And, in keeping with what I mentioned yesterday, one point I never got around to was the PS3's ridiculous fetish with getting users to agree with it.

Koobert got a PS3 back in... oh I don't even know, the fall some time. Since then, we haven't really played it that much because of the lack of fun games for it (though that's sloooowly starting to change....kinda....almost.....not really).

And ever since then, I want to say that "it seems like every time we turn it on it asks us to sign a user agreement." But I can't say that, because it does not "seem" like it, it's the truth!



Every frickin time we so much as look at the thing, we have to sign a user agreement, download something, then wait for it to install, then plug the controller in, then sign another user agreement. Is Sony really that afraid of lawsuits that they have to cover their ass on every single little angle? Is it really worth suing a company if you're offended over a game like Super Rub-A-Dub?



I really can't understand why they went this route. Microsoft and Nintendo are content to let their consumers go crazy and reckless and play Poker Smash or Mario Galaxy without so much as a second thought. So, Sony isn't doing this because it's a trend in the game industry or that there was public outcry for such actions.

Maybe, after their hellish lawsuit with Immersion they just decided they're not going to go through that again in any way. Kind of like how you're extra cautious while using a knife if you previously cut yourself on one while chopping vegetables. While you're going to take extra care not to cut yourself again, it doesn't mean you should stop chopping vegetables altogether.

So, seriously... what's with all the User Agreements?

I'm slowly beginning to feel like I'm just a grumpy S.O.B. but there are a few things in this new console gen that I'm simply not comfortable with.

Take, for instance, the amount of patching and user agreement-agreeing that is being done on console games these days.



I'm definitely not against the ability to patch a game on a console. I think it's great and am thankful developers are able to give us new content this way, as well as fix missteps they made during the game's creation.

But that's also partly my point. Guitar Hero 3 for instance (on the 360, at least) shipped without a multiplayer quickplay option! Granted, they uploaded a patch for day one so people were able to quickly and immediately update their game in order to play locally with their friends.

That's all well and good for those of us with an internet connection that reaches the Xbox. Keep in mind however that there are also millions of Xbox (and PS3 and Wii) owners that do not have their consoles online for varying circumstances. These people must now have a single-player experience with their Guitar Hero game (I realize there's co-op career mode, but that's quite limited compared to multiplayer quickplay options).

This is interesting to me because Microsoft is so intent to not leave their people without a hard drive behind, even going so far as to somewhat cripple games to make sure they will work with core systems (Mass Effect elevators I'm looking at you... as you travel ever so slowly between floors). So why, then, is Microsoft totally fine with leaving those without an internet'd console high and dry?

It just seems to me that this fixation on online connectivity at this point in time is a mite shortsighted. Sure there are millions of people online, but think about the millions of others that you are denying.

So what do we do? Developers are human, and they make mistakes in game-development. Sure, that's fine. However, shouldn't our standards be a bit higher? If a car were to go to market without seatbelts you can bet it wouldn't be sold to anybody. If bottles of Pepsi shipped without caps there wouldn't be too many buyers. It's certainly not out of any company's reach to get their QA team to double, triple, and quadruple-check their product before it goes gold, thereby decreasing the need for ass-covering patches that would otherwise leave a large percentage of your consumers screwed.

As I mentioned earlier though, the ability to patch is a great thing. And there are those certain games where they take player feedback to patch the games in good ways, in order to restore balance to multiplayer mode among other things, for instance.

I haven't heard anybody else discussing these issues so I'm positive that I'm in the minority here, but in my opinion, the industry as a whole could benefit from shifting its focus to include those people who aren't graced with the ability to crawl the internet from their couch.

THIS is exactly what I was talking about in my first 'Disturbing Trends' blog. Seriously, motherfucking SERIOUSLY!!!

Army of Two, a game built around the very fucking idea of co-op play; two soldiers playing through the game together, two, two, fucking TWO PEOPLE, has NO option for local multiplayer. The only way to play as an Army of fucking TWO is online! And if you want to LAN two 360's together to play in the same room, both players still need to have a fucking Gold Xbox live account.

What. The. FUCK?

EDIT: It appears I jumped to conclusions based on what Tycho said on penny-arcade today. However, as confirmed by ProfessorPew, you do indeed need two Live accounts in order to play local split-screen and that is something that I think is just stupid.

I've been a gamer for a long time. I'm in my early-to-mid 20's and have been a 'hardcore' gamer for going on 14 or 15 years now. One thing that's always puzzled me is the inability by my fellow gamers to appreciate the growth of a certain franchise, and instead demand that it be a carbon copy of the previous installment.

It seems like this generally only happens on a massive scale, except I'm guessing people only whine in the millions when huge franchises such as the Final Fantasies and the Halos are being worked on.

Take, for example, Street Fighter IV. It's been 10 years since the last proper Street Fighter game and I'm thrilled they're finally picking it up again. I'm also thrilled about the new art style the game has taken on. The 2D gameplay is staying in tact while they're branching out and making the 3D character models. The characters and backgrounds are colourful and vibrant, which I'm very happy about. And the new style isn't immediately striking as being either Japanese or Western-influenced; instead, it's something new!

Now, I fully comprehend the fear some people have while a new game of their favourite series is being produced, that is, the fear that it will suck. What I don't understand is why do people, the minute they spot a change, go absolutely apeshit and demand that the characters look more anime-inspired and less muscular. Or that they make it in 2D. Or that they reduce the size of the characters' hands and feet.

Then again, I'm not saying it's bad to dislike the new art style. But disliking it simply because it doesn't look like it did before is a bit narrow-minded.

Seriously, there are 20+ years worth of amazing 2-dimensional Street Fighter games to fall back on if this one doesn't work out. Doing the same thing over and over again isn't interesting. There's nothing wrong with growing and exploring new territory.

What I'm trying to say here is that people need to relax and approach the new Street Fighter (and any new series installment, for that matter) with an open mind, and try not to judge it until you've played it. Making crazy demands for sameness perpetuates a stagnant atmosphere that I don't believe is conducive to anything but boredom.

Personally, I'm very much looking forward to playing Street Fighter IV. Capcom has more than proven their worth as a company that's capable of making great fighting games, so I'm content to leave it in their hands to do as they please.

It seems that everything I've seen and read about LittleBigPlanet thus far has only focused on the level/character creation aspect of the game. Granted, this is a very large part of the game... but what about the gameplay?

In all the videos I've seen, the gameplay honestly looks quite sub-par. Any time developers have demonstrated levels, they have difficulty jumping up even small little ledges, often resulting in death somehow. And I have yet to see any enemies in the game (though I seem to recall reading somewhere that the game will in fact contain enemies).

For me, character creation in games (and really, any kind of customization) makes me go nuts! I spend as much time as possible carefully crafting whatever aspect of the game, and it's usually a big selling point with me. However, when there's a level creator it's really tough for me to actually enjoy a level I've created. This is because I know the level - I know all the tricks and I know exactly how to beat it. Since the level was born from my mind, there's essentially zero exploration in it.

This is my problem with LittleBigPlanet. If I create all these wonderful levels, sure it'll be sorta neat running through them afterwards, but I'm not sure that's something I'm going to want to pay money for. Sure, levels that tons of other users create will be available online, but unless there are some really compelling platform levels up for grabs, I'm just not sure how fun the game will actually be once I start playing. Time will tell I suppose.

So on January 1st, I finally got Rock Band. I was ecstatic. Unfortunately, upon opening the massive box, I found out that the guitar controller was broken. It only strummed down, among a few other issues.

Later that night, or early the next morning (on January 2 at 2:00AM) I filed for a new guitar on the Rock Band support website. On January 11th they still hadn't sent me a box to return the guitar in, but emailed saying that Canadian customers weren't required to return the broken peripherals in order to receive new ones.

Finally, today on January 17, I received the new guitar and promptly went home to put it through its paces since I haven't had the chance to use the Fender controller yet (I borrowed my friend's X-plorer so I could still play the guitar portion or Rock Band.)

Unfortunately, the 2nd, new guitar seems to be broken as well... although, not as broken as the other one. I'm afraid if I send this one back, they'll test for a minute or two and not deem it broken.

The strum bar now strums both up and down, but in order for it to register I have to strum really quite hard which is both unnatural and uncomfortable. The Xbox guide button works inconsistently, sometimes needing 6 or 7 pushes before it registers. And the guitar effects menu will randomly pop-up during a song even though I have not touched the guitar effects switch.

If you just plink around with the guitar for a few notes though, it'll seem to work ok and I'm worried they'll deem it working and send it back or something. Has anybody else had this issue? I just want to play Rock Band without issues!