I remember being about seven and hearing that Super Mario Brother 2 was coming out. I probably didn't know what the word sequel meant but I knew there was going to be more of what was, at the time, my favorite gaming experience. I think we've lost the simple pleasure of "More" in this industry. We've over complicated fun, and the quest for MORE of it.

Are the alleged "Cry Babies" wrong? The protesters have presented points and clearly stated them, but I think their going about it in the incorrect manner. A sequel means more. That's the simple pleasure I wanted at seven, and I believe fundamentally that's all they are looking for now. Why do they want more? Well, because as I have often said. L4D is lacking.

L4D is a game where quality depends solely on the users. If you have four creative players, the game can have infinite replay value. Otherwise, it gets repetitive real quick. Which, in my humble opinion, is the definition of an incomplete game. However, even if the game wasn't repetitive I just don't understand the emotional uproar over a sequel. A sequel is a just another venue for more. Nothing else. (Unless the 13 thousand of you are upset because there will be no more compromising situations to put Zoey in.) Play with the new chick and deal.

However, the other camp is just as annoying. Tossing around the word "Crybaby" does not present an intelligent retort to what is upsetting these people. "STFUAJPG" doesn't cut it. It like "Crybaby" just means you like the game and dislike anyone who doesn't. Therefore, you have no real argument to bring to the table, because clearly you right and then are wrong. In short, The word Crybaby typed over and over has made for very dull reading material these past few weeks.

I, on the other hand, like to skate the middle ground. I am excited to see the sequel, but not from the standpoint that L4D was the best thing to happen to zombies and games since Wesker uttered his first bit of poorly translated dialogue. Thousands of people are upset that more content isn't coming for this game. This says to me that the game showed a slice of intriguing gameplay but fell short. Why else would there be an outcry for more. If it was a complete game then everyone would have been satisfied with it. However, it wasn't. Was it? It was kind of like they released the demo and not the full version and then just made a sequel. Which makes me fear that it's just going to be another demo but this time with Chainsaws, frying pans, and maybe even spatulas if they so choose.

Will I still play this game? Yes. Am I angry enough to sign a petition or join a boycott? No. However, that doesn't lead me to believe that anyone involved is a "Crybaby." We are all the same. We all want more L4D, we're just arguing over the reasons why and what venue. No one has taken the time to realize we are all on the same side, trying to feed that simple desire we've all feed from childhood--"MORE MORE MORE".

Combining that word with that phrase should give every gamer goosebumps, but the problem remains that video game movies have a greater potential for greater terribleness than any other movie adaptation. Indeed, I am pumped. The thought of an exceptional on-screen adaptation has crossed my mind, but it doesn’t step out of the shadow of the fear, the fear it’s going to suck harder than a little sister’s big syringe.

Why do video game movies fail to tell a decent a story or portray captivating characters when adapted to film? One of the biggest problems is that books, plays, television shows all already have narrative as where games have gameplay. The narrative has to be filled in. Often the experimental garbage they jam in that gap sinks the movie—especially when’s its actual footage from the game. Thank you much, Uwe Boll, for ruining House of the Dead, not to mention Alone in the Dark.

Other game movies such as Mario Brothers and Double Dragon drifted too far from the source material to seek out a plot. The problem is that these movies have a built in fan base, and the going perception seems to be that if a PG-13 rating is stamped on it then it can at least make some money regardless of the content. Bioshock can easily suffer this fate, cheap action marketed to simple minds.

The movie needs to be R, period. The subject matter is mature. It’s Ayn Rand meets Locke meets gore fest. Do not dumb this one down, so teenagers that button mashed through the game’s back-story anyway can populate the theaters. For once, we have a brilliant narration interwoven into the gameplay. This could work. It just has to be done right. Hollywood, would you kindly, not ruin Bioshock.

Game Over, Man! Game Over. Perhaps, the immortal words of private Hudson will soon cease to make sense to the new generation of gamers. The classic conventions of gaming are starting to go the way of game cartridges. Lives, 1 Ups, and even death are suddenly passe. Weird, right, but true.

It occurred to me the other night. My girlfriend has been working through an addiction with the new Prince of Persia game. Even though, the game’s main character is the world’s most goofy and clumsy acrobat the right to die is restricted. I know this country prohibits euthanasia, but come on, if there’s one character I ever wanted to kill on purpose… But, I digress.

Who would have every though that Pitfall II was waaay ahead of its time. Anyone remember that gem on Atari. It was a game with the great-grandfather of autosave points, crosses you stepped on. In the Atari world of rigorous shot-clock-time-limits and strictly allotted lives, Pitfall II said no to these conventions, and even no to its predecessor that bowed to them just two years before. And the autosave spun…

Now, autosave is almost the most common function of any game in any genre. After years of just being something that happened in RPGs, the length of current games has made it a common replacement for lives, because, after all, who wouldn’t throw their remote through a TV screen if after 80 hours of Gameplay their lives counter hit 0 and it was time to start over. Times have changed; the autosave spins on.

Even the Mario Galaxies of the world, that have the conventions, need to rely on both. The journey is just too long, without it. And the journey is whole other can of worms. DLC has almost also illustrated that THE END doesn’t have to be THE END. The Fallout Series, since Wasteland, always let you keep playing even after there was no more quests.

Sooner or later, It will be life that needs an Autosave. Once we start programing games that are longer than our lifespans… Well at least there will be something to do in our Cryo-freeze chambers.

Familiarity breeds contempt or we always hurt the one’s we love. Whichever adage applies I find that games we enjoy the most we look the hardest to find flaws and be critical of. Fallout 3 was very satisfying, one of the best games in a long time, but I love to complain so here are couple little bits of wasteland dust that tickled me the wrong way.

Fallout had great gameplay, but was not free of the typical Top-heavy RPG feel. Most RPGs have this problem. Simply put, the game is challenging in the very beginning and somewhere in the Middle of the game, you become ridiculously powerful and the challenge dissipates. I remember fighting Vance and his Vampire gang. How long it took me. I had to use the Stealth Boy and pick them off one by one, occasionally having to book down the tunnel and hope that only one follows me. Post Rivet City everything seemed like cake. My caps were plentiful from then one and I could always keep my Stimpak count above 100. It isn’t hard to mash B once you get in trouble from there on out.

Acquiring NPCs that are nearly invincible doesn’t help this problem. Fawkes’s ability to sustain boatloads of damage and not blink while he wastes a party of four Enclave members before you can target one really takes the fun out of the game. I had to leave him in Megaton after awhile. Dogmeat found himself hanging out with Wadsworth for the opposite reason. I got tired of trying to protect him in heavy firefights. Sydney was one of few happy mediums for any Karma setting and she only stayed for one quest.

And was I the only one who got real sick of running around Metro tunnels. Fallout 3 should not have played like a Dungeon hack game. The repetitiveness of the rail system made it feel like I was playing Diablo in 95’ again. Ghouls, Mire Lurkers, and Raiders—oh my—it got a little boring. I want a little bit more entropy in my dungeons in Fallout 4.

Another idea that sounded great on paper, but fell short in gameplay was the ability to create special weapons. Okay Nuka Grenades were okay and the Shiskabob is the only Melee weapon in the game that really rocks. Some people like the Dart gun, but I found its uses limited. You can cripple every limb on a Supermutant but by the time I do all that, I could have rendered lifeless by emptying a few shotgun shells into him.

The rest are really gimmicky. A gun that shoots garbage. Great, was anyone really ever out of ammo in this game? If I sold my ammo supply at the end of the game, I would have had enough caps to buy Megaton. Not to mention that by the time you get the schematic and all the parts for it. You probably own a rocket launcher at least a combat shotgun, which both pack a much heavier punch. Even though it is funny to watch a Talon company merc get a bloody nose from a tin can in slow-mo, I’m not going to spend my time scrounging the wasteland for leaf blowers anytime soon.

I felt the same way about the Railway Rifle and Deathclaw Gauntlet, by the time I’ve got my hands these gems, I already had an arsenal of more powerful weapons on my person, in my locker in Megaton, hidden under Bittercup’s bed. Well, maybe not, but you get the point. Not worth the effort.

My last little complaint is that there was only one good “boss” fight, the Behemoth Mutant fight at Galaxy News Radio. Some may argue that Ant Queens weren’t bad. Fine, but think of the ending. You stand behind an 80-foot Robot that tears through dozens of Enclave while you mostly walk, then trade energy waves with a handful of Enclave, so you can fight a boss that’s wearing an officer’s uniform and no combat armor. You tear through him like paper.

Other than that, I loved it. Which concludes this rant.

I’m aware that Left 4 Dead was the greatest thing to take a big slobbery bite out of the gaming industry since Pac-man. At least, that’s the way most of you act. Even though I enjoyed it thoroughly for about a month, I left the game feeling a little empty. Why? The game has a little single player value. Should games be created with heavy emphasis on Multiplayer?

Well, for one, it’s the greatest marketing scheme ever. How can we think of ways to make people buy our survival horror FPS in bundles of four? Answer: make the single player very limited in its amusement. (You could take your chances with random XBOX live parties. That is if you like ten year olds screaming in your ear and shooting Zoey around the waistline cause its funny when bloodstains appear there.) Good grief. Maybe, I’m being too critical, but hear me out.

This game has infinite replay value if you have four buddies with you. Why? Because it’s fun to fortify yourself and find creative ways to watch the undead burn. The progression of better strategies is awesome for those who play it. Couldn’t the developers find was to expand on this concept? Longer fortification situations with more strategic ways to coral zombies than just walls of flame might give this title a new zing.

The last thing I want to see of more of the same. Bigger and badder can only carry a sequel so far. How many zombies can I hit in the face with a frying pan before it runs out of entertainment value? Playing butcher with the new Chainsaw is going to be amusing, I’m sure, but the novelty will run out of gas faster than the saw.

Don’t get me wrong. I am going to play this title. I love killing Zombies, but what I love more is the environment of a zombie apocalypse. The atmosphere. The ruined landscape, and the various situations that survivals would need to put themselves in to survive. Left 4 Dead 2 needs to capture this atmosphere better than just hordes of undead coming at you. Give better landscapes, better fortifications to defend with more ways to utilize the environment. Anything that’s going to give the gamer a fuller experience, even if they can’t hook up with three buddies that day.

Perhaps, I’m Dead wrong. Everyone else seems to worship this title. However, I see room for improvement.

Let’s face it. We’re all pumped about Bioshock 2. Why, because Bioshock was awesome and we want more. My apprehension is that the developers don't realize what we need more of. Bioshock didn’t succeed for its gameplay alone. The story telling elements and captivating environment were the little of bits of drug that we need another injection of like a shot of Eve.

FPSes were already a tired and saturated Genre when Bioshock hit stores in late 2007, but Bioshock did something a little different. Sure, the controls were smooth like butter on the muffin. Sure, the AI was creepy smart. Sure, it’s just plain fun to shoot bees at people, but beating Splicers to death with a wrench while their dancing the dance of insect sting wouldn’t have brought the game its acclaim, alone.

Rapture captured us all because of its mystery. We all fell for it when that plane crashed and we played through the introduction long enough to get our first glimpse at a little slice of hell. The wonder about how Utopia, the beautiful city we saw on the way in, became this filled every gamer to enter Rapture. Until, of course, the mystery unraveled through the voices of the living, dead, and long insane.

Everyone who stuck around long enough to see that mystery unravel was dealt with nice “Holy Crap” moment when the storytelling came to its climax and we all realized how damn good of a job the writers had done. I hope Bioshock 2 is up to that challenge.

Anyone to play Bioshock is anxious to get back to Rapture. It’s a fertile environment with limitless potential for more creepiness and beautiful macabre moments. However, I think if Bioshock 2 has only an excellent environment and more entertainment gameplay then it has truly cheated its fan base. It needs to deliver hardcore in the story-telling department. The developers need to dazzle a copycat gaming industry with a focus on a technological innovation with plain good old fashion story telling. At least once more, would you kindly give us plot line that amazes? Would you, Kindly?