It recently came to my attention that an undisclosed Destructoid member is over 6 feet tall and weighs over 250 pounds, all muscle or so he claims. This startling discovery has challenged some of my fundamental assumptions about the fellow gamer, and it has prompted me to disinter other cases that are typically abnormal for our species. With estimable journalism, I've decided to collect pictorial evidence to contradict the popular theory of homogeneity with evidence of biodiversity within the
specimen "Masculinus Gamerus" and alternatively the more rare "Feminum Gamera"



A "booth bro" or "booth bear" Masculine men can also be gamers



This guy too? Come the fuck on!

I am a pretty simple guy, I am a graduate student who comes home late to play for a few hours, jerks off (unless the wife puts out), and goes to sleep. I've traditionally thought of the adult gamer as one who does the same -- a fairly educated guy who is either thin or fat. I myself fall in the latter domain, I am not obese but I have definitely have seen better days in my youth. To me, this homogenity is a standard worldview, although I am more used to seeing women fall in the same category than I used to be growing up.

What I don't see too often are the smoking hot female gamers recently coined Smokus Hotus F. Gamera such as Megan Fox. According to the info for the Transformers community playdate on Xbox Live, Megan is appearantly a real gamer. I'll take that with a commercial grain of shit.



Darling, you've played as many games as I have had girlfriends.



I'd "co-op" that



If only reality was this sweet

On a serious note, there are several women who are both good looking and successful within the gaming industry like Assassin's Creed producer Jay Raymond and IGN poster-girl Jessica Chobot



Mmm, Chobot



The professional Miss Jade Raymond

Although my categorical assumptions are challenged on a day-to-day basis, I still find comfort in my pre-designated zones of social identity. Gaming is my hobby, and it is within that my own unique masculine identity has burgeoned. What I find interesting is how some people, notably women, can co-exist in multiple social spheres at the same time. I don't see myself as a party-goer even though I am certainly far from ugly. I just have a belly because I enjoy more solitary and sedentary activities at the moment. Perhaps my personality as an introvert has also predestined some of my choices in life. Regardless of what I think personally, I hope you enjoyed my humerous somatotypical treaty of the gamer.

Assassin's Creed 2 had a relatively quiet launch this week most likely from all the hype being sucked up by Modern WarFEAR 2. So, why would anyone want to boycott both it and its predecessor? Perhaps because IGN called it the greatest disappointment of our time? Perhaps because the combat was uninspired and bland? Because of the disjointed incohesive story? Good reasons but what about religious reasons? Wait WTF, rel-ig-ion what? Yes, that's right, I am boycotting AC and AC2 based on the gross historical confabulations by the developers. I am talking about the fabled Knights Templar, the sworn defenders of the Christian pilgrims in the conquered Jerusalem during the crusades.

I have been fascinated with Templar history for a while now, even to the point where I actually considered membership. Yes, the Knights Templar exists today as a spiritual caucus, of course, without the swords and horses, and all of that. In AC1, the Templars are traduced and vilified to no end which is why I couldn't play for more than a few hours before selling my copy. I was disappointed with the lack of historical insight produced by the developers despite claiming valid source attribution in their preamble.


Dude..wait! Not cool

If you look around, you won't find much credible evidence to validate the claim that the Temple Order was a murderous cabal. In fact, the Templars were persecuted by King Philip who tortured and burned them at the stake after producing their false confessions. Thus, the virtual killing of an honorable organization is to me a despicable act. What's next, AC3 set in post-WW2 India where Mother Theresa is the evil crone who dispatches her fledgling nuns to kill the protagonist? I understand there is a great deal of truth to the word "fiction" but there is a difference between fiction and perversion. Then again, we're talking about a video game and the usual "who cares dude"



Historical inaccuracies? Defamation? Insensitivity? Oh shit, look over here, a hot chick made the game!

Yep, that's right. There is no typo in the title. Dragon Age: Origins is the spiritual successor of Baldur's Gate 2, the best damn game of all time. After spending over 40 hours with DA, I have barely scrapped the surface of this epic new ip.

Being the unofficial RPG-lover of the site, it would be fitting to write more about DA itself rather than just a related diatribe. However, this isn't a review per se, this is more of a suggestion for a review with some modest impressions. How shall I put it, I will try and put things into:



Speaking of tits, Dragon Age has em' and offers a unique glimpse into the lewd with homosexual relationships, threesomes, foursomes, etc. I bet Moleaux himself would be shamed by the depth of the relational drama which unfolds in the hands of the player. Needless to say, there is a lot to do in Dragon Age Origins and the player is empowered with a feeling of being a vital necessity in a depraved world. The story is epic, though formulaic, and it carries a sense of fait accompli with the diversity in its four separate endings without sacrificing the teasing of a sequel

Of course, there are plenty of references to big brother Baldur's Gate, and the pressure to produce a "sequel" must have been intense. For example, the famous pausing system is back even though I feels unnecessary on the console version which offers a more action-oriented approach. There are still plenty of Easter eggs for the fans, like the demon Gaxkang who feels like a pussy compared to the insanely powerful Kangaxx in BG2. However, DA still brings back fond memories of the original tale, and DA is pleasingly more gritty, mature, and dark compared to big brother.



Despite the obvious references made to BG2, Dragon Age stands on its own with a solid story, a rich and varied world, and potential for some amazing interactions with one's party. Customization is the heart of DA, and although it's not as expansive as BG2, it does retain a gamut of options relating to the type of character you want to make. The spells are decent but I miss the old system where you could buy them in stores, and they had a tier-system ranging from 1 to 9. Admittedly, I am also a big sucker for combat voices and the lack of such during spell casting is mildly disappointing.



Trust me, keep the dwarf for some lulz.

Dragon Age origins does carry some faults which are inescapably linked to Bioware's past. The difficulty, as Sterling suggested, is not paced properly. Some fights will seem tediously easy while others require complex strategical thinking, a fair load of cursing, and multiple reloads. This lack of proper pacing is not unique to Dragon Age alone. Many other Bioware games have had notoriously difficult areas which overall dampens the fun. Graphically, Dragon Age, as many have noted, is kind of awful. I was hoping for something close to splendor of Mass Effect but the visual department has been neglected in favor of porting what is widely called an inferior console version.

Overall, I do not assign a score but I can recommend a range of valid scores. Given the breadth of the experience and the overall homage to BG2, DA comes heavily recommended with a few noted problems.

Suggested range of score: 85-95

Anything below 80 is ostensibly an insult.

Perhaps a rare planetary allaignment would cause, for the first time in history, a massive boycott of a game company that has long vowed to exploit customers by any shameless means necessary. I had vowed to fight alongside my PC bretheren and declare my apostacy by a brief missive on this very site; now, that presaged cosmic event appears to have been eclipsed by the this laughable travesty



Fuck, Kotick just bought Aspen.

I am introducing a blogging series dedicated to the controversial. The rediculued "B" word. Yes, I am a boycotter, and I am the voice of no one. I am the guy who tells you what you don't want to hear but it is what you need to hear. Modern Warfare 2 is a game developed by a team which shits on your integrity as a PC consumer, and it is published by a man who fucking hates you.



So my immediate question is to the community of enthusiasts. If you are a d-toid user who initially voiced intentions to boycott, but who has now purchased a new copy of MW2, why did you give in? To anyone in general, why not just wait a few days before used copies surface on Gamestop? If this keeps happening, game price will inevitably go up if there is a large enough demand for big titles like MW2. If it happened in the UK, it can and will happen in the U.S.



Go ahead, it's just one copy. No one will care or even notice. Sales won't be affected if I'm the only one giving in.

Still going proud though, me and the other 10 people in the world who didn't pussy out.

There used to be a time when I could go home and load up my cartridge and get away from all annoying people. Games were my solitary sanctum, my own private retreat. There used to be a time when I didn't have to worry about who would invite me to a "party" as soon as I started up my console. People enervate me, and I use games to replenish my energy. Yes, I am introvert and a lone wolf. I seek solitude, and I just want to be left alone a majority of the time while i'm on the 360.

I was absolutely heart-broken when I heard that Resident Evil 5 would feature co-op for the very first time. I was worried that narrative and characterization had been sacrificed for a slight boost in sale. Not just a slight but most companies believe that sales increase significantly if there is some matter of tacked-on multiplayer feature. Most developers now incorporate the dreadful co-op mode as a standard of this current zeitgeist. I was so infuriated with RE5, I never played a single chapter in co-op. Instead, I endured the entire game on professional difficulty despite some frustrating stuttering from the ostensibly deficient AI



Don't get me wrong, Sheva was, overall, a well-designed character but the core focus was clearly on co-op which many people noted was just "more fun." Well I had plenty of fun on my own, and I could play the game on MY conditions. It's my proudest achievement I've ever unlocked next to Mile High Club

Ding!



I've also completely refused to play Borderlands in co-op despite the more robust 4-player setting. I've been tempted to try it now that I'm actually done with the game and I've seen everything I want to see. What worries me about co-op is the fact that I might get rushed to please my party, and I won't have a chance to properly see and explore everything. I suppose that is the cost of so called "fun." Fun to me is in diametrically oppositional domain. I enjoyed the single-player campaign despite some clear frustrations. For example, your second-wind bar depletes FASTER in single-player than mp. WTF?



Not today guys, I've got a headache...again.

One guy on my f-list told me he only buys games with co-op or multiplayer. I guess I am a reactionary, I strongly oppose certain change within the gaming industry. This co-op thing is really bothering me. Anyway

Ding!



There is no denying the co-op paradigm is here to stay only because it makes sense from a business perspective. I wonder how aggressively it will change in a couple of years. How about MAG boosting 250 players in a single match?



Ding!

Forgive the false literary allusion but do allow me to inject some "earnestness" into the whole fiasco surrounding Destructoid's abysmally low review of Dragon Age. As my username suggests, I play RPGs, not only that, I am the RPGIST, a unique blogger whose nature encompasses the entire scope of the genre. This is my forte, my publishing niche, and I am grossly offended by Jim Sterling's deprecation of Bioware's latest and possibly greatest entry to their already reputable pedigree.

I believe Jim might be suffering from fatigue as he is responsible for reviewing a wide range of titles not just the limited experience with RPGs. It takes an unusual amount of patience to enjoy more
"old school" RPGs which is offered by Dragon Age. Though, rest assured, I am constantly drawing parallels to Bioware's magna opus: Baldur's Gate 2. One must not only craft a compelling story, but a vast and interesting world with an addictive combat and multifarious customization system. Is Dragon Age better than BG2? Doubtful, DA is more scaled-down to the "mainstream'd" younger generation of 360 owners. For example, there is no more dice rolling in the character creation menu, and the allocation of skills appears to be more abundant.



Barely worth a purchase *scoff*


In all honesty, the review staff at Destructoid overall, and it's self-ascribed "non-lenient" review policy is appalling. I am new to Destructoid so I went back and looked at the Burch's review debacle of Mass Effect. It was given a 7.0 with strong caution against buying a 50 hour game with top-notch production values. I am beginning to see a disturbing trend where reviewers play games they genuinely do not want to play apparently. If one approaches a game with a half-assed attitude then one's not going take out a whole lot of the overall experience. This is probably why I would never agree to review games in genres I typically do not appreciate. I would underestimate the value of the game and my review score would be terribly biased and deflated as a result.

Suppose for one second that say "Two Worlds" was accidentally programmed onto a Dragon Age disc, I could understand the shock of playing a terribly underdeveloped title with a nonexistent budget. However, my impression of DA is an overly pleasant one. The graphics may not be great, in fact, that may be its greatest pitfall on the 360. However, the art-direction clearly makes up for the technical flaws in this game. Just take the city of Ostagar, it sits near a range of mountain which reminds of the splendor in Lord of the Rings. This stunning vista was clearly not implemented in the graphics department but the soul of the idea is still there. Lastly, I find Sterling's attack on the difficulty level absolutely absurd. In fact, IGN's review clearly stated that it was significantly LESS difficult than on the PC version. You can probably play through 80-90 % of DA without using tactical pauses on the 360 version. If difficulty is suddenly a "bad" thing then why is Demon's Souls metacritic so high? I can't wait for that review to appear on Destructoid.

My recommendation is simply to add more enthusiastic staff who are still able to balance objectivity with their own expectations and biases. If this is simply a matter of pro forma policy, then I would never, as a publisher, send out advanced review copies to this site. In fact, I would ban it from metacritic.



Jim Sterling, astringent connoisseur or fatigued ribald?