With a price cut, a new Slim model, a 250gb system on the near horizon, and a completely free to use Playstation Network, it's getting hard to nitpick about the PS3. But, if there is one almost completely universal complaint about the Playstation 3, it lies in the Dualshock 3 and its recessed L2 and R2 trigger buttons. And with more and more people experiencing the joys of the slippery, recessed triggers that Sony refuses to change, there are sure to be even more people that are frustrated about their refusal to make them like actual trigger buttons... But I am here to tell you: there is hope! And it isn't in an entirely separate controller, but in two little pieces of plastic known as Real Triggers.



Gioteck Real Triggers for PS3
Company: Gioteck
MSRP: $4.99

At the time of buying my PS3, the trigger attachments were around $10, came with a piece of metal that wrapped around the controller to bulk up the original Sixaxis (the vibrationless controller the system debuted with), and I couldn't imagine spending extra cash just to make my brand new, perfectly functioning Dualshock3 controller a bit easier to hold. And even though I got used to the recessed triggers without much hassle, when I finally got an Xbox 360, the control scheme ended up being a pretty big factor in what version of a game I dropped cash on.

For those who still don't have a PS3 and haven't had much time with one, I'll break it down a bit: the PS2's triggers weren't such a big deal because the Dualshock 2 didn't have it's trigger buttons hanging off into open space like the DS3; instead, its plastic molding went out just beyond them, keeping them at an equal slant as the L1 and R1 buttons and thus keeping them more like buttons than the trigger shaped shoulder buttons on the Xbox. And with the 360, Microsoft took it a step further and made their triggers even more comfortable to use than before, whereas Sony went in the other direction, making them stupider and harder to use. I assumed that the Dualshock3 would change that, since it was already adding vibration, but they didn't fix the problem then. And when I heard about the Slim, I hoped that maybe this would be a good time for them to rectify their stupid mistake... but there has been no sign of relief. So, when I noticed that the RealTriggers were just under $5 and lacked the metal wrap-around, I decided that, for the sake of science, I would go ahead and splurge on something I was pretty sure wouldn't make that big of a difference.



But, I have to admit, they make a huge difference. Not only is it easier to press the triggers in, but it takes less effort and there is no slipping at all. The plastic molding has the exact same feel as the original triggers and the shoulder buttons, so it doesn't feel foreign at all, and if it weren't for a slight overhang on the sides of the trigger, these would almost be completely unnoticeable to someone who wasn't looking for them. Within my first weekend of using them (to beat Arkham Asylum), I had already gone back to buy a second set of them for my extra controller.

The installation is insanely simple. You just open the box, take them out of the plastic baggy they're in, hold onto the trigger, and snap them down over them... and that's it. If you ever need to take them off, you just hold the trigger's at their base, and pull the attachments back off. It doesn't seem to damage the controller in the least, it doesn't harm the RealTriggers, and you can always snap them back on in a jiffy.



Some of you might be wondering why you should pay $5 for a fix that Sony should have admitted with the original Sixaxis and corrected with the DS3... and you are right to question that. This problem should have been fixed a long time ago, but Sony is too stubborn to admit it's mistake and so it is the consumer who loses an extra Lincoln, not them. And for those of you who have opted for third party controllers, I'm sure you're happy with them... but, since you probably still have that controller that came with your system, it might be worth the $5 to make it a little more friendly on the hands of friends or whoever might be using it. After all, the Sony controllers not only use bluetooth (rather than some that opt for a usb dongle), but the battery is rechargeable via any USB port, they're light as could be, everyone has at least the one that came with the system, and the familiarity of the dualshock in the hands at least takes me back to my first romps with the PSone at a friends house in the mid-90s.

If you're curious if these Trigger attachments really are that simple, work that well, or just like getting other opinions from the community, you can check out the other awesome cblogs written by Corak and Xiofire about these very same attachments. And although I don't really like pitching unneeded attachments to friends and fellow gamers, I really mean it when I say: these were worth the money.

The first XBLA Summer of Arcade wasn't just hot, it was on fire. With titles like Geometry Wars: Retro Evolved 2, Braid, Bionic Commando Rearmed, Galaga Legions, and Castle Crashers, I really couldn't imagine it getting much better. In fact, at the time of the first Summer of Arcade, I didn't even have a 360. Sure, I was able to get BC: Rearmed on the PSN, but the others, and the rest of the exclusives to the XBLA, are what got me interested in the system more than anything else.



And since I got a 360 later that year, and have picked up a pretty good amount of XBLA titles (all of which I've enjoyed), I was looking forward to another powerhouse lineup for this years Summer of Arcade for me to blow my money on. But when they released the list, the only title I really found myself excited about was TMNT: Turtles In Time Reshelled... and that was more due to my memories of playing that game at elementary school skate nights while ignoring the girls and wasting whatever money I could get out of my parents. (Which actually sounds quite a bit like high school... and even college... minus the skating. Unless you count one incident where I bought rollerblades and went to all my classes in them until I snapped a wheel off trying to jump a bench.)

When I found out that 'Splosion Man was from Twisted Pixel (who did The Maw, which is one of the best 3D platformers I've played since the N64/PSone), I bought it on release day and have been very glad that I did. But I've never been great at fighting games, in fact I think the appropriate phrasing would be: I completely suck at fighting games. I still haven't read up on Shadow Complex, outside of what I saw from E3, and that didn't really impress me. And aside from Burnout Paradise, I've never gotten into racing games, despite numerous tries; and I've never messed with the Trials flash games, so why get an HD version you have to pay for? So I figured I would just hope for something better from next years Summer of Arcade, and just buy the two titles I had any sort of interest in.



But, seeing the overwhelmingly positive review/response to Trials HD on Dtoid, I decided I'd give it a try... and I'm stoked that I did. It's not a racing game at all! It's a fast paced platformer with a level editor and customizable bikes/riders. Honestly, after some time with the game, it feels like something that honestly belongs as a part of Sony's "Play, Create, Share" initiative/genre. Like LBP, the levels are fun, fairly short, and creative. Like what I imagine ModNation Racers will be from demos and videos, its fast paced and easy to control. And like both of them, it has a level editor and a marketplace of sorts to download new ones from other users and hopefully more from the developers as well.

One of the things which I love about platformers is how frustrating they can be, but how addictive they still are... and when done well, there is a certain level of frustration and repitition needed to complete a level, challenge, or world. In most genres, however, that same "frustration motivation" seems to be higher and much more explosive within me... so, I often find myself putting down the remote so I don't put it through my TV, instead. Trials HD manages to walk that fine line of being challenging to the level of anger, yet still fun to play, like a rockstar. Even though it's frustrating, it's still fun to watch the crash. And even when you get stuck, you can easily jump to the last checkpoint or to the levels beginning... no pause menu or navigation required. Hell, with the controls being as simple as they are, you quickly find out you can pull some pretty sweet stunts with ease; and when you mess up a huge landing, it's almost worth starting the level over just to see the crash and get a sick laugh.

It's honestly a ton of fun, and once you hit the medium and hard levels, it goes from pure fun to extreme frustration... until you get the controls down with the new bikes, then it's back to fun again. That learning curve is something that steadily increases, making earlier levels easier, yet still fun to play with new bikes (each one needing a different strategy and control style per level). I've had it for a week now, and, although I haven't played it as much as I would like, I've had a great time with it.



If you're on a budget and don't want to spend $70 to get all the Summer of Arcade titles, just to get $10 back sometime this fall, I'd recommend Trials HD above all the others I've played so far. And, in case you decide to be a big spender, my second place award would probably go to 'Splosion Man.

As a kid, there was one NES game that I completely sucked at but loved to play nonetheless: Bionic Commando. Sure, I had most of the other classic NES games (Mario 1-3, Zelda, Rad Racer, Duck Hunt, Contra), but the controls for Bionic Commando were just so fun to play with, that even though I couldn't make it past the first few levels, I always enjoyed what I could do. And up until this recent generation of consoles, I used to bust out the NES while at home over the holidays and play some of those classics from my childhood. So, when I heard about Rearmed and the 3D sequel, I got pretty amped up. Just knowing that for just a few bucks I would be getting HD graphics, retooled music/levels, challenge rooms, twoplayer co-op, and a chance to actually save my progress excited the hell out of me, because with as many hours as I have put into the NES version of the game, I still haven't beaten it. Since I didn't have a 360 at the time, I got it for the PS3 and didn't think twice about the lack of trophies since they were so new to the system. I bought it the day it was released (after checking the PS Store about 20 times throughout the afternoon for their update), played through it to completion once or twice in the days that followed, and didn't really think about replaying the whole thing again until I heard trophy support had just been added. But, with that patch came some side-effects which some might say ruin the retro experience... they made the game easier.



But is that really a mixed bag? Does it make PS3 owners girlymen? I don't think so. I beat the game on medium without much effort last summer, completed all the challenge rooms (getting at least 3 stars on them all), and had replayed most if not all of it on Hard just for the hell of it. So the decision to delete or move my data off the PS3 was one I wasn't looking forward to; but knowing that I'd have unlimited lives on the medium playthrough reassured me that it wouldn't be a hellacious journey through frustration, bouts of anger, and a sickening self-loathing. Of course, this does mean that there will be many players who either didn't beat it because it was too hard (which I can't imagine, because Easy was insanely simple) or haven't bought it until after the update... and that is sort of a shame, but playing it on the hard difficulty really brings the "retro challenge" to the plate in the same sense that MegaMan 9 did, so it's still there for those who want it.

This did bring to light an issue over what we expect from a retro title, however. Should it really have to recapture all of that anger and frustration, where, you can't play the game for more than a few minutes before wanting to break your controller, TV, or someone's arm/face/body? Is there something essentially wrong with updating a classic title and making it so more people can not only stand a chance at finishing it, but enjoy the experience as well? MegaMan 9 caught a lot of flack from some gamers for being harder than the original 8-bit MegaMan games, yet won over a lot of other gamers who were trained on that repeat and slowly learn the level/movements sort of gaming. The original release of Rearmed was the same way (but with difficulty levels so you could crank up/down the difficulty if needed).



So, does this patch really take away the Bionic Commando experience just because you don't have to constantly watch how many lives you have left or restart a level when they're gone? You still die as often as you would have before the update; and that is frustrating in and of itself. The enemies seem to be just as hard/medium/easy as they were before. Challenge room difficulties are exactly the same. And except for limiting the effect of hitting a wall while swinging (on the lower two difficulties), the game feels pretty much the same. All the patch really did was save us from breaking a Dualshock3 by eliminating the need to restart the level after you run out of lives; which is probably a good thing, because I still haven't finished MegaMan 9 thanks to an uncontrollable rage that about gave me a brain aneurysm last time I played it.

As much as I love the new "retro" games, I'd much rather finish a game on a slightly easier setting than leave it unfinished forever because it's too damn frustrating. Maybe that's my completionist/perfectionist nature showing through, or maybe its because I just have a limited attention span and lack of patience. Hell, maybe its just the fact that I'd much rather play something that I enjoy as opposed to something that irritates me to a peak of insatiable rage. Does that mean I'm not a retro gamer, even though I play and enjoy retro games? Hell, I dunno... maybe it does.

E3 was pretty amazing this year (at least in comparison to the last few). Nintendo did much better than their flop of a show in 2008; mostly thanks to Mario steppin' up to the plate in three different titles, the MotionPlus thingy that is supposed to fix all the shittiness of the Wiimotes, and Team Ninja's Metroid project. Sony had a strong showing with probably the most badass lineup of exclusive titles, a sexy new version of the PSP, some PSN love, and more "proof" that the PS3 is really just getting some steam built up before it takes off (as the other systems age and can't keep up). And Microsoft did well, as usual, by pushing LIVE even further into our real lives (with facebook and twitter on the 360, why do I need a PC anymore?), revealing some cool games, and by announcing a MGS title for it's console (even though it's not a Kojima led effort, they'll take whatever they can get). But the biggest news, which most gamers saw coming since 2006, was all about the motion control tech which Sony and Microsoft showed off.



I was fairly impressed with both, but, as one of the hardcore gamers, Sony's solution to the Wii's inaccuracy and general lack of realism seems much more impressive than Microsoft's full body, controller-less technology. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm all for innovation, revolutions even, but what I'm not really down with rehashing old ideas using newer/better technology and blatantly ignoring how badly it has failed in the past... which is exactly what Microsoft did with Natal. They took a few different technologies which we've seen before, threw them together in tech demo form for their console, and showed it off to create some hype and "win" this years E3.

Does no one remember that shitty game Totemball that used the 360's camera? It was/is a free title on XBLA, and what you basically do is control a ball with your hands. While rolling around, the ball picks up new pieces of a totem thing that are balanced on top of the ball as you also try to complete little puzzles and get through different levels. In other words, it was a shitty rip off of Katamari Damacy that used these fancy new controls Microsoft was hoping would be "revolutionary" enough to appease the hoards of people wanting to get in on the Wii fad. The only reason I played it as long as I did was for a few achievements when I first got my 360, and since then, it hasn't been touched. Considering that most people I've talked to about it either don't remember it, have never heard of it, or hated it, I'd say that it failed pretty miserably. And furthermore, since no one else followed in their footsteps, I think Microsoft (and just about everyone else) agrees that it was a failed effort.



If that isn't a good enough reason to question this new technology, how about those 3D, virtual reality games that amusement parks have. You get in there, box/fight for a while, and leave after a few minutes feeling stupid, sore, and unfulfilled. The problem with motionless tech is this: we want to touch something. Whether it is a controller acting as a skateboard, tennis racket, or golf club, it's nice to have something real there to help us out. And who doesn't get a sort of sick satisfaction from the feedback of a body, drum, or punching bag as our hands slam into something. And aren't the arcade games where you get to hold the real looking guns way cooler to play than the ones with joysticks and buttons? So, from whence did the idea of controllerless technology come from and who ever made it seem like an appealing idea?

To expand on their demo, and question the next faucet of it... who has ever had a great, satisfying experience with those speech and facial recognition programs? I've got them on my laptop, and every time I try to use one or the other to log in, type, or do pretty much anything, I have to try several times to do anything with them. You either can't get the right light, cut down on enough background noise, or get your facial expression or voice inflection just right for it to work like it's supposed to. So, if it won't work on my new gaming laptop, which is more powerful than the 360, how well will it translate to the living room experience? Sure, it won't be moving around, so hopefully the lighting differences and background noise won't vary too terribly much. But if it is the non-gamer audience that they are targeting, after just a few frustrating run-ins with Natal, they will give up. They don't have the patience to stick with it, they don't have a reason to keep trying if it's frustrating, and they won't try again after each firmware update.

And what about the hardcore gamers? You know, the people that this gaming market has been built upon and who buy all the new games, gadgets, and updates as they come out (often at full price, and sometimes through insanely long lines and frustrating setup times). We're the ones who have figured out a way to bowl from the comfort of our favorite recliner, golf while slouched in bed, and play tennis while hunched over in a computer chair. Does Microsoft think that their controllerless technology will inspire us to stand up and move around the living room to play "football?" Or skate on a non-existent skateboard? Or smack balls into a wall with our body? Sure, it's fun to show off on Late Night TV and get people excited about buying and playing with it... but do we really want our game company's focused on who can create the next dusty Monopoly game that sits in a closet until enough of our bored friends come over wanting to kill time?



I don't know... maybe I'm just a skeptical asshole, but watching Jimmy Fallon and the demo team suck at the games on live TV just didn't inspire me to want to drop however much money it will cost so I can wave my hands around to use the menu, talk to my Xbox to turn it on or off, or use my body to make my players move. As far as I'm concerned, being able to do all that while relaxing from the comfort of my couch and only moving my thumbs and a few fingers is a much bigger accomplishment. Hell, even a revolution... Especially if I could just use a DualShock3 to get the rest of my work done for the night.

A recent Penny Arcade sent me spiraling into a state of reminiscence before I had even finished the strip or read the associated blogs. I'm pretty sure I don't miss the diehard dedication and elitism of those days, but the sense of nostalgia stemming from those heated issues brings back some priceless memories.

Although I wasn't drafted in the great war between Sega and Nintendo in the early 90's, due to my parents refusal to buy a Super Nintendo (I had the NES already, and they couldn't tell the difference), I was a fairly active part of the Nintendo and Sony conflict of the mid to late 90's. My brother and I received an N64 for Christmas the year it was released and, because of our age, it would have taken us far too long to save up for a Playstation, Saturn/Genesis, or anything else. And even if we had, it would mean that we wouldn't have more than a handful of games for any of the systems. Since we'd grown up with Nintendo's classic first-party games, that was just unimaginable; we had to have each of the big first-party releases. So, we stuck to our guns and backed Nintendo.

In those days, we only had a dial-up internet connection, and without the resources online to filter and review games as they were released, all we had to judge what was worth dropping our precious coins on was Nintendo Power, a few cheat code sites (which would occasionally post reviews/scores), and our group of Nintendo loving friends. I've always assumed that these console wars were fueled by a lack of information more than anything else. Sure, everyone feels a sense of dedication to whatever system you have spent the money on, but it doesn't escalate today like it did then. We still have diehard fanboys/fangirls of the current systems who flame each other, post stupid blogs, and piss off their fellow forum members on a regular basis, but it is nowhere near as heated as it was with the Sega, Nintendo, or Sony conflicts.


I can think of three fistfights I got in as a kid based solely on gaming. The first were the result of a quip I made regarding a friends Genesis and how I'd rather play outside than play any more Sonic. It escalated quickly from there, and pretty soon we had fought, I had to walk home alone, and we didn't talk for quite a while. The second was due to a round of GoldenEye at a friends house across the street. We only had a few kids our age that lived nearby, and their parents bought them anything they wanted. The younger brother of one of the guys we liked hanging out with kept coming in last and I was probably being a smartass. He accused me of somehow cheating, I said something aparantly offensive enough to force him to grab a nearby hockey stick, which he started swinging at me. I somehow got it out of his hands and beat him senseless with the stupid thing... and wasn't allowed back at their house ever again. I'm pretty sure we never spoke again either, even though he lived across the street and went to the same schools as me. Anyway, the last one was due to accidentally pulling a friends PSone off the shelf. I tripped on the controller cord, the system fell, it scratched up his game, he got pissed off, I said something about a cartridge not being scratchable, and we had it out.

You rarely hear about kids fist-fighting because of an argument over the Wii, PS3, or 360. Hell, most arguments about them are even brief, childish, and halfhearted. Maybe it's because most of the games are multiplatform so they can pull in the biggest profit, thereby killing console loyalty. Maybe the wars can't sustain themselves with three major players on the field. Maybe it's because today's youth are a bunch of pansy's who care too much about the environment and humanitarianism than proving a point. Maybe parents are just way more overprotective or we're old enough that we just don't hear about these instances. Maybe it's because the marketing focuses on what their own console does best, rather than what the others do worse. Or maybe it's just because information is so easily accessible that we can throw together charts, informed blogs, and statistical evidence for which system and games get the best sales, reviews, and hype, thus quelling the anger before a conflict can break out.

Although each could obviously contribute to the lack of a diehard console war in this generation, I think that the multiplatform dedication from third-party developers and the insane amount of access to gaming information hold the most weight. Both make a lot of sense and there's nothing like facts to diffuse a loyalists (or fundamentalists) argument. Then again, maybe the war hasn't really died down, but merely changed its face, way of fighting, and its overall focus. If that's the case, the only logical place for it to be currently waging war is in the realm of casual gaming (rather than the core, where the battles have previously been waged). It is, after all, the casual arena where one group (Nintendo) holds the high ground, while the competition (Sony, Microsoft, etc), fight for what appears to be a lost cause.

In the past, whoever "lost" the fight either dropped out of the next generation, quit in the middle of the current generation, or would go on to make some pretty radical changes to their next console. If the same applies to the fight for the casual audience, maybe this version of the "console war" is just as important to the core-gamers than any of the other consoles war ever were.

The idea behind motion controlled games is a pretty cool one... in theory. Slash to use a sword. Point to use a gun. Turn a wheel to drive a car. But after 3 years of the Wii's motion controlled games, and the PS3s motion enhanced Sixaxis controls, it is hard to find an instance where most of us wouldn't just prefer to have a regular controller without any sort of real, physical movement necessary.

There are a lot of places where blame can be placed when it comes to answering the question of why motion controls are so popular yet have such a negative connotation from gamers. Is it a problem with us as gamers? It could be a problem with how we like to play... my slouched sitting style doesn't exactly make most Wii games easy to use. The TV is also at an awkward angle from where my recliner is at in my room, and the bed is further away from the screen. So I can either stand or sit in a chair in the middle of my room. Neither are as comfy or as appealing as a bed or recliner. And how many gamers really get into games like the people in commercials? I've played a lot of Wii party games with friends, and we've never been as excited as them. Not even drunk. So maybe part of the problem is with us as gamers...

But could it also be a problem with the control system itself? The fairly obvious answer is "duh!" Even Nintendo is looking to answer that problem with the Motion Plus attachment, meant to give a more 1:1 control than whatever the hell the Wii currently can give us. It's an attempt to better the technology, but after 3 years of games that the Motion Plus can't fix/help at all, and with maybe another 3 years left on the market, it might be too little, too late. Even more discouraging is that early feedback from EA has said that they had to limit the technology because it was responding to movements they didn't want or intend to be commands. This makes me wonder if the Wiimote isn't inherently flawed technology. Microsoft and Sony are supposedly looking at using their camera technology with new controllers to do a more accurate motion control system which would track full body movements. These technologies are a backwards form of the Wiimote, so they should be better at tracking motions which the Wiimote has sucked at. But from the looks of things, most gamers don't really care anymore.

Maybe part of the problem lies with the developers/games themselves. Most people would say they at least played a big part in the lackluster motion controls we know and have come to groan at. Jumping in deBlob was just stupid. Eventually, after hours of popping the Wiimote up in the air for a jump, I finally quit playing cause it wouldn't let me remap the jump to an actual button. How about the stupid wheel for racing games!? They absolutely suck. I tried to use the Wii-Wheel for Mario Kart Wii but I can always beat my times by just using the regular controls, so why go through the frustration and humiliation of turning a wheel that isn't connected to jackshit? And sure, there are games that just plain use the controls badly... but when even first-party games seem like a gimmick rather than a good use of the technology, and their controls are the best out there, I think we need to take a step back and look at whether this is a "revolution" we really want to be a part of.

And maybe that's just what is happening within the gaming community. Wii sales have dropped pretty dramatically this year, their library of games can't sell as well as those on the "next-gen" (HD capable) systems, and the Wii's tie-ratio seems to be slowing down, whereas the other systems keep climbing. So what does this mean for Nintendo's revolution? From the looks of the market, it means that the Wii fad has saturated the market with plenty of systems in peoples homes, but that they aren't picking up the games that are put out there for it.

Part of that problem, though, could just be with the sort of games which the Wii is aimed at actually getting out on the market. Of the top 20 Wii games on metacritic, six of them are Nintendo titles (mario, ssbb, metroid, tetris), four of them are music games (guitar hero, rockband), one that is arguably better on PC (world of goo), and two of them are games originally made for the last gen's systems (okami, re4). That leaves 7 games that aren't Nintendo titles, casual games on other systems, or haven't been ported to the Wii. Not very impressive... especially when you compare those games sales to the others on the top 20.

But that isn't stopping the competition from trying to pick up the casual market which the Wii has managed to capture, and which its games has seemingly fumbled. Microsoft is putting Lips up against Sony's legacy of Singstar games (which, along with Guitar Hero, could have arguably sparked this latest casual fad in gaming). You're In The Movies! is an attempt to create a party game around the camera rather than a controller. Trivia games like Buzz for Sony and Scene It! for Microsoft have used simpler controllers as a way of getting non-gamers to play. A lot of the artsy games for the PS3 take advantage of the camera, Sixaxis controls, or both. And even the huge FPS title Killzone 2 jumped on the Sixaxis bandwagon for some of their games controls.

I guess the real question is what consumers plan on spending their money on this year. E3 will most likely have Sony and Microsoft debuting new, motion controlled, casually aimed titles and hardware. Nintendo will continue down that path (and it will probably go over just as well as it did last year). And casual consumers will keep buying a handful of games per year, while the rest of us, whose support keeps the industry alive, have to sort through all the BS just to find a few good games among the overwhelming tidal wave of shovelware.

Wait a second. I have this creepy feeling of deja vu... Could something like this have possibly happened before?! ...nah!