I did not like how The Divine Comedy got the video game treatment
(Dante's Inferno). I mean it just felt wrong to me in almost every
way. It's a narrative poem with a very political and philosophical
approach...but the game turned it into a pseudo-God of War game.
There is no way to capture the poem in a game style in anything more
than an old fashioned point-and-click adventure genre...if even that
would work for the source material.
That was bad enough, but I am entirely frightened hearing that
The Great Gatsby is coming in July as a game.
I think the ultimate problem with games right now is that creativity
is gone. Well, it's not gone, but it's limited and rarely accepted
by major publishers. You may occasionally get a well thought out
game with a deep setting and a great plot that also manages to have
fresh or well defined game play mechanics. However, 99% of the year
you have the usual stagnant crap that costs publishers and
developers very little to create in both time and licenses, and thus
look like a more assured "cash-cow".
I mean Dante's Inferno was based on something that had a setting
almost built for gaming, and was public domain. This means you can
save money on licenses and save time on building an entire gaming
world from scratch. Of course with The Inferno you have something
not set for a game beyond the location. That doesn't matter when you
have a world ready to use and God of War is a popular game. Just
borrow the game mechanics, slap in some boobs, and then use the
basic setting of The Inferno and you can call it a day. It's even
better when "Dante's Inferno" carries a well known name, despite how
so many of the target gamers for this work would know nothing
beyond, "it's about hell, which means I get to skull-f#@$ Satan!
I understand that the gaming world is facing the same economic
hazards as the rest of the world. It's hard to lay out money on
creating a new intellectual property when you're absolutely unsure
on how the gamers will take to it, and thus you're unsure if you'll
get any return on investment. However, that doesn't really excuse
making games that will be less pricey to make but almost more likely
to flop...despite being well known before ever being released.
I mean it should have been obvious to Activision that Tony Hawk Ride
would fail after the series became stagnant. I mean Tony Hawk
stopped being relevant to gaming ever since they ditched the "Tony
Hawk Pro Skater" name...and became a complete joke once EA
reinvigorated the genre with Skate. However, it's cheap to make a
sequel of any sort, it's free to use your own IP (plus a minor
license fee to Tony Hawk for his name), and the name recognition
means "games should buy it", or at least that's the Activision way
of thinking. The same goes (not to keep picking on Activision, but
they are the new EA) for making excessive Guitar Hero/Band Hero/DJ
Hero/Who-Gives-A-F#@$ Hero and all the rest that comes from this
franchise. If you release one or two rhythm games, you'll be
fine...but when you have competition (Rock Band...and Harmonix is
starting to enter Activision ideals with so many releases planned
this year and last year) and few new ideas to build upon, you have
to slow down or else your cash-cow becomes old and stale.
I think I'm bitching about this for one reason beyond all else; I
really feel like playing some new games. I really want to try
something new. Right now, am I playing a new and exciting game? No.
I'm actually playing Final Fantasy IX again. Why? Because there is
so little that is new that is not just some overly manufactured
crap. I can give some gratitude to Bioware/EA for Dragon Age
Origins, but that's about all I can say in favor of gaming right
now. If you want a refined/updated version of one of your old
favorites, you may be in luck (FPS fans keep getting some good, or
at least fun updates of Call of Duty and Battlefield, sports fans
always have the next season for any league sports, and casual gamers
will always find a new twist on Bejeweled), but if you're like me
and just want something fun and new...well, the options are limited.
It's especially bad for RPG fans who have grown tired of the same
tired clichés or overly annoying cookie-cutter characters (Square
I've also been thinking about this stagnation since I recently
finished Gyromancer and Dragon Age Origins. I wanted to play
something else while waiting for Dragon Quest IX (which will be a
long wait). When I couldn't find anything cheap and fun at a store,
I decided to check my game collection. I looked through all of my
360 and PS3 games, but found nothing worth playing again. I mean a
good deal of these games were hard enough to find the motivation to
play through the first time. It wasn't until I hit my PSX collection
that I actually found games worth playing again. I don't mean one or
two games...I mean a collection of games with more replay value than
anything I've encountered for some time. Legend of Mana, Xenogears
(although I think I've played that one a bit too much...for now),
Final Fantasy VII and IX, Castlevania Symphony of the Night, Grandia,
Arc the Lad trilogy, Lunar Silver Star and Eternal Blue (the
remakes...although not quite as good as the Sega CD originals),
Suikoden 1 and 2, Wild Arms, Dragon Quest VII...the list goes on and
on. Yes, these are tired old games, but the game play was not so
watered down with innovation and the plot not so overly stuffed with
convoluted twists controlled by annoying characters, so they still
feel worth playing another time.
On a side note, these old PSX games are even more fun to play
through again when you consider the PS3 and how you don't need to
hunt down dusty old PSX memory cards...and the wireless controller
is a nice touch.
Maybe I'm feeling old or jaded, but I just feel like I need to see
real creativity back in the game marketplace. It seems the only
place to find it anymore is in games like you'd find in the 360
Marketplace. While a $10 short game is great...it's like an
appetizer and I need a full meal from time to time.
I recently ordered
Dragon Quest IV for the DS from Gamestop. I should add that I
ordered a pre-owned version. I mean this is one of those rare games
at Gamestop that's a fair bit cheaper used than new (almost 50% less
for pre-owned). The game is one I've skipped for too long and it
seemed like a good fit for me while I struggle with no good new RPGs.
Of course that was before I started playing FF9 again, so DQ4 is
going to sit on the back burner for a bit as I go through FF9 for
the second time (well, about fifth time on the second disk, but I
only fully beat the game once before...I usually get bored around
the time you hit the western continent).
I mention DQ4 and
buying it pre-owned for one reason; I do not understand modern
gamers. So, in the past, when the SNES and NES were around,
pre-owned games never have boxes or instructions. This was all due
to how a game cartridge did not fit in with a cardboard box and
overly large instruction manual. That's why in some cases a box and
instruction book can be more valuable than the game they belonged to
on eBay. Games lasted and were, generally, taken care of, while the
flimsy paper goods were tossed aside by excited kids.
modern gaming we have modern cases and instructions. In games of the
PSX era, and onward (not counting Nintendo until the DS and Gamecube),
we have CD or DVD cases. I guess you could say it started with the
Sega CD era, but those were horible cases that were oversized and
made of some damned brittle plastic. We also have disks that can be
scratched. Plus, the books are all sized and designed to easily fit
into a case with not a problem and not a chance of being
With that being
said, I could understand instruction booklets being lost still. I
mean they are paper and they can be quite simple to misplace.
Especially in games after the single disk PSX times when the cover
of the case was not the same as the book. I guess I could even
understand an occasional instance of packing material and
instructions being separated from a DVD/CD/Blue-ray based game,
since some people would rather have a CD/DVD wallet of games than a
shelf lined with larger cases. It should be as common for a case to
be separated from a game as in the SNES days, but it could still
happen occasionally. I'd never separate my games from their case,
but some people might.
said...why the hell does it seem that pre-owned games at Gamestop
never have a case or book included? When I bought the second and
third Ratchet and Clank (PS2 pre-owned), I got the Gamestop fake
cases. When I bought...well, any digital disk based game pre-owned
from Gamestop, there is never a case. Then when I bought Dragon
Quest IV, once again I get not a damned real case but some Gamestop
not like I can do anything about this. Maybe if I trade
anything in to Gamestop I should just always keep my cases and
instructions to continue the cycle of being a douche.
It's pretty far from
autumn right now. So, normally, I'd be thinking of just about
anything besides the NFL. However, I can't help but feel next season
is going to look a lot like last season for the Seahawks. I mean so
far the moves being made by John Schneider (the new Seattle GM) make
me feel about anything besides confidence. I figured the moves that
Tim Ruskell made as he tried to destroy the Seattle roster were bad,
but at least some good came from Ruskell's actions (not much good,
but Burleson did come to Seattle...more on that in a second).
Let's see, on the
Seahawks roster front, there's been nothing but confusing moves this
offseason. First Schneider drops the ball on Nate "The Great"
Burleson and Seneca Wallace. Burleson was the number one receiver
last season for Seattle, and about the only receiver that has any
type of understanding of how Matt Hasselbeck throws, despite being
considered the "number two" receiver for roster purposes. Burleson
led in receptions and was about the only player who could, week
after week, perform to any level of quality.
Wallace, while not
being the greatest QB in history, is not too bad of a backup.
Primarily, he is a man who can pull off some awesome moves in a
wildcat formation, pulling triple duty as rusher, receiver, and
passer on the fly. He is not the best at any single action, but he's
a good enough player who can be the triple threat. Unfortunately,
Wallace has always been underutilized, and Mora's offense made the
wildcat too damned predictable. At least Wallace should do good with
the Browns and being back with someone who understands his play
style (Mike Holmgren).
Now, however, the
Seahawks just get more confusing. I mean
Schneider just brought in Quinton Ganther from the Redskins.
Really? A tiny (5'9" 214lb) rusher? Do we really need another season
of this crap? The last three seasons have seen the Seahawks flounder
on their running game, with the only bright spot being when Julius
Jones was injured last season and Justin Forsett finally got the
starting role he deserved. Considering Forsett can play the starting
role like a pro (assuming he's finally given enough respect to be
given the number one spot), it would be a lot better for Schneider
to look for a third-and-short rusher. Someone like who T.J. Duckett
was supposed to be, who could pick up a couple yards by just plowing
through the defensive line.
Then again, it's
not like the weird moves end there. Now Seattle, with it's lack of a
picked up a backup's backup in Charlie Whitehurst. This would be
the third string QB from San Diego who has yet to make a regular
season pass. In four years, Whitehurst has done just shy of
jack-shit. However, it's not like he's got a $8 million two year
contract with $2 million in incentives...wait...he does? In other
words, Seattle gains someone with no real record, good or bad, and
loses a lot of room on payroll for a potential "QB of the future",
while they gave up Seneca Wallace for a hell of a lot less. In fact,
Wallace has a proven record, and is a player who we at least knew
would remain healthy when Schneider makes a bunch of bullshit moves
and probably forgets about the O-line, leaving Hasselbeck in
While I understand
a new GM making some moves to help a struggling team rebuild,
there's something different between "rebuilding from the ground up"
and "spending money like the world is ending on a team of unprovens".
Maybe I'm just too used to poor quality GM mistakes with the
Seahawks roster, but I somehow feel like this offseason is one of
the more befuddling and wasted of recent Seahawks history. I also
can't help but feel a bit unsure of the direction of this team when
most starters are coming from teams like Washington and Tampa Bay,
while the players coming from winning franchises are all way too
familiar with the bench.
For Those Who Don't
Have Flash Plug-Ins...
This Site Links
Contact Us Disclaimer