Games

As our own Ben Richardson once put it, the function of video games at their heart, more often than not, is to make players feel bad-ass. I have to say that I very much agree with that assessment, but while most games give you some manner of bad-assery, other games take things over the top to a degree that borders on godlike.

Prototype 2 is heading for consoles next week and PC this summer, and from what we’ve seen of the game so far, its sole purpose for existing is to convey unto players as much bad-assery as possible in a digital medium. But it won’t be out until next week — which means you’re going to need to curb your desire for curb-stompage and phenomenal powers in some other way. We’ve got a list of games that can sate your hunger for punching guys so hard, their faces explode. Check them out below, in no particular order.

Prototype

It seems only right that we start with Prototype, since it’s getting a sequel on Tuesday that has gone out of its way to make it possible to turn enemies into bombs that suck up everything around them and then explode. The first Prototype was concerned greatly with turning players into powerful weapons of destruction as well. As Alex Mercer, players had the ability to thrash people in a number of very imaginative ways, and they got to shapeshift themselves like Clayface to do it. Sure, kung-fu is cool. Gun fights are fun. But turning your arm into a blade and disemboweling a guy who one second earlier thought you were his co-worker? That’s kind of a different level.

Batman: Arkham City

One of the big selling points of Batman: Arkham City when it was being marketed last year was its ability to throw tons of bad guys at Batman at once, giving him both the tools to beat the snot out of them and the ability to get pummeled by them en masse. The fighting was further deepened by making timing a lot more important to making sure Batman blasts people to within an inch of their lives, and giving Batman the ability to set and detonate explosive gel in between breaking noses. Awesome.

Breaking up the wailing on dudes portion of the game were the many sequences of flying, crashing into people while flying, solving mysteries and thrashing just about every Batman nemesis ever. That’s quite a bit of bad-assery. Also, you’re Batman, which pretty much tops out the bad-ass scale.




Source: Gaming Today

{ 0 comments }

China has an estimated 180 million gamers, and most of them spend money on online games every month, according to a new study from analyst group Niko Partners.

In its 2012 Chinese Gamers Report, Niko found that 64 percent of the 500 gamers it polled said they spend money on games each month — many of which are free-to-play titles. The group notes that this percentage is far higher than what it’s seen in other developing countries.

Last May, Niko said the Chinese online games industry was experiencing “explosive growth,” and forecasted that 2011′s total revenues for the market would grow to $ 5.8 billion from $ 4.8 billion in the previous year.

In its latest report, Niko says the ratio of hardcore gamers (those who play more than 22 hours every week) is falling, as the share of gamers playing fewer hours per week is rising. It also notes that the ratio of gamers aged over 40 is growing every year, too, now making up 10 percent of its survey sample.

“In examining the rapidly evolving Chinese games market, we see that casual, social, and mobile games have all captured the hearts of hardcore and occasional gamers alike,” explains Niko Partners managing partner Lisa Cosmas Hanson.

She adds, “Online games revenues are now more distributed among various platforms and genres than they have been in past years, when MMORPGs compiled the vast majority of domestic revenue.”

Source: Gamasutra

Source: Games Industry Blog

{ 0 comments }

Why Video Games Don’t Need a Savior

by Salat on April 17, 2012 · 0 comments

 

Taylor Clark doesn’t waste any time. Profiling iconoclastic game designer Jonathan Blow for the prestigious magazine The Atlantic, the author plants his flag right underneath the title: “Never mind that they’re now among the most lucrative forms of entertainment in America, video games are juvenile, silly, and intellectually lazy.”

Later in the article, Clark delivers another angry critique, which is amusing, and worth quoting in full:

“…video games, with very few exceptions, are dumb. And they’re not just dumb in the gleeful, winking way that a big Hollywood movie is dumb; they’re dumb in the puerile, excruciatingly serious way that a grown man in latex elf ears reciting an epic poem about Gandalf is dumb. Aside from a handful of truly smart games, tentpole titles like The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and Call of Duty: Black Ops tend to be so silly and so poorly written that they make Michael Bay movies look like the Godfather series. In games, brick-shaped men yell catchphrases like “Suck pavement!” and wield giant rifles that double as chain saws, while back-breakingly buxom women rush into combat wearing outfits that would make a Victoria’s Secret photographer blush. In games, nuance and character development simply do not exist. In games, any predicament or line of dialogue that would make the average ADHD-afflicted high-school sophomore scratch his head gets expunged and then, ideally, replaced with a cinematic clip of something large exploding.”

Clark is hardly the first gamer to be frustrated by these excesses, though he may be first to express his frustration in the pages of one of America’s most respected periodicals. Unfortunately, by doing so, he falls into a common rhetorical trap: Why should “video games,” as a whole, be defined by the medium’s bloviating blockbusters? Transformers: Dark of the Moon is the fourth-highest grossing film of all time. Does its wild popularity mean that cinema is “dumb?” Of course not. Nor does Justin Beiber’s runaway success represent a crisis in the future of music. People like all sorts of turgid crap, designed to titillate the lowest common denominator — they always have, and always will.

The author might be forgiven if he didn’t compound his error later in article by making this stunning, bad-faith argument: “It’s tough to demand respect for a creative medium when you have to struggle to name anything it has produced in the past 30 years that could be called artistic or intellectually sophisticated.”

Video games don’t need to “demand respect.” Now a $ 74 billion industry, they are already respected by a swelling demographic tide of the young and not-so-young who grew up playing games and respect them reflexively. Physicist Max Planck, discussing a different subject, explained exactly how this works: “New scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”

I’m not going to waste anyone’s time citing the specific examples that prove Clark spectacularly wrong, though by using the second person (“you have to struggle”), he’s practically inviting me to. In fact, if it came down to it, I am confident that Clark could come up with plenty himself, without much effort. The explanation behind the author’s cynical hyperbole is simple: it makes Jonathan Blow, his subject, seem much more important.

Throughout the article, Clark is determined to portray the Braid designer as a messianic figure, set to transform the “dumb” world of video games with one fell swoop of artistic intentionality: “With The Witness, produced with about $ 2 million of his own money, he [Blow] plans to do nothing less than establish the video game as an art form — a medium capable of producing something far richer and more meaningful than the brain-dead digital toys currently on offer.” It’s a classic bit of “Hooker with a Heart of Gold” thinking: video games are stalking Hollywood Boulevard in thigh-high boots, and Jonathan Blow is Richard Gere, ready to whisk them away in his Tesla Roadster and show the world that despite the rough manners and loose morals, this a woman worth wedding.

Video games are already established as an art form, and have been since their inception. The debate — “are games art?” — is as tiresome as it is endless. Defining the meaning of “art” is a similarly tedious business, but if you doubt the ability of games to depict beauty and truth, or their ability to inspire joy, wonder, and sadness, you’ve obviously never played one. As designer Tim Schafer once facetiously quipped: “There is art inside of games, but the games themselves are not art — this is sort of hard to explain. You see, we wrap the art in a thick layer of non-art that we call gameplay. That hides the art, and neutralizes its ability to connect with people and express emotion – like botox.”

Despite the stunning variety of different games, and their demonstrable power to connect with people and express emotion, writers like Taylor Clark insist on penning exaggerated, self-castigating apologies, as if admitting the lowbrow nature of Gears of War will somehow convince the mainstream intelligentsia to give video games a seat at the table of culture. Forgetting that games are already taken seriously by millions of people, they search for a savior, a visionary who will somehow convince other, more important people to take games seriously. Paradoxically, it is exactly this fundamental insecurity that undermines their stated goals. As long as certain writers continue to apologize for games being games, certain people — readers of The Atlantic, perhaps — will continue to treat them as something that requires an apology.




Source: Gaming Today

{ 0 comments }

It might please those of you annoyed by the constant drumbeat of GAMING IS KILLING OUR KIDS YOU GUYS that not everyone with an audience thinks it’s so. Noted parenting expert Scott Steinberg, best known for penning the Modern Parent’s Guide series, has a new book in the series out – The Modern Parents Guide to Kids and Video Games – and surprise surprise, it largely comes out in favor of the dreaded video games that are supposedly ruining the youth of America.

After a perfunctory acknowledgement that the decline of physical activity in favor of electronic means of entertainment might be cause for concern (we agree!), he says “the truth that audiences seldom hear is that the vast majority of software titles are perfectly safe and fun for families, and capable of impacting them in positive ways.” And rather than trying to scare the hell out of parents, the new book offers them tips on topics like picking the right video games for your kids to play, use of parental controls and video game ratings, setting house rules and limits, and addressing concerns about online safety and virtual violence. Shockingly, this seems to suggest it’s the parents job to determine what’s best for their kid and gradually bring them into adulthood, rather than forcing the rest of us to babyproof the world.

If you’re a parent and this sounds interesting, the book is available for free download.

Via Develop Online




Source: Gaming Today

{ 0 comments }

The games industry in India is expected to see huge growth in 2012, according to MCVUK. The video game industry as whole is expected to grow to $ 359 million in 2012, up 38 percent compared to the previous year. It also expected to grow several times over by 2016 to $ 917 million.

In 2011, consoles gaming accounted for 55 percent of the market, however only made it into two percent of households, compared to 13 percent globally. PC gaming is harder to track due to the high piracy rates, however it is expected to grow from $ 8 million in 2011 to $ 17 million in 2016. Mobile gaming grew by 55 percent in 2011, to $ 86 million and is expected to grow to $ 340 by 2016.

Source: VGChartz

{ 0 comments }

According to a market analyst, Call of Duty’s “thinning tail” has been a key factor in the relatively low game sales we’ve observed of late.

PiperJaffray analyst Michael Olson predicted that Modern Warfare 3 will be the eighth largest selling game in March 2012 — as opposed to Black Ops, which was 4th on a similar time scale — and will sell less than half of what its predecessor pushed a year ago.

Olson said:

“We believe big name titles are no longer able to sustain ‘fat tails.’ This ‘thinning tail’ phenomenon is driven by 1) casual gamers leaving the market, 2) a steeper pre-sale and up-front curve, and 3) cannibalization from the pre-owned market.”

I’m no fancy-pants market analyst — I’m just a denim-pants writer — but don’t you think releasing the same re-branded product year after year after year has something to do with the diminishing sales of a burnt-out franchise? That maybe, just maybe, gamers have become disenchanted with the obvious cash-grab of yearly sequels?

But, hey… What do I know?




Source: Gaming Today

{ 0 comments }

My hometown is a little place in Southeast England called Erith. Erith was immortalized a few years ago in a book, that I unfortunately no longer recall the name of, listing the very worst places in Britain. Erith was a top contender, noted for its prevalence of “white van man” pubs and desolate surroundings. When I was a child, Erith was a dismal place to live, full of struggling small businesses and a town center that resembled a big block of filthy concrete. The following years had not been kind to the place, as those struggling businesses shut down and the concrete block got filthier. I remember a greengrocer’s my mother would regularly visit, and the old man who ran it and would give my brother and I half an apple each. Last time I was in Erith, the building was long-since shut down, the store’s sign faded beyond recognition. The man who ran it likely died a very long time ago.

I’ve not been back to England for a while, but when I return, I feel I shall visit Erith again. Even in spite of attempts to renovate and modernize the place, it’s still always been a derelict wasteland of a town. Like Fallout, but with a McDonalds. Here’s the thing though — I love my hometown. It’s a wretched den of failure and remorse, home to grey streets and faded memories, caught in the limbo between small town and inner city. When I think of Erith, I think of empty roads with nothing to do, soulless housing blocks, and complete degradation. It feels comforting, in a strange way. It feels like home.

I think my experiences growing up in Erith are what led me to appreciate the dismal and the depressing on an artistic level. I love grey weather. I enjoy rain, especially. To me, there’s nothing I find more serene than a rainy day. I’ve often been told by family members that I am “miserable” for enjoying the rain more than the sun, but I wholly disagree. I take great comfort from the rain. It makes me feel as happy as a sunny day would make somebody else. Grey can be engaging. Overcast can be cheerful. Bleak can be beautiful.

This love of the bleak carries over into games. Two of the most beautiful looking games this generation, as far as I’m concerned, are Demon’s Souls and Dark Souls. This pair of From Software games are as grey and miserable looking as anything. Skies are overcast, the environments bear the oppressive hallmarks of ruin and devastation, and nowhere feels like a warm place to settle. From Software can craft worlds that reek of utter despair, drenched in visual echoes of terrible deeds committed in a world that once may have been something better. Such an aesthetic could be considered ugly, but I find it gorgeous. A dreary, depressing world, when presented in the right way, can be thoroughly enchanting.

The idea of the “dark and gritty” game has quite rightfully earned the ire of gamers this generation. There are many games that strive to be “realistic” or “mature” by sticking to drab color schemes of grey and brown. It’s ironic because bright colors are what really stand out in high definition, and you’d think more of the “HD Generation” of videogames would exploit that. Viva Pinata? One of the best looking games on the Xbox 360, without a doubt. Sonic Generations? Utterly sublime, with colors that really pop on an HDTV. So many games, however, went for that “dark and gritty” look, to the point where the top triple-A games of any given holiday season look like a mass of grey porridge. It’s not hard to understand why there’s a rebellion against such titles. However, just because there are so many drab looking games, that doesn’t mean “dark and gritty” doesn’t work. It does, provided you have artists that aren’t using the style cynically, and are fully committed to going all the way with it.

That is the difference between a game like Demon’s Souls and your average triple-A game like Call of Duty or even the relatively drab Grand Theft Auto IV. GTA IV and COD are good looking games, but they don’t quite have enough atmosphere to back them up. In such games, the grey grittiness feels almost cynical, a quick way to look all serious and adult by painting everything in a drab color scheme. Then you get something like Dark Souls, where every care has been made to build big, awe-inspiring environments, nonetheless cloaked in misery and decay, in a way that makes the entire game feel as intimidating as it is tragic. What I am driving at is that, when we dismiss “dark and gritty” games, we’re merely dismissing the cynical ones. Games like Dark Sector, that actually used the term “dark and gritty” in its promotional material, betraying how it was just trying to look like everything else without adding the atmosphere to back it up. When you wish to make a game that’s mostly grey or brown, you need to put extra effort into the lighting, the environment design, and the sound. Perhaps a few cruel beams of sunlight escaping through cracks in the cloudy skies. Scavengers picking at the bones of the dead. Upturned carts and ransacked homes, all pointing toward a life that used to be there, but no longer is. These little details make all the difference.

One of my favorite game stages in recent memory was from Resistance 3. You’re following a companion through blasted city streets while heavy rain drenches everything. Fighting opponents in the dismal torrential downpour was an amazing experience, one that really felt ambient and engaging. The addition of rain gave it that extra detail to stop it being just a grey shooting gallery. It was that beautiful bleakness that reminded me of home, and made me feel good. Similarly, as much stick as Gears of War gets for popularizing the whole “grey shooter” stereotype, one cannot deny that Epic Games did a lot of work to justify the art style. Gears’ world is similarly home to many details that indicate the ruined memories of a pre-Locust world, with a sense of deep foreboding and sometimes horror-influenced moments that the series doesn’t get enough credit for. Gears of War isn’t cynically gritty, it’s beautifully bleak.

I love a colorful game, and one day I’ll have to present my argument that Viva Pinata is the best looking game of all time. For now, though, I want to just celebrate those truly inspiring “grey” games out there, for many exist, and they don’t perhaps get the love they deserve. As an appreciator of the miserable and the gloomy, I find a lot of wonder in many of those gritty games, so long as the grit has a good reason for being there.

They just feel like home.




Source: Gaming Today

{ 0 comments }

Also, certain customers will be eligible for a $ 15 refund
Source: GamesIndustry International

{ 0 comments }

Page 3 of 9312345...102030...Last »