EleFlameMax

This post relates to: Super Mario Bros.

There's an applet on the interwebs known to some as vNES. It was created by Jamie Sanders, who, along with the support of a small company, takes original NES cartridges and puts them through a legally sound process known as ROM dumping. They essentially strip the cartridge of all it's game data and then store it on their computers for the theoretical purpose of digital preservation. Distrubiting these ROMs freely, however, is deemed illegal, since people who don't own the original copy could download the ROM regardless and play that data in an emulator.

However, and here's the super awesome part, it's not illegal to stream the output data, because any and all of that data is randomized byte code that the computer creates based on the instructions in the ROM. If I told you how to get to Krispy Kreme in Union City from here in Fremont, would I get to eat the donut? Nope, and hence Nintendo can't eat my freely distrubted retro donut, or retro-nut. Seriously: Jamie Sanders can take any game for which he has the cartridge and put it online. For free, legally. No way, but totally, effing way.

So, yeah, I've been into this legal emulation scene as of late, and I'm enjoying myself. Of particular note is the very solid gameplay I find in games like Super Mario Bros. and Metroid. They aren't all that innovative in their design, but are superb in their technical gameplay and level design. I was listening to Trigames Podcast numero 102, and found that I agree with Austin's monologue regarding innovation in game design. He said that innovating and reinventing amounts to nothing if your game isn't technically sound and lacks good level design. Innovation isn't a bad thing, but you should be able to back it up with good production values, like Gears of War, which innovates here and there, but has most of it's excellence beneath the solid controls, high production values and well-structured level-design. That is, if you're talking about the single player. The mutliplayer is lagshit-crazy-fuck-noodles.

And with that, good sirs and ladies, I bid you much ado.

This post relates to: Shenmue

So I wrote a tearful blog post a few days ago concering the departure of Yu Suzuki from and that there was no more hope for my grandest gamer wet dream, Shenmue III. Turns out that Simon Jefferey "misspoke", or was bullshitting crap-crap.

Now Shenmue III can go back to being a tiny, slightly possible entity. Oh how far we've come.

This post relates to: Mass Effect, Tactics Ogre: The Knight of Lodis, Final Fantasy, The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, BioShock

American role playing games have been on the receiving end of a lot of mainstream interest lately, primarily because of their attractive, grand promises: Dynamic worlds, multiple endings, a plethora of side quests, and an overall streamlined role playing experience. Occasionally some of these games, like Oblivion, make good on their promises, and the moment they do, people use that game as the standard for what a “good” RPG should be. It’s impossible to talk of RPGs without the words “Bioshock” and “Oblivion” coming up once and again.

But with innovation comes re-evaluation: Gamers are beginning to question the “tried-and-true” concepts of JRPGs, like: Grinding- the act of tediously fighting monsters to level up your character; a lot of statistical data regarding your character and his strengths; action sequences instead of action taking place during and after exploration; and more grinding. The question in question is whether or not these genre staples are flaws.

You might be surprised to find that many of these concepts, most notably grinding, are also common in western RPGs, albeit presented in a simplified and more streamlined form. Herein lays the question: Are subtlety and streamlining necessary in making a good game? Are games bad if they have an abundance of data and blunt use of common game concepts? 

Firstly, I’ve slightly exaggerated the quality of western RPGs. JRPGs have made some great technical strides in their system of “common” concepts (see Final Fantasy: Tactics and Tactics Ogre: The Knight of Lodis; or hell, even Final Fantasy XII). I just feel that western developers are a little bit more abstract in their way of approaching design, in that they look at slightly broader, larger concepts, and then work their way down to the role playing, technical level.

Secondly, developers like 2K Games, the good fellas behind Bioshock, tried to take several concepts, (like upgrades, hacking mini-games, respwaning, first person combat) and make them all work on a technical level, together. Japanese developers aren’t trying to shoot as “high” because, JRPGs, along with their established style and structure, have been an integral member in the mainstream Japanese game industry for quite a long time, whereas RPGs in America are only now showing their mainstream appeal. Since the market for JRPGs has had the time to decide what they want of the genre, innovation becomes a much more difficult thing to achieve.

Now, onwards to the end: Just like the process of screenwriting, assembling an RPG shouldn’t require a lot of originality; the developer should just structure and present it well enough that it feels “fresh”. Bethesda and Bioware have games that incorporate concepts as tame and simple as “an open world” and “an abundance of planets”, which they then amplify with good programming and presentation that suits their game. That last bit, that’s why I think it’s a-okay for JRPGs to stay primarily the way they are: The design teams want to create an arcadey, seemingly simple and rewarding game.

And that’s fine. :)

Feel free to let me know if you disagree.

This post relates to: Shenmue II, Shenmue

Yu Suzuki has bid good-bye to Sega, and with him leaves any chance we had at a sequel to Shenmue II.

... :'(

Written by Peter Tomasi.

Pencilled by Don Kramer.

Cover art by Rags Morales.




The opening monologue of this issue can pretty much be summed up to: "I'm pissed, and people are pissing me off." The story is just as brash: Wordy, but with both fists up and throwing punches. To be honest, Nightwing has never really resonated with me quite as well as Tim Tracy or Batman. Don't get me wrong, he's as dynamic as they come, I just don't fashion him. It doesn't help that a few of his one-liners gave me good reason to twinge, but Tomasi earnestly makes up for it with his ability to skillfully structure an entertaining story, brimming with action and sometimes smart conversations.

Nightwing is just thinking about how pissed off he is all the time, when suddenly his signal lights up the night sky. Nightwing finds the transmitter to be none other than Harvey Dent, or Two-Face. He interrogates Harvey, who tells him of Carol Bermingham, the DA from NY that Harvey was once infatuated with. She witnessed an "important" person murder another such person, and now she's the target of several assasinations that Nighwing must stop, or not be told the location of innocent civilians that Two-Face trapped and left to die.

The story doesn't strain itself to tie into Morrison's R.I.P yet, but opts instead to give you your Nightwing fill before Grant Morrison throttles the lives of Dick and Bruce into devastating chaos. It's an ironic treat, watching Nightwing team up with Two-Face, a foe whom he encountered earlier, as Robin. Don't worry though, Nighwing does more than just talking, he kicks ass from start to finish. The panels are chalk-full of fists, blood and guns; you can indulge as much as you feel necessary. It's a great issue to pick up if you want a fun introduction to Nightwing and Two-Face.

Three out of Four.