Homefront Multi-player Previews and Opinion

Remember last week I mentioned in my post that some new Homefront previews and such were coming? Well today I re-post it to you my loyal readers and give you my take on it. I also want to touch on the whole opinion piece of Homefront stemming from its story line and in-game world.

First thing is first. Two, count 'em, two videos showing off Homefront's multi-player gameplay and new features. My thoughts after the jump.

Ok so what did you think of the two videos? At first glance you might think this was a video of CoD or BF2. I must admit that I was thinking the same thing. Then the guy starts showing off all of this cool stuff like enemy players getting bounties placed on their head and the cool class/loadout screen which can be customized in the middle of a match. The two features introduced in the video are the Battle Commander system, which gives you missions on the fly (marking enemies) based on how the match is going, and the Battle Points system that is just flat out awesome. While the developers haven't re-invented the wheel here it seems, at least on the surface, that they have successfully combined all the aspects of what made other games great and added their own flair to it which looks to be adding up to ALOT of fun. After a few minutes of footage I saw what makes Homefront different and all-together awesome. I will post my full impressions once I have a copy in my hands. These devs have some huge competition that this game will be released in the shadow of, but the gaming landscape is ripe for a show stealer. This could be it people. Stay tuned and pick up your copy come March 8th. 

Now for the opinion piece of the post. First I want to reference IGN's coverage from 1/21 as my inspiration to post these next few lines. After reading the IGN piece, the comments, and some other articles from last week I have to say that the controversy is building in the media over Homefront's premise and chosen background for the story. The authors of the articles and a lot of readers are "concerned" about the game's message. They are worried that the message will be "America is awesome" or that it will fan the fires of American patriotism. There is also the North Korea card getting played that some take offense to, and not to mention the supposed 'improbability' of America being invaded. 

Opinion? 

I think they are all stupid. Who are they kidding? Worrying about a game's message of patriotism? Really? What kind of audience do you think you are catering too? The men and women playing this game are not going to all of a sudden start going bat-shit insane toting American flags on their body and treat foreigners with extreme prejudice because of the events in Homefront. Games are forms of art in my mind. Much like a movie or book. All forms of art are at their greatest when they make people begin to question the things they represent. Good or bad, happy or sad. Take it or leave it, admire it or hate it. That's art.

That being said....Homefront's singleplayer mode is meant to draw the emotions out of you. What would you do in that situation? You think it is improbable or unlikely that America would be invaded, which gives you an air of ignorance, yet you think it is OK to portray a poorer country in this light? Get over yourself. 

OK I said my piece. I expect that once the mainstream media gets a hold of this, and they will, the controversy will just get bigger. Which should translate to more sales and more n00bs to blast online! Comments welcome!

PC Gamers vs. Console Gamers in FPS games- Is there a clear winner?

How do you think you would do against a PC player vs. an Xbox player?

So yesterday I posted a link to a story that brought to light a Microsoft project that would have brought PC and Xbox 360 players together for some cross-platform gaming. The project was canned by MS because PC gamers absolutely crushed the console gamers every time they went head-to-head. According to the story, the test put mediocre PC gamers up against top-notch console gamers with the aforementioned results. I have some ideas on why this was a terrible attempt and how it could have been a great thing.

I have played many a FPS game on both PC and consoles. For years, consoles couldn't come close to reproducing the FPS experience that PCs delivered regularly. I have used a trackball for years and when ever I played Rainbow Six, Unreal Tournament, or Quake I had an extreme amount of precision at my fingertips. Couple that with some nimble fingers on the AWSD keys and on a good day I was near the top of the leader board at the end of matches. I use to go up against some friends of mine online and via LAN that would just pwn me repeatedly and vice versa.

I gradually started playing my Playstation 2 more often than my PC when Grand Theft Auto started becoming more popular and to me games like that just seemed better suited to a PS2 controller than a keyboard and mouse. The same goes for racing games. It wasn't until I saw Halo and then Gears of War that I started thinking of FPS gaming on a console as a real competitor to traditional FPS gaming on a PC. First and foremost the gameplay just felt slower, but after 10 or 15 matches I adjusted. Secondly, the controls obviously were not as precise and as responsive as my PC setup particularly compared to my mouse. I really had to adjust to using an analog stick for both movement and aiming. It didn't take long for me to start adjusting my reflexes and coordination to this different scheme of control. That leads me to my first point.

 The BIGGEST hurdle to overcome for cross-platform gaming? Making the platform type not matter. Microsoft was dumb for thinking it could just link the two platforms via Live and all live in harmony. Yeah it could work for racing or adventure games, but not for the money making FPS genre. No way. Let's face it, shooter games are the bread and butter for multi-player gaming which makes it the cash cow that it is. So how   could MS level the playing field and put console and PC gamers on par with each other? Good question.

I honestly don't know what the best answer would be. Obviously it would revolve around the control input. My initial thought would be to hook an Xbox 360 controller into those PCs and voila! Problem solved. I just know that PC fanboys would bitch about being handicapped and if we flip it around and give console players a mouse and keyboard to plug in, well that just defeats the purpose of having a console in the first place and while the hardcore would jump in, the serious recreational and casual gamers would not. So where does that leave us? Simple. Leave the options up to the gamer. Come out with an Xbox controller with a trackball built in to it (that would be sweet)! Make matches customizable so that only certain control methods are allowed. This could have been the best of both worlds had MS given it more thought. If they pressed on, opened up the control methods on both platforms and left it up to the gamer it would have caught fire! I would gladly buy a controller specifically designed for FPS with highly precise analog and/or trackball controls built in. That's the only sticking point people! Controls!

Bottom line....PC gamers are equipped to battle against foes with near-identical equipment as are console gamers. Would you go into a gunfight with a bb gun? Probably not. It doesn't mean console gamers are inferior in skill compared to PC gamers. It just means that while your replica Glock 17 air-soft gun might shoot my eye out, my .45 Colt 1911 with hollow-points will make your head into a canoe. Right after a I cry in agony and then aim with my one good eye.

When to stop playing video games.

I am attaching a video here and I want you to watch it. Then form your opinion and read my thoughts below.






Ok so what did you take away from that? Is he simply blaming games for his failures or is the person responsible and not the games? I tend to believe the latter. With all the different types of addiction out there, I just don't see videogames as a plausible form of addiction at least in the medical sense. Psychologically may make more sense, but even then videogames should not be blamed for an individual lack of willpower. Videogames, much like movies, are a form of artistic entertainment and expression. Vilifying developers for writing code is vastly different then dope dealers who sell crack or heroin on the street. Sure you can make an argument that while not as dangerous as a drug or alcohol addiction, videogames can be addicting. But blaming the videogames directly is unfair and truthfully I think it's unfounded. The guy in this video failed to realize the consequences of his actions, but he was still directly in control from the outset and while its a sad tale, I don't think placing the blame squarely on videogames is an accurate representation of his issues. I sense a deeper seated problem with videogames simply being his escape and excuse to not face it. While the same can be said about other addiction, the simple truth is that videogames don't kill you or make your body dependent on them.

The video does bring up some things I think are worth noting.

• Our society now has technology everywhere we are and for the first time we have to choose if technology simply supplements our lives, or dominates it.
• Playing video games is immensely more enriching when enjoyed with others next to you rather than playing in solitude and at the behest of human interaction.

I love to play games, but I know what's most important and when our son is old enough, he will too. Have fun everyone!

Modern Warfare 2's Serious Problem

Call of Duty is a great money-making franchise and it has tons of appeal for gamers who enjoy intense FPS games with depth and emphasis on team-work. When Modern Warfare 2 released in November of 2009 it was a landmark event. Gamers everywhere clamored for a copy of the game. As a developer Infinity Ward is a great game studio overall. The initial quality of MW2 is stunning. However, to quote a famous phrase, "Houston, we have a problem." In-game glitching and some unbalanced weapons are infecting online matches and making the gameplay unbearable. At the time of this posting, I am seriously pissed off with the situation. I know IW has a patch forthcoming that is suppose to fix a number of issues, but that doesn't change my mood any right now. Let me run you through a game I participated in last night with some friends: The game type was Sabotage (first time to try this type) and the map was Terminal. 4 of us were working together to achieve the objective of placing a bomb on the enemy target and blowing it up. After just a few minutes, it was apparent that the other team had no intention of playing the game this way. They would defend their target and shoot us when we tried to plant the bomb, but they never once attempted to take the bomb and plant it on our target. Instead, the care packages started to show up. Pretty soon the map was filled with harriers, helicopters, bombers, and missiles. It was ridiculous. At one point, I hit the select button to see what the kill counts were, and almost the entire enemy team had 30+ kills. I had only been shot by an opposing player 3 times the whole match. This my friends, was the notorious 'Care package glitch' in all its awfulness. At one point 3 enemy harriers and 1 Apache were hovering above me and my team. Needless to say, once we figured out what was going on, we left the match. I was furious. From what the forums of my favorite game sites say, its not getting any better. In short, this angry gamer is not playing online anymore, unless its a private match or something set up by my friends, until the patch is released that is suppose to fix this issue and a few others (like the 1887 shotgun range). To help make my point I am embedding a video here for you to watch where Killthrash (an honorable member of 2old2play.com) shows how the care-package glitch is done and as a bonus at 7:30 in the video you will see him get killed by a player with akimbo 1887 shotguns from an absurd range. Here is to hoping that my MW2 strike is short-lived.

Older Gamers and Today's Shooters

I have found an inspiring article on Wired.com/GameLife today (Read it!). It's right up my alley. I am an avid MW2 player on Xbox Live and can relate to what the article is talking about. The good news is that if you read through all of the comments you will find that you are not alone as an older gamer. I was pleased to know that. I already have a group of older gamers that I play with every week. Guys and gals with families and full time jobs just like me. We often join up in a party and take on the public matches. We often win too. We always communicate enemy whereabouts and spawn areas. It makes the game more enjoyable. The article hits home in more ways than one. For instance it cites the fact that younger players cut their teeth on Halo2 while gamers my age and older started with Pac-man and Donkey-Kong. Big gap there. It also mentions the fact that 'free time' is a factor. Let's face it, the kids in school have no bills, jobs, wives, kids, or responsibilities like us adults so pouring in hour after hour on a game is just unreasonable. In the end though, I think things could be done by developers and manufacturers to cater to us older gamers whom they have been leeching off of for so long. Give us some dedicated servers, or better match-making algorithm's. Also, stating that PC is the platform of choice for adults is just ridiculous. I want to sit on my couch or in my recliner when I load up a game, not at a desk. This older gAmE ZoMbiE will not convert back when clearly console gaming is the wave of the future.

For all you older gamers out there, stick with it. There are sites like 2old2play.com that do cater to the older crowd and can get you in touch with others who are ready to frag.