Alraiis

I think it has to do, in part, with the needs of a video game. If I wanted to write a book, I need to be a good writer and find an editor and a publisher. The bulk of that book's success or failure is tied to the writing and the editing and, for my part, I only need to be good at one thing: writing.

Budget constraints, graphical limitations, or studio pressure are unlikely to change my writing significantly; for the most part, I get to call the shots, unless I'm on a very specific contract. What I (or the publisher) don't have to do is devote huge swaths of the book's budget to a team of people specifically focusing on how fun the pages are to turn, and the book won't get dinged in reviews for having bad page-feel or an outdated font choice (gameplay and graphics, as it were). I also don't need to make a protagonist so relatable or so undefined that people don't mind being that person (or robot, or sentient meat-square, or whatever). And let's not underestimate the ego aspect: if my book succeeds, the credit and financial windfall is given to me, the writer, and I join a pantheon of Great Authors(TM) that stretches back thousands of years. That combination of the promise of individual success and fewer restrictions on creativity likely attracts the top storytelling talent to try their hand at media other than video games—there's more room for their talent to rise. If I want money, I can try to be the next J.K. Rowling; if I want recognition, I can make it my life's goal to win a Pulitzer or a Nobel, which has a lot more cachet than Game of the Year. Never mind that many aspiring authors won't even get published, let alone attain those goals (I am an editor; I crush dreams professionally). Despite the hurdles, big dreams will motivate the most talented dreamers.

If I'm a great video game writer for a big studio, I'm just one comparatively small part of a very large project—and the project's success or failure often has as much or more to do with the artists, level designers, and so on. If I want to make an indie game to have more creative control, I have to either be multi-talented so I can do my own design, well-off enough to hire good talent, incredibly lucky, or have some similar advantage. Ultimately, I don't think video games have inferior stories because it's a worse story-telling medium (I think it might be the best, in fact, but I love games so damn much I'm rather biased). Instead, the issue is that the medium just isn't set up to attract the best storytellers, unless they have a genuine passion for video games above traditional writing. It's a lot more complicated than all that, I know. This is just one facet that came to mind for me.

Fantastic work! I had a few notes and possible fixes—mostly attempts to crack some of D-Leezy's unintelligible rhymes.

---

We're gonna just blaze, B (I believe this is “With a Just Blaze beat”)

---

Killin' from the forties still two decades later

Say peace to Jimi Hendrix, say good, see you later [I'm not sure what these last three lines are referencing. Maybe something about Wolfenstein.] (Yeah, it is about Wolfenstein. I didn’t do the right playthrough for this, but there’s a character in Wolfenstein that’s basically Jimi Hendrix. “Killin’ from the forties still two decades later” references Wolfenstein’s plot, which starts in 1946 and jumps to 1960.)

---

Ree-ska why you need to scratch that puzzlin' itch ("Threes! got what you need to scratch...")

Jam clone stoppin' fred from gettin' old money, rich [no idea.] (Where you hear “Fred”, I believe he's actually saying “Greg,” presumably Greg Wohlwend, one of the developers of Threes! If it weren’t for clones like 2048, he’d have certainly gotten richer. "Jam clone" may refer to the fact that 2048 looks like a game-jam game—hastily produced.)

---

Dr. Game about Games, Just Blaze breeze buffoon! [very unclear. Dr. Game & Watch, maybe? ...] (I believe it’s “Just Blaze brings the boom!”—just another reference to Just Blaze’s contribution of the beat. No idea about the Dr. Game bit.)

---

How you all spell it, best friend (Sounded like “Tell it, yell it, spell it.")

---

Again, you rock!

I absolutely agree that the issues you list are relevant. However, I don't think it's fair to lambast a video focused on a specific issue for not addressing other issues. Focus is important for communication, especially in such a short format. The video is about one topic—maybe not the most important topic in video games, certainly not the most important topic in the entire spectrum of injustice or inequality—but that's the topic they chose. Crucially, it doesn't present itself as a comprehensive look at everything wrong with the video game community, just an examination of one particular facet.

Ryan had so much energy, enthusiasm, and love of life that to me, in a dumb sort of way, he seemed immortal. A force of nature. Like, there's gravity, thermodynamics, and Ryan Davis on the Bombcast. And I say this as someone, like many here, who had no personal relationship with him. Just that voice every Tuuuuuesday, that energy that made his Quick Looks end a little too quickly, that overwhelming charisma. A light so strong I thought it would never burn out, but of course, reality has a way of being a goddamn asshole. To those who truly knew him, I can't imagine what it must be like to have him gone. I can only add my voice to that of the community and offer my deepest condolences to his friends and family—and to say thank you, Ryan Davis, for so many laughs and good times.

When I was at the scene with the white phosphorous mortar, I was going slowly enough (I was on Easy to get through it, and I don't see well so I'm used to looking very closely) that I could tell, without a doubt, that those were civilians before I bombed them. They were grouped too close, they were clearly in a sheltered area, and they were milling about harmlessly in a way that soldiers wouldn't be in that situation. The sounds of gunfire had died down; I was safe, but the game still demanded that I clear out that group. (Were they next to a vehicle you had to destroy? I don't remember precisely.)

In some ways, I felt a bit cheated that I had to make an obvious mistake to continue—and in other ways it was effective, because the action was fully deliberate. But it was only deliberate in a "meta" sense; I was doing it to move the game forward, not completing my mission or saving my squad's lives. It probably would have been different if I wasn't on Easy and had to think faster, but regardless, some of the impact was lost on me.

When Williams says he doesn't agree with the idea that "the player should be able to do whatever the player wants and the world should adapt itself to the player’s desire," I see where he's coming from, but there are risks. At that moment, I, as the player, wanted to back away from the mortar, rappel down and get the civilians to safety. I couldn't do that. I haven't felt that strongly resistant to a game's critical path in a long while, perhaps ever. It cast the rest of the game in a different light than many people experienced it, I expect.

I think the real news here is that Alex wrote a straightforward, humorless headline.

@TheDudeOfGaming said:

Once, a long time ago, there was a great developer. It was only known as BioWare, it released such classics as Baldur's Gate, KOTOR and Neverwinter Nights. Even it's newer RPGs, like Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins were great. But then...then came Mass Effect 2. And after that Dragon Age 2. Now, a new dawn beckons, and new developers take BioWares place. We greet you Bethesda and CD Projekt Red.

Once, two years before Baldur's Gate was released, there was a developer called Bethesda Softworks and a game called The Elder Scrolls II: Daggerfall. Don't get me wrong, I love the BioWare classics, but Bethesda isn't exactly new to the game.

At first I wanted to complain about the price they're asking for five hours of single-player content. Then I remembered how I said nothing about the Half-Life 2 episodes and how satisfied I was with those purchases. $15 is fine.

@Zippedbinders said:

I've never understood the complaints over the Meat Circus, its honestly not that hard.

However, all this updating is fantastic news. Time to go through Psychonauts an eighth time.

In an absolute sense, compared to other games, no, the Meat Circus is probably not that hard. But relative to the rest of Psychonauts, it comes out of nowhere. You've got a fun, lighthearted game with a lazy difficulty curve and all sorts of fascinating art direction, collectibles, and hilarious tidbits to distract your focus from the very forgiving platforming. Then, you get to the Meat Circus and now you've got to pay attention to those jumps. People complain about the Meat Circus because it's just not the game they've been playing for the previous eight hours. I'm with you in that I didn't find it hard, but I can certainly see where the complaints come from.

@august said:

@benjaebe said:

@Kyle said:

WOW. That's amazing. You know, I don't think I've ever described the actions of game company as evil, but if I were to, this would probably be it.

It's not just Sony though. Valve, for example, has had the same thing in their EULA forever. It's probably fairly common and the only reason people are realizing it now is that they changed their EULA to have it and, following the PSN hacking thing, people have been paying attention to stuff that Sony does.

Cite please.

A. EXCLUSIVE REMEDY -- STEAM AND THE SOFTWARE.

YOU ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOUR SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR ANY DISPUTE WITH VALVE WITH REGARD TO STEAM OR THE SOFTWARE IS TO DISCONTINUE USE OF STEAM AND CANCEL YOUR ACCOUNT.

Steam Subscriber Agreement, Section 10. Caps Lock is theirs. Disclaimer: I am by no means a contract expert, so I don't know if that clause is in the same ballpark or not.