shadowy council of apparently high ranking officials who keep tabs on the band and always believe Dethklok is up to more sinister plans than they let on. When in reality, Dethklok is comprised of typical, dumb rock stars who would barely be able to survive on their own if not for the fact that they are outrageously rich.
Though "Metalocalypse's" season is over, AS has renewed the show for at least one more season and it has also been stated on the band's official MySpace page that "DethAlbum", a real metal album from the fictional band, will be released sometime in the summer. I plan on putting a song from the band in this blog post just as soon as I figure out how to do it.
UPDATE: For anyone who hasn't seen the show, here's the opening sequence and theme song. Be warned...if you don't like having your faced rocked by the awesome force of metal...you may want to turn your volume down.
I Don't Want My MTV
Whenever I turn on the TV, I can't help but shake my head in shame at the sorry state of television these days. Where have the quality, original shows gone? TV has gotten worse than ever and I blame MTV. Has anyone watched MTV lately? I mean, really watched it? How they glorify materialistic, self-centered, egomaniacial assholes on "Super Sweet 16" or how they keep squeezing every last drop of life out of the "Laguna Beach" model. The Hills? Do people actually watch these pieces of shit?
I'm also fairly sure that Bam Margera has sold his soul to the MTV devil...because how else would this talentless, mediocre skater STILL have a show on the air? Yeah, the whole "Jackass/CKY skate vid" concept show was funny when they did them back in the 90's but really...do people still like Bam or look up to him or think he's "cool"? Don't tell me everyone hasn't figured out yet that "Viva La Bam" wasn't a "real" show in terms that all that crap wasn't scripted before hand like any other "reality" show these day because if we are that far gone as a society that we still care about the zany antics of Bam and his buddies that he pays to do what he says, then there really is no hope for mankind. Honestly, Bam makes me sad to even have grown up in the same area of Pennsylvania as him.
I'm fairly certain this is all part of some MTV experiment to see just how stupid they've made people. When they've dumbed down our culture to the point that people care about what happens to LC on "The Hills" or that Bam has a new girlfriend that he's marrying on his new show "Bam's Unholy Union" (Newlyweds rip-off, anyone?), MTV knows that people are just about stupid enough to watch anything.
I'm also fairly sure that Bam Margera has sold his soul to the MTV devil...because how else would this talentless, mediocre skater STILL have a show on the air? Yeah, the whole "Jackass/CKY skate vid" concept show was funny when they did them back in the 90's but really...do people still like Bam or look up to him or think he's "cool"? Don't tell me everyone hasn't figured out yet that "Viva La Bam" wasn't a "real" show in terms that all that crap wasn't scripted before hand like any other "reality" show these day because if we are that far gone as a society that we still care about the zany antics of Bam and his buddies that he pays to do what he says, then there really is no hope for mankind. Honestly, Bam makes me sad to even have grown up in the same area of Pennsylvania as him.
I'm fairly certain this is all part of some MTV experiment to see just how stupid they've made people. When they've dumbed down our culture to the point that people care about what happens to LC on "The Hills" or that Bam has a new girlfriend that he's marrying on his new show "Bam's Unholy Union" (Newlyweds rip-off, anyone?), MTV knows that people are just about stupid enough to watch anything.
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Lost on "Lost Planet"
Have you checked out the best column in the Slate yet this week? What? You haven't?? Well what in the heck are you waiting for? Go check out my latest "Grizzly Gaming" column in this weeks Slate and find out whether you should run out and buy "Lost Planet: Extreme Condition" right now or save your money for more important things. Like trips to the bar.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
The Legend of Grizz
Ok...maybe I'm getting ahead of myself, calling my story "legend" (Ahead of myself...for now).
The story of Grizzly Gaming begins many years ago...in a decade affectionately known as The 80's. No, I won't be recounting the story of my birth because frankly, that'd be a little weird and awkward for all of us. No, this story will be about a much more important event in my life. An event so life changing that it's affected everything I've done since and relates to everything I am now. This, my friends, is the story of the first video game I ever played.
Back at the tender age of 3 (I might've been 4...who knows. I mean, I don't. That was a hella long time ago. But hey...it's my story and I'll tell it how I want). Anyway...back then, I was your average little kid. My parents worked, my little sister was just born, and I played all sorts of sports like baseball and soccer (You know, all the mandatory sports you play when you're a kid). But at Christmas time of that fateful year, I recieved a present that changed the way I led my life. That year, I was lucky enough to get a Nintendo Entertainment System. Little did I know that that little, gray box of fun would start to mold me into the powerhouse of gaming mastery that is Grizz.
Once my Dad set up that Nintendo, I was hooked. I played every game I got, inside and out. I begged my parents to take me to the video store to rent new, different games. Games like "Mega Man 2", "Bionic Commando", "Operation Wolf", and of course "Super Mario Bros./Duck Hunt" kept my firmly parked in front of my TV. And once I found out a newer gaming system was released (The Sega Genesis), I could barely contain my pure elation.
Since then, I've been playing all sorts of different console games, handheld games, and PC games and dominating them all.
But how where did the awesome nickname "Grizz" come from? Well kids, thats a story for another time. So tune in next time for the second part of however many parts I feel like making. Same bat time...same bat channel.
The story of Grizzly Gaming begins many years ago...in a decade affectionately known as The 80's. No, I won't be recounting the story of my birth because frankly, that'd be a little weird and awkward for all of us. No, this story will be about a much more important event in my life. An event so life changing that it's affected everything I've done since and relates to everything I am now. This, my friends, is the story of the first video game I ever played.
Back at the tender age of 3 (I might've been 4...who knows. I mean, I don't. That was a hella long time ago. But hey...it's my story and I'll tell it how I want). Anyway...back then, I was your average little kid. My parents worked, my little sister was just born, and I played all sorts of sports like baseball and soccer (You know, all the mandatory sports you play when you're a kid). But at Christmas time of that fateful year, I recieved a present that changed the way I led my life. That year, I was lucky enough to get a Nintendo Entertainment System. Little did I know that that little, gray box of fun would start to mold me into the powerhouse of gaming mastery that is Grizz.
Once my Dad set up that Nintendo, I was hooked. I played every game I got, inside and out. I begged my parents to take me to the video store to rent new, different games. Games like "Mega Man 2", "Bionic Commando", "Operation Wolf", and of course "Super Mario Bros./Duck Hunt" kept my firmly parked in front of my TV. And once I found out a newer gaming system was released (The Sega Genesis), I could barely contain my pure elation.
Since then, I've been playing all sorts of different console games, handheld games, and PC games and dominating them all.
But how where did the awesome nickname "Grizz" come from? Well kids, thats a story for another time. So tune in next time for the second part of however many parts I feel like making. Same bat time...same bat channel.
The Best Blog of All Time
First post of the internet home of Grizzly Gaming. Prepare to have your brain overloaded with my pure amazing-ocity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
