Posted by Alex (1969 posts) -

I don't feel like I'm speaking out of turn when I say that I believe Disney Infinity was the most interesting thing that happened this past week. Yes, I'm well aware that we spent most of the week shouting about governmental scapegoating of the games industry, college football players with imagined girlfriends, and the decorative merits of eviscerated lady torsos, and amid the din of all that, you may have simply taken Disney's latest video game announcement as a point of minor curiosity. But putting aside the noise of the week and looking at things objectively, there really hasn't been an announcement as outright intriguing as Infinity in the game industry in quite some time.

The amount of money Disney seems poised to make off of Infinity is just staggering. But I think the product is interesting beyond its ability to print dollars.

I say this not just as some industry coverage man dying for some thrilling new technology to write about. If that were the case, I'd be focused on the same dubious new console hardware spec rumors we've been collectively regurgitating into each other's mouths since we all apparently decided the Wii U wasn't really all that interesting to talk about anymore. More to the point, Infinity isn't even really a new technology announcement. At its most distilled core, Infinity is exactly what we've seen from Activision's Skylanders series; a transmedia blending of the toy market and the video game market into a single, (hopefully) successful initiative. But reading through what Disney Interactive's chiefs, Disney Animation's chief creative officer John Lasseter, and the developers at Avalanche Software envision for this project, the scale for what Infinity could be trumps anything that's been done similarly by several orders of magnitude.

That's not a slag on Activision, who, despite their Mordor-like consumer image, have created one of the few genuinely successful new children's properties of the last few years, and done it mostly just building it as it went along. That Activision and developer Toys for Bob were able to make Skylanders a success on the mere strength of its withering Spyro the Dragon franchise is why you should believe this concept isn't going away any time soon. Spyro has proved an enduring franchise over the years, but in the case of Skylanders, it was really just a jumping off point. The framework of a collectible action figure-oriented game was just being filled in with spare parts from a franchise a publisher hadn't done much with in a while. On paper, it just sounded like a slightly more ambitious version of what Ubisoft did with its Raving Rabbids franchise, but once executed, suddenly Activision had a major hit on its hands.

Why? Because Skylanders appeals to the desire in children (and certain psychotic adults) to experience every possible facet of what they love. Give them something to collect, and they will collect the shit out of it. It's an idea that properties like Pokémon have exploited for years, but done with such a direct connection between the toys and the game that the line between the two was effectively blurred. Kids could have their bright, colorful toys to play with, and those toys actually fueled the action in the game. What kid wouldn't love that idea?

So at the outset, Activision's only true nemesis in all of this was the limitations of the Skylanders brand. Half a billion in sales later, now it has a real one in the form of Disney.

Too early to start getting excited about this kind of thing? Yeah, probably. Gonna do it anyway.

We've all seen the trailer now, and read the various descriptions of what Disney plans to do with this concept. Infinity goes beyond just the idea of a rigidly structured game and actively encourages kids (and, again, adult players) to use the characters and environments they've purchased (by way of the figures and other accessories) however they damn well please, thanks to this upgraded Toy Box mode. The Toy Box mode in Toy Story 3--which, understandably, you probably didn't get around to playing--is one of the better pieces of unrealized potential I've seen in a game in a while. While that game's version of it is limited, it's the version of it that's being implemented in Infinity that sounds truly exceptional.

Who wouldn't want a version of LittleBigPlanet featuring tons of major characters and settings we already know and love? It's why kids buy licensed toys in the first place, after all. They want to have those characters, those worlds at their imagination's disposal. Just playing a predesigned game is certainly fun, but when I was younger, I know I had a lot more fun taking my various G.I. Joes and Transformers and super hero figures and smashing them together into scenarios only my addled child brain could fathom. Whether the Disney characters are specifically your thing is entirely beside the point. The point is that they are giving you creative access to these characters and environments in ways that were traditionally relegated to plastic crap strewn about your living room.

That it is purely digital access is also beside the point, though it might not be for some of you. I've already seen a few comments lamenting some larger shift toward a "digital toy box" versus a tactile one, though I don't necessarily think one would ever replace the other. The toys, in Infinity's case, appear little more than a means to getting content into people's games, but kids will still play with those toys. The adults like Jeff who buy them, then proceed to leave them stacked and unopened, like canned beans in an apocalyptic bunker, are probably the distinct minority here.

And keep in mind that over time, all facets of this idea, from the game, to the toy box, to the figures themselves, will improve, provided they are successful. Infinity is likely just a launching point for many, many more things like it. Some of those will undoubtedly come from Disney, who has both the Marvel and Star Wars brands just sitting there, minding their own business, waiting for a chance to jump in and make their parent company unfathomable gobs of money. And when a company like Disney gets behind something like this in a big way, you can almost guarantee that others will follow suit. Activision's success was guaranteed to produce a clone or two, but Disney being the second major player in this "toys to life" market says to me we're about to see a fundamental shift in how games and toys are marketed to kids. If Infinity is a success, it could become the blueprint for these kinds of properties.

Adult me has no strong interest in Skylanders, nor does he feel a strong need to play Infinity outside of professional curiosity. Eight-to-eleven-year-old me, however, is practically exploding at the thought of what Infinity might mean for toys and games in the foreseeable future. I remember when I actually was that age, I always lamented that the toys and games I bought essentially had nothing to do with each other, even if they represented the same property. This is all the kind of thing I always imagined for the far-flung future, decades away from my own childhood. Turns out it wasn't so far-flung, I guess.

Dear Disney People, I would like to see Duck Tales in your Infinity video game because it is my favoritest show. I also like Darkwing Duck and Gargoyles. Please do this or I will be sad forever. Sincerely, Alex Navarro -- Age 31

Sure, the technology is still somewhat crude, but again, this is a launching point for potentially greater things. Just reading about Infinity has given me all sorts of crazy hypothetical ideas of how those interactions between toy and game could evolve over time. And that doesn't even factor in crazy other tech that has yet to be utilized on a typical consumer level. Just wait until somebody tries to fuse 3D printing technology with gaming on a level affordable for the average consumer. You might not even have to wait that long, at the rate things are currently moving.

I know it's trite to toss out the old "we live in the future" nugget, but goddammit, we live in the future. Maybe my understanding of this fact is why, no matter how loud and angry everyone in the industry seems to be in a given week, an idea like Infinity can still stand out above the fray. Sure, it's just another way for a publisher to make money, but it also says to me that companies are looking for new, innovative ways to tailor gaming experiences to a market that's suffered stagnation for a while now. It says to me that companies aren't necessarily going to just wait around for console makers to do the innovating for them on the hardware side, especially when you consider Infinity is coming to current-gen platforms, and not waiting around for the next go of things, which isn't even that far off.

2013 really is shaping up to be quite a year, isn't it?

Weekly Notes:

First of all, thanks for reading this! You might be confused why written content is appearing on the site on a Sunday. I assure you, there is no cause for alarm. This is The Guns of Navarro, a new column I'll be doing on a weekly basis here on the site. Yes, I'm well aware that title requires a purposeful mispronunciation of my last name, but you know what? Fuck it. It's not even a real last name. My parents made it up. It's supposed to be Ratcliffe.

So, what is this column? Well, it's kind of whatever I, and you, want it to be. I don't have a particular format or structure I plan to adhere to with this. It's more just about me writing about what I find interesting, positively or negatively, in the video game industry, and tangentially related areas of the world. I'm doing this because A. More content is always better than less content, and B. People have often lamented not really having the best handle on me and my own personal tastes. I do a lot of reviews and news writin' around here, but obviously being in New York, it's difficult to participate in things like the podcast and video coverage.

So this will be my nook, my little corner of the site where I talk about the stuff that seems of interest. Hopefully you'll dig it, but if you don't, hey, it's not like we're forcing you to read it! At least not until Dave finds a way to do that. I think that's his next project after the new site launch.

Anyway, thanks for reading, and I'll see you next week.

--A

Staff
#1 Posted by Alex (1969 posts) -

I don't feel like I'm speaking out of turn when I say that I believe Disney Infinity was the most interesting thing that happened this past week. Yes, I'm well aware that we spent most of the week shouting about governmental scapegoating of the games industry, college football players with imagined girlfriends, and the decorative merits of eviscerated lady torsos, and amid the din of all that, you may have simply taken Disney's latest video game announcement as a point of minor curiosity. But putting aside the noise of the week and looking at things objectively, there really hasn't been an announcement as outright intriguing as Infinity in the game industry in quite some time.

The amount of money Disney seems poised to make off of Infinity is just staggering. But I think the product is interesting beyond its ability to print dollars.

I say this not just as some industry coverage man dying for some thrilling new technology to write about. If that were the case, I'd be focused on the same dubious new console hardware spec rumors we've been collectively regurgitating into each other's mouths since we all apparently decided the Wii U wasn't really all that interesting to talk about anymore. More to the point, Infinity isn't even really a new technology announcement. At its most distilled core, Infinity is exactly what we've seen from Activision's Skylanders series; a transmedia blending of the toy market and the video game market into a single, (hopefully) successful initiative. But reading through what Disney Interactive's chiefs, Disney Animation's chief creative officer John Lasseter, and the developers at Avalanche Software envision for this project, the scale for what Infinity could be trumps anything that's been done similarly by several orders of magnitude.

That's not a slag on Activision, who, despite their Mordor-like consumer image, have created one of the few genuinely successful new children's properties of the last few years, and done it mostly just building it as it went along. That Activision and developer Toys for Bob were able to make Skylanders a success on the mere strength of its withering Spyro the Dragon franchise is why you should believe this concept isn't going away any time soon. Spyro has proved an enduring franchise over the years, but in the case of Skylanders, it was really just a jumping off point. The framework of a collectible action figure-oriented game was just being filled in with spare parts from a franchise a publisher hadn't done much with in a while. On paper, it just sounded like a slightly more ambitious version of what Ubisoft did with its Raving Rabbids franchise, but once executed, suddenly Activision had a major hit on its hands.

Why? Because Skylanders appeals to the desire in children (and certain psychotic adults) to experience every possible facet of what they love. Give them something to collect, and they will collect the shit out of it. It's an idea that properties like Pokémon have exploited for years, but done with such a direct connection between the toys and the game that the line between the two was effectively blurred. Kids could have their bright, colorful toys to play with, and those toys actually fueled the action in the game. What kid wouldn't love that idea?

So at the outset, Activision's only true nemesis in all of this was the limitations of the Skylanders brand. Half a billion in sales later, now it has a real one in the form of Disney.

Too early to start getting excited about this kind of thing? Yeah, probably. Gonna do it anyway.

We've all seen the trailer now, and read the various descriptions of what Disney plans to do with this concept. Infinity goes beyond just the idea of a rigidly structured game and actively encourages kids (and, again, adult players) to use the characters and environments they've purchased (by way of the figures and other accessories) however they damn well please, thanks to this upgraded Toy Box mode. The Toy Box mode in Toy Story 3--which, understandably, you probably didn't get around to playing--is one of the better pieces of unrealized potential I've seen in a game in a while. While that game's version of it is limited, it's the version of it that's being implemented in Infinity that sounds truly exceptional.

Who wouldn't want a version of LittleBigPlanet featuring tons of major characters and settings we already know and love? It's why kids buy licensed toys in the first place, after all. They want to have those characters, those worlds at their imagination's disposal. Just playing a predesigned game is certainly fun, but when I was younger, I know I had a lot more fun taking my various G.I. Joes and Transformers and super hero figures and smashing them together into scenarios only my addled child brain could fathom. Whether the Disney characters are specifically your thing is entirely beside the point. The point is that they are giving you creative access to these characters and environments in ways that were traditionally relegated to plastic crap strewn about your living room.

That it is purely digital access is also beside the point, though it might not be for some of you. I've already seen a few comments lamenting some larger shift toward a "digital toy box" versus a tactile one, though I don't necessarily think one would ever replace the other. The toys, in Infinity's case, appear little more than a means to getting content into people's games, but kids will still play with those toys. The adults like Jeff who buy them, then proceed to leave them stacked and unopened, like canned beans in an apocalyptic bunker, are probably the distinct minority here.

And keep in mind that over time, all facets of this idea, from the game, to the toy box, to the figures themselves, will improve, provided they are successful. Infinity is likely just a launching point for many, many more things like it. Some of those will undoubtedly come from Disney, who has both the Marvel and Star Wars brands just sitting there, minding their own business, waiting for a chance to jump in and make their parent company unfathomable gobs of money. And when a company like Disney gets behind something like this in a big way, you can almost guarantee that others will follow suit. Activision's success was guaranteed to produce a clone or two, but Disney being the second major player in this "toys to life" market says to me we're about to see a fundamental shift in how games and toys are marketed to kids. If Infinity is a success, it could become the blueprint for these kinds of properties.

Adult me has no strong interest in Skylanders, nor does he feel a strong need to play Infinity outside of professional curiosity. Eight-to-eleven-year-old me, however, is practically exploding at the thought of what Infinity might mean for toys and games in the foreseeable future. I remember when I actually was that age, I always lamented that the toys and games I bought essentially had nothing to do with each other, even if they represented the same property. This is all the kind of thing I always imagined for the far-flung future, decades away from my own childhood. Turns out it wasn't so far-flung, I guess.

Dear Disney People, I would like to see Duck Tales in your Infinity video game because it is my favoritest show. I also like Darkwing Duck and Gargoyles. Please do this or I will be sad forever. Sincerely, Alex Navarro -- Age 31

Sure, the technology is still somewhat crude, but again, this is a launching point for potentially greater things. Just reading about Infinity has given me all sorts of crazy hypothetical ideas of how those interactions between toy and game could evolve over time. And that doesn't even factor in crazy other tech that has yet to be utilized on a typical consumer level. Just wait until somebody tries to fuse 3D printing technology with gaming on a level affordable for the average consumer. You might not even have to wait that long, at the rate things are currently moving.

I know it's trite to toss out the old "we live in the future" nugget, but goddammit, we live in the future. Maybe my understanding of this fact is why, no matter how loud and angry everyone in the industry seems to be in a given week, an idea like Infinity can still stand out above the fray. Sure, it's just another way for a publisher to make money, but it also says to me that companies are looking for new, innovative ways to tailor gaming experiences to a market that's suffered stagnation for a while now. It says to me that companies aren't necessarily going to just wait around for console makers to do the innovating for them on the hardware side, especially when you consider Infinity is coming to current-gen platforms, and not waiting around for the next go of things, which isn't even that far off.

2013 really is shaping up to be quite a year, isn't it?

Weekly Notes:

First of all, thanks for reading this! You might be confused why written content is appearing on the site on a Sunday. I assure you, there is no cause for alarm. This is The Guns of Navarro, a new column I'll be doing on a weekly basis here on the site. Yes, I'm well aware that title requires a purposeful mispronunciation of my last name, but you know what? Fuck it. It's not even a real last name. My parents made it up. It's supposed to be Ratcliffe.

So, what is this column? Well, it's kind of whatever I, and you, want it to be. I don't have a particular format or structure I plan to adhere to with this. It's more just about me writing about what I find interesting, positively or negatively, in the video game industry, and tangentially related areas of the world. I'm doing this because A. More content is always better than less content, and B. People have often lamented not really having the best handle on me and my own personal tastes. I do a lot of reviews and news writin' around here, but obviously being in New York, it's difficult to participate in things like the podcast and video coverage.

So this will be my nook, my little corner of the site where I talk about the stuff that seems of interest. Hopefully you'll dig it, but if you don't, hey, it's not like we're forcing you to read it! At least not until Dave finds a way to do that. I think that's his next project after the new site launch.

Anyway, thanks for reading, and I'll see you next week.

--A

Staff
#2 Edited by xdaknightx69 (448 posts) -

Disney!

#3 Posted by BaneFireLord (2909 posts) -

Quick correction, @Alex ...it's Avalanche Software, the developers of the Toy Story 3 game, not Avalanche Studios, the developers of the Just Cause games.

#4 Posted by Superfriend (1526 posts) -

I´m sure Jeff will be interested in those newfangled toys.

#5 Posted by VoshiNova (1639 posts) -

Go Alex! Now I'm going to read it.

#6 Posted by Happenstance (461 posts) -

Nice to see more from Alex.

#7 Posted by lord_python (94 posts) -

Yay, more insight into the crazy mind of Alex Navarro. This first article is great, infinity does sound like a great win for Disney.

#8 Posted by Drebin_893 (2902 posts) -

Good to see more written content.

#9 Posted by Excast (814 posts) -

More content is indeed always better than less content. Nice first entry Alex!

#10 Posted by natetodamax (19170 posts) -

I'm a fan of this idea

#11 Posted by FunkasaurasRex (847 posts) -

Dammit Alex, why you gotta go trigger my nostalgia with that Disney Afternoon image.

Also I'd completely forgotten about that Mighty Ducks cartoon. I think I preferred it that way.

#12 Posted by EchoEcho (815 posts) -

Good read, , and glad it's going to be a weekly column. Need more Navarro on this site!

#13 Posted by kalibr (120 posts) -

Oh man how good was TaleSpin

#14 Posted by adam1808 (1372 posts) -

I love me some Alex writin'. Infinity seems fascinating, if only from an academic perspective. I'm not nearly familiar enough with all of Disney's properties to get properly excited but I'm sure this is just the start of transmedia properties for the next generation.

#15 Posted by DazzHardy (667 posts) -

3 words that'll print money when it happens, and I do mean when. Kingdom. Hearts. Infinity.  
The worst part is, that sounds pretty exciting to me >_<

#16 Posted by Hurricrane (128 posts) -

I was completely expecting him to shit all over the exploitation factor more. Still a good read though.

#17 Posted by Slab64 (1048 posts) -

The Puns of Navarro

#18 Posted by rabbithearted (74 posts) -

This is a really great article! I'm definitely looking forward to this new weekly Alex-Navarro-written bit of content. :)

#19 Posted by sarahsdad (1079 posts) -

Nice write up. Got some high hopes for this game. Also....Really nice to see Alex writing something that doesn't drip with snark.

#20 Posted by Video_Game_King (35993 posts) -

I thought this was going to be about the visual novel Infinity.

#21 Edited by Laiv162560asse (487 posts) -

Nice to see you have a column, Alex. I'll look forward to seeing what you cover in future, since reviews are quite sporadic and tbh GB doesn't cater to my interests in terms of its other written content.

While on a dispassionate level it'll be interesting to see how Infinity shapes up, I think it's likely to be a very cynical enterprise. This whole idea of tying physical toys into video games, as a way of selling games piecemeal, seems like it's an awesome thing for kids but a complete nightmare for the parents who have to worry about the serious matter of the value proposition. I'm not a parent, I'm happy to be a kidult forever, but my sympathies definitely lie more with the exploited wallets of the parent in stuff like this.

@BaneFireLord said:

Quick correction, @Alex ...it's Avalanche Software, the developers of the Toy Story 3 game, not Avalanche Studios, the developers of the Just Cause games.

Thank you so much for making this clarification. My heart sank when I thought that the makers of Renegade Ops were now on Toys R Us duty.

#22 Posted by TheLastGunslinger (208 posts) -

@BaneFireLord said:

Quick correction, @Alex ...it's Avalanche Software, the developers of the Toy Story 3 game, not Avalanche Studios, the developers of the Just Cause games.

That would be a decidedly different, and awesome, game.

#23 Posted by caduceus (53 posts) -

Gregory Peck approves, Alex.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAwNG5ZwECk

#24 Posted by Kieran_Smith5 (139 posts) -

Appreciate the article Alex. You have an excellent writing style, and I look forward to future posts.

#25 Posted by rcath (358 posts) -

@kalibr: really good.

Also great writeup Alex.

#26 Posted by MetalGearSunny (6986 posts) -

Awesome, a weekly Navarro soapbox thing! So glad we've been buried with so much great content lately.

That was a good read! I'm also interested in seeing where this takes toys because the sucess of Skylanders have been insane.

#27 Posted by Abendlaender (2761 posts) -

For some reason I knew who wrote this article before clicking on it. I must by psychic

#28 Posted by falling_fast (2183 posts) -

"The Guns of Navarro". I love it, haha.

#29 Posted by SpannerX (6 posts) -

Two words, which might cause nightmares: Gummi Bears.

#30 Posted by Phatmac (5721 posts) -

I'm with you Alex. Infinity has a ton of potential and I'm way more interested in it than Skylanders.

#31 Posted by Baal_Sagoth (1235 posts) -

Great stuff sir! That's one hell of a starting point for your column. Well executed piece on an important phenomenon I'm just starting to try and contextualize as well as comprehend in the first place. It certainly seems to have a lot of exciting potential. Looking forward to reading more of this caliber here in the coming weeks.

#32 Posted by cthomer5000 (743 posts) -

@Kieran_Smith5 said:

Appreciate the article Alex. You have an excellent writing style, and I look forward to future posts.

+1

#33 Posted by forkboy (1115 posts) -

Firstly, great to see Alex writing feature pieces again because I miss his stuff from the Screened days. This did not disappoint my expectations.

And I agree. OK, this isn't the sort of thing that will necessarily interest me enough to buy it, but I'm a 28 year old with limited disposable income, hardly the target audience. But as I put myself back into child-me I can absolutely see the appeal. And when I see the queues of parents in Game over the holidays, each carrying a new Skylanders toy (it was almost impossible to actually get out of the store, such as the density of parents & children) it seems like doing something like that with these much beloved characters is a no-brainer. Buzz Lightyear, Darkwing Duck & Wall-E all getting together to beat the hell out of Jar Jar Binks? I'm in.

It is a cliché at this point in time, but this really does seem like the "license to print money"

#34 Edited by Trilogy (2645 posts) -

Yea Alex! I'm glad you're jumping into unique weekly articles.

Anyway, I agree that Disney stands to make asstons of money off of Infinity but lets not forget that kids are kind of fickle. They move on from one fad to the next and if they see infinity as something old rather than something new, they might pass it up. I remember how fast fads would come and go when I was kid. Pokemon was kind of a phenomenon, but even that went out of style. Of course my friends and I held on to it so we eventually became the "nerds". Kids are also hypocritical as fuck.

As for myself, Disney definitely has a pretty large monopoly on my childhood so Infinity interests me more than Skylanders ever did. Then again, I'm 25 so I don't see myself walking into a toys R us to buy it without constantly blurting out, "IT'S NOT FOR ME IT'S FOR MY NEPHEW!"

#35 Posted by PrioritySeven (322 posts) -

@kalibr said:

Oh man how good was TaleSpin

Ok, if they bring some "Disney Afternoon" characters back (TaleSpin, Darkwing, etc) I think I'm in on this Infinity thing.

And TaleSpin was fucking awesome. Best cartoon theme song of the 90s.

#36 Posted by deano546 (182 posts) -

Ratcliffe?

#37 Posted by mattgriffin (58 posts) -

I've been watching DuckTales on Amazon Prime Instant. I had forgotten how huge a part of my childhood was about the Disney Afternoon.

#38 Edited by Grissefar (2842 posts) -

I don't know, man. Nice try, I guess.

Even if it was good, I don't know that there is a huge need for this sort of article. The bombcast seems like a much more fitting place for this stuff, where you would also get the opinions of several different people. But that's just my opinion I guess. Ha ! Ha ! Thankfully I don't have to read it, and hopefully Infinity will get a bombcast mention soon. But thanks for trying, man. At least you have found a place to try and make yourself useful on Giant Bomb.

#39 Posted by Brewmaster_Andy (520 posts) -

Disney Infinity sounds like exactly the kind of thing I will end up having to purchase for my daughter.

#40 Posted by Rhombus_Of_Terror (2089 posts) -

@BaneFireLord said:

Quick correction, @Alex ...it's Avalanche Software, the developers of the Toy Story 3 game, not Avalanche Studios, the developers of the Just Cause games.

That would be something if the JC guys went and took their engine and made an open world toy game.

#41 Posted by abdo (1037 posts) -

Good stuff, Alex. But what about Year of the Cage?

#42 Posted by Trilogy (2645 posts) -

@PrioritySeven said:

@kalibr said:

Oh man how good was TaleSpin

Ok, if they bring some "Disney Afternoon" characters back (TaleSpin, Darkwing, etc) I think I'm in on this Infinity thing.

And TaleSpin was fucking awesome. Best cartoon theme song of the 90s.

Just the other day I was thinking about Disney afternoon. Then I went to go look up this song that I hadn't heard since childhood and my nostalgia got kicked in the balls.

#43 Posted by hfm (74 posts) -

Great column, the name is inspiring me to watch the movie for the umpteenth time!

I have hope that Disney will treat star wars correctly the way that marvel has seen a good run. I'm jealous of kids that will get to play with this.

#44 Posted by AnotherPerson (5 posts) -

Hey Alex, got to ask, why is it you don't feature on Bombcasts via Skype? Your input is always insightful and constructive, so it is pretty disappointing that you get to feature in very little non-review content by circumstance and situation. Even if you only had a small segment on the podcast, where they guys Skype called you for a half hour during the "What have you been playing this week" section, it would be appreciated, as it is always good to hear from you.

Nonetheless, it is great to see you with a weekly column now, I will enjoy reading it and keeping up with what it is you have to say.

#45 Posted by Alpha1 (254 posts) -

I want the Gummi bears to be in this.

#46 Posted by goreyfantod (114 posts) -
"The adults like Jeff who buy them, then proceed to leave them stacked and unopened, like canned beans in an apocalyptic bunker, are probably the distinct minority here."

Best. Sentence. Ever.

#47 Posted by DJKommunist (171 posts) -

@AnotherPerson: And also call Rorie. I miss him so. I really hope he's not dead.

#48 Posted by Nicked (246 posts) -

Really cool article, though I think Alex's optimism is a little nuts! I tend to be a little overly technophobic, but I don't really see how the ability for a corporation like Disney to keep reselling you your childhood through these fervent capitalist enterprises ("collect 'em all!") is a Great Sign Of Things To Come. I mean what does it portend for a company like Disney with all their copyright abuse to take over what is potentially a new and interesting field separate from old corporate structure?

I suppose that sounds snooty, and it's not an argument I'm interested in elaborating on or defending, it's just something that came to mind. Looking forward to more articles like this!

#49 Posted by buft (3301 posts) -

Alex is right , need Darkwing Duck in this, not that i will actually play it

#50 Posted by SmilingPig (1337 posts) -

Now that the length an article should be.