My fellow gamers, for too long I have held my tongue, for too long I have watched from the sidelines as our beloved Destructoid community has slowly become corrupted from within. Such crimes against humanity have been brought on by the one we have all come to known as Jim Sterling. Since the inclusion of Jim "The Rapist" Sterling, our once peaceful gaming community has slowly fallen into chaos.
Jim "Yahtzee" Sterling was born in England, the same England that ruled over the entire world for decades. It is the same nation which gave the world plague and Amy Winehouse. Jim "Karl Marx" Sterling does not only review games for Destructoid, in his spare time he likes to write lies about American made games like Halo Wars, while lauding more European games like Killzone 2. You see my friends, his bias knows no bounds.
Every week Jim "Hitler" Sterling appears on Podtoid, a podcast hosted by a Mahmoud Ahmedinejad look-alike. Every week this vile man mocks the only Native American in the staff whose ancestors helped build this glorious nation. This is not the Eighteenth Century Mr. Jim "Stalin" Sterling, we Americans do not discriminate the Native people of this country. My friends, I wish that was the only problem with this man-beast, but it isn’t. Not only does he regularly conspire to have forced intercourse with one American Nicole Wiebe, but he also has no respect for the American values, and refuses to acknowledge our Declaration of Independence.
Jim "Charles Manson" Sterling hosts another podcast, one called The Podcastle. The Podcastle is a podcast which is directed to the less patriotic and more uncouth members of the community. Every other week Jim "No Talent" Sterling and his co-hosts Wardrox and Atheistium try to brainwash the pure men and women of our world with their filth. Just from their fake names, you can deduce that these people are not good honest people. They are godless, jobless warmongers, who would like nothing better than to corrupt you with their impartiality.
Now I know what you are thinking, how can these monsters are employed by our fearless leader Mr. Destructoid? I have wondered the same thing, and with my ingenious internet sleuthing skills, I have found the dirty little secret that they conveniently “forgot” to tell you.
Yes what you see is true my friends; our cherished, well developed and girthy website is being managed by a bunch of communist invaders. These are people who are not born American, and might as well be sleeper agents for all we know.
These people are taking our American jobs, bedding our American Women, eating our American food; and yet they still have the nerve to complain about our American High Fructose Corn Syrup.
The United States Customs have failed us, and clearly the CEO Cat has no idea what is going on. I know this is a lot to take in and I know you are scared, but we still have an option. Join our resistance; together we shall purge this place of all contamination. Now that the Destructoid headquarters is empty of the traitors, we can overthrow the CEO Cat and finally claim what is rightly ours. With the help of our Beta Clan, we can restore power to the only legitimate owner, a true American, one who truly understands the video games journalism business, one who has been handpicked by the brightest minds in the country. One who is so baller that he will blow your mind.
My fellow Destructoiders, join us and finally we can rid this place of the smut that has been building up since the departure of our one true leader. These Brooker-lovin Mexican Liberal Nazis should go back to where they came from, only then our community and our entire lives can be sacred once again.
Well, you knew people would find out someday. Apparently Japanese Company Capcom hates black people. How else can you explain the reason behind the latest Resident Evil game taking place in Africa? Sure they give you the Marketing Bullshit like "They are Zombies, we here at Capcom are not racist", but we know in our gut, that they might as well just call this game "Redneck Heaven" because that is just what this game is.
Even the inclusion of a second character who is "multicultural", does not stop this game from being a Murder Killing Simulator, Capcom is systematically trying to brainwash the entire world, by turning us against "them" one game at a time. You think you are not affected? But I assure you, you are; did you not feel like punching Spanish people after playing Resident Evil 4? Did you not want to Kill "Mecha Hitler" after playing Bionic Commando? Didn't you feel like killing the developer after playing Lair and Too Human? I rest my case.
I know we as a community are very vocal, when compared to the fans of Films, Music or even new Gadgets, we are the most active. In the midst of all of this arguments, we sometimes lose perspective on what is important. This does raise interesting questions, if you are being mugged, and you fight back, are you racist if the mugger is Black or White? If you are in a state where zombies are trying to eat your brains -and its obvious that they are zombies because no sane person wants to eat someone else's brain- and they are black, are you racist if you put a bullet in their head?
We may make silly jokes here and there about being racist, or about someone we know who makes racist comments, but once you open that door, when you accuse one video game of being racist, should you not research other games to see if they are also racist?. What about the promotion of Afro Samurai and Church's Chicken, is that not racist? or GTA San Andreas, where gangs are stereotyped according to race?
I know I can't properly argue about race, I certainly would understand if someone feels offended by these games, but since I have never faced discrimination of that kind, I have nothing to bring to this argument. I do believe that we should have a proper discussion about this, away from the Video Game websites, away from any sort of News program or blog. It should be a couple of guys, locked in a room, who can come to a conclusion in an eloquent manner. To the media -whether it be blogs or journalists- this is just another story, one they never bother to follow up anymore because it stops being interesting. And the minute this gets onto Fox News, you can bet your ass the sales of this game will go through the roof, more than the usual anyway.
Ah the good old days, when developers couldn't release a half ass game and fix it later with a patch. Yes with the inclusion of internet connectivity on our consoles, developers and publishers have found a new way to screw us over. Sure PC gamers have been getting patches and bug fixes and even new content for free for years, but since our overlords cant get away with charging money for the PC gamers, they have turned to the console.
Its great when a developer supports their game throughout its lifetime, when they bring out new content, or fix bugs or even create a community from their followers. Problem is other publishers and developers don't always follow in the footsteps of Bungie and Valve, why would they when they know there are always suckers to be had.
Let me make this clear, I am not opposed to DLC. What does scare me is when they force me to unlock features or levels in a game that I should not have to pay for. Its obvious that many game creators already have ideas about what to release as DLC later on the line, they just don't start thinking of new content if they see that their game is a hit. This is why I don't bitch about the Downloadable Content for Fallout 3 or GTA 4, because they already have the full game on the disk, their DLC provides new content, and I would happily pay $15-$20 to play another storyline in Liberty City.
Games like Burnout Paradise and GTA 4 gives me hope for the video game industry. I remember how quickly Rockstar had released a patch for GTA 4 as soon as people found the glitches. Metal Gear Solid 4 has no trophies, but Burnout Paradise, a game more than a year old has updated their game to include free content and trophies. But, that's not the point, because I don't expect everyone to give out free content, but when I pay full price for a game, I expect you to support it thoroughly. This is why I would wait to buy Valve games on the console, I know Valve not making games on the Playstation has more to do with their lack of Playstation programmers and not their "bias", which is why I would be fine with Left 4 Dead on the PC instead of a bad port to the Playstation.
The virtual store has opened up new possibilities, more and more I see new smaller game developers popping up, creating small and innovative games. I would like to see the bigger developers take this to the next level, these smaller games can be used as a big marketing push for the larger games. I wouldn't have even thought of buying Street Fighter 4 had I not played Street Fighter 2 HD, and being a "born again" Street Fighter player, I would gladly buy The Collectors Edition and the Tournament Sticks if I had the money. Its not just Street Fighter, games like Bionic Commando Rearmed encourages me to stay hyped for the new Bionic Commando and Mega Man 9 gives me a chance to play the old games I never got to play.
Just give me a good game, make sure its the actual "full" game, don't just shovel DLC on my face just so I wont sell my copy to Gamestop. Otherwise I wont buy your game, I'll just Gamefly it, its as simple as that.
Podcast You MUST listen to this week -- The Bugle Episode 63 You MUST listen to it, otherwise you're a wanker.
Its the new hotness, the new "Special Feature" listed on the back of the box, its Co-operative Multiplayer. Granted the "Co-op" feature is as old as the 8 Bit games, and like Mega Man they have suddenly become relevant in this generation. But does the inclusion of Co-op make the game more fun to play? How many games can actually pull it off? and should we be criticizing games for not having Co-op?
Now I have not had a lot of time with Co-op games. The first Co-op game I played was Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles in a pirated console that had no name (and came with 50 inbuilt NES games). I remember that game was fun, actually it was way more fun to play a level with my friend rather than play against him. I have not played the Gears of War games thoroughly, so I cannot comment on whether they are good or not. I have been playing Call of Duty World at War, and I did try out the Resident Evil 5 demo, and I am more than happy to go on and on about them.
Lets try the RE 5 first, since my PS3 hates me, it took me a LONG time to connect with another person online -I kept getting disconnected-. While I am not a fan of the control scheme, it was nice to be able to depend on another person, actually I was fiddling with the controls while he was taking care of the zombie/infected. Now this is a game that would probably be more fun to play with another person, relying on another person while Mr. Big Axe Man swings his big manly man-axe at my head.
Now Call of Duty World at War, on of their "biggest improvement" from the previous Call of Duty game was the addition of Multiplayer -because the story sure wasn't "gritty" or "mature"-. Finally we could play with our friends if we were getting "pwnd" online, we could finish the entire game and experience it as a group. Problem was, they didn't put their money where there mouth was. Ill be honest for a second, I rented "WaW" to practice for Killzone 2 and rack up the trophies, I believe many other people out there like getting those trophies. Imagine my surprise when I saw that the majority of the trophies cannot be accessed in Co-op mode. So even if I finish the entire game with my friends, I "technically" did not finish the game. Why would I spend all those hours playing the story mode? Definitely not for the story, competitive Multiplayer (meaning Deathmatch and Team Deathmatch) is a lot more involving and a lot more fun, and I only get one lousy trophy for going through all the trouble of finding four other people who wont disconnect in the middle of the game.
Now lets imagine for a moment that you are not a trophy whore, is Co-op any more enjoyable for you? It doesn't give you simple option playing through the story mode one mission after another, its just mishmashed and throws you one random level after another. The Co-op experience isn't just four of my friends playing as a squad, its four of us playing as Private Miller or Dmitri, so while I am shooting Nazis and planting bombs, my compatriots trigger the next portion of the "in-game" cutscene which instantly teleports me to wherever I needed to go -this is a problem that a certain Gears of War developer warned about when he was explaining his reason to keep Co-op between two players-.
I believe Co-op is difficult to pull off, you can be unique and create a whole 'nother Co-op experience like Resistance 2, but if people wanted originality, we wouldn't have had World at War in the first place. Now reviewers are complaining that Killzone 2 doesn't have Co-op, which makes me happier than ever. But the exclusion of something -which does not break the game in any way- shouldn't be criticized. Should we then start criticizing video games for not having features we want to see? Is there a checklist somewhere that says that an FPS or a Third Person Action Adventure game MUST have Co-op?
Give me a decent single player game, that is all I ask. I will gladly spend $60 on a great Single Player experience, specially if the Story and the Gameplay is good. Either build your game around Co-op, don't just include it in the game so you can list it in bullet points on the back of the box. There are so many things that can go wrong with Co-op -internet connection is on the top of my list-, and I have been reading about a rumor that God of War III is going to have Co-op, which terrifies me. If you have a good story, keep it in single player because the minute you give others the option to play with me, I don't feel as immersed in the game, instead I talk to them about random things like PSN logging me off on purpose.
P.S. I haven't played Left 4 Dead, but I know enough to never criticize Valve, those guys will hunt you down and kill you.
Also, just as I finished this, my newly downloaded Rebel FM (Episode 5) started talking about Co-op. So any similarities means they stole it from me :)
Gears of War 2 was recently patched, and being a fan of the first Gears of War game -even though I played very little of it- I was surprised to find that Gears of War 2 had a lot of bugs and glitches. Now bugs and glitches are common in a game, some are minor annoyances while others make playing the game a chore. Being a famous developer and creator of Video Game Engines, I expect better from Epic, actually I expect a LOT from Epic. Developers like Epic Games and Bungie has set the standards in the past, with their unique style of Gameplay or their solid Multiplayer modes. So as a gamer, it is heartbreaking to find that the final product they shipped needed a lot of patches. I am sure that Epic didn't slack off, I know that they worked hard on this game -I cant understand why they didn't have a beta- and I'm sure that in the end, it hurts them more than it hurts me.
While I may sound like I'm bashing Xbox 360 games, I assure you I am not. I criticize because I care, I have high expectations from these developers, -having only a Playstation 3 at the moment- when I hear about a new shooter-action game announced for the Playstation 3, I hope and pray that they can reach the amount of polish and the level that Epic, Bungie and Infinity Ward has set in the industry. This does raise some interesting questions, we know that the list of bugs on Gears of War 2 is long, then how is it that all the reviewers missed them, and how can a game with so many glitches get near perfect scores from gaming web sites. It is statistically impossible for all of them to have missed these bugs and glitches, I hear many reviewers and critics say how they have "journalistic integrity" and only review the final build of a game, the final build that the customer themselves buy from the store, where was their journalistic integrity when people were waiting 20 minutes to connect to a game?
Now lets pretend that the 85 Video Game reviewers listed on Metacritic missed all the glitches, perhaps they were not paying attention, what do they do when they find out that a game has bugs after it is released? What is their responsibility as video game journalists -that many claim to be-, should they review the entire game again, or do they just add or subtract the scores based on the bugs and glitches? What about the responsibilities of the gamers? What should they do when they find out about these things? Now I don't check the Xbox forums, so I don't know what was going inside there, but in other forums I was surprised to find that people were apathetic to this whole thing, when they found out about the matchmaking problems, they just played Horde Mode and didn't bother with the other Multiplayer modes. I think as gamers and as consumers, we should bitch about games more. By that I don't mean trolling the forums and flaming posts, I mean bitch to the developers, the people whose job is to give you complete product. Sometimes I see people whining about the smallest things, -like Braid being "overpriced"- and other times, they are apathetic. If you don't criticize the developers for messing up, they wont be bothered to improve or support their products, and I'm not talking about random bitching and whining, give constructive criticism. No game is ever "perfect" or "complete", it is our job to make sure the developers don't get too comfortable with our $60 and continue to support their game, whether its Gears of War 2 or Saints Row 2.
This brings us to the next part of this post, the online services provided by Sony and Microsoft for their respective consoles. Now it is common practice to compare the two services, praising PSN for providing a free service and chastising Microsoft for charging people for playing online with their friends. The problem is, you can't objectively compare the two services, they have different goals and different expectations from their service. Let me make this easier for people to understand, if Xbox Live was a Classy and Expensive Restaurant, then the PSN would be a soup kitchen. Both serve food and both are there to satisfy your hunger, but you cant compare the two without looking like an idiot. Xbox Live is a premium service, meaning it is not for everyone, it is an exclusive club and therefore I expect it to set the industry standards and when you compare it to PSN, you actually bring Xbox Live down to a lower level.
I may sound very bitter, but I have my reasons, a couple of days ago I tried to play Super Street Fighter 2 HD with my friend over PSN. Now this was 4 o clock in the morning -and therefore not during peak hours- and we were in the same country and the same time zone. We tried more than twenty times to create a lobby, every time we would get disconnected from the PSN, I was getting annoyed but I still wanted to play Street Fighter, so we shut off our consoles, waited a few seconds and started the game (without voice chat), after one or two games, we would get kicked from the same lobby we were hosting. This isn't something that only happens to me in Street Fighter Turbo HD, this happens in Call of Duty World at War, Grand Theft Auto 4, and also Socom Confrontation. The only thing that stopped me from throwing the controller at the TV that night was the fact that I was pulling off some stylish moves with Vega on my Dualshock 3 D-pad, a small consolation.
Things like this make me look towards Xbox Live in envy, PSN is in no way perfect, I do hope the service gets better and I would gladly pay to play. The only way I can peacefully sleep at night is by bitching and whining in the Playstation forums.
P.S. If I encounter the same problems in Xbox Live I swear I'm going to fucking kill someone, seriously, more than twenty times I tried to create a lobby, every time getting kicked out by PSN, worst half an hour of my life.
I hope the Gears of War 2 becomes more enjoyable for people, I love the fact that it looks muddy and gritty and has "macho" generic manly men characters, that makes it unique and an enjoyable experience, the same as a summer action blockbuster movie. So enjoy it doubly for me.
I remember a year ago, people all over the forums were screaming death of the Wii. Many said that the Nintendo Wii was a fad, that it was a dust collector and would soon be forgotten. Twelve months have come and gone, so far the hype has not died down, could the prophecies have been wrong?
When I first heard about the Wii, I was very excited. I think in a game, we should focus more on gameplay rather than graphics, and the Wii had wonderfully innovative way of playing games. I put my faith on them, even when I found out that Red Steel was not the revolution that I had hoped it would be, and even thought Twilight Princess was a good game, it tacked on unnecessary motion controls. While Wii Sports was a nice preview for how motion controls could be used, eventually every single game started implementing random waggling instead of implementing proper motion controls.
I don't try to understand why people like the Wii, but I have always believed that most consumers are idiots. How else can we explain Paris Hilton becoming a celebrity and Carnival Games selling more than 1 million copies on the Wii. I certainly can't blame Nintendo for going after the casual gaming market, no one even thought there was a casual gaming market untill a couple of years ago. If they had simply made another generic upgrade of the Gamecube, not as many people would have bought it, hardcore gamers will go for the Xbox and the Playstation because they find the familiar games there, whereas Mario and Zelda are perceived as childish games.
Moments like this -when Wii music sells more copies in a month than LittleBigPlanet- questions my faith on humanity. Nintendo wont come up with better games than their age old franchises because that is what sells, because people are perfectly happy with their sub-par mini game collections, just like people are perfectly fine with selling their new games to Gamestop for a quarter of their price and then buying second hand games at twice their market price. I do worry about the fact that if the Wii owners don't demand better games, then the first or the third party developers wont be encouraged to innovate.
However having said all that, I would still buy a Wii. Even though it has only a handful of good games, the backwards compatibility with the Gamecube and the Virtual Console means that I can enjoy the old games I never got to play. So in a way, for newcomers, the Wii is a very good investment. The problem is people don't buy the good games, they don't buy games like No More Heroes. I know a particularly intelligent gamer who buys an Xbox 360 for Halo and will buy Naruto: Clash of Ninja and Lost in Blue for his Wii because he thinks Mario's story of saving the princess is childish.
At the end of the day, things like the Wii motion plus and Madworld gives me hope, hope that people can find new ways to bring us better games. I do hope that the people who are starting to enjoy video games buy an Xbox or a Playstation and that they demand better online services from Nintendo. But then again, I am perfectly happy with my Playstation, and I wont have to worry about the Wii till after I get an Xbox, Im keeping my fingers crossed for a Wii with a hard disk.