WALL OF TEXT

 
I'm not looking for a flame war (although I'm aware of how inviting this truly is).  I've been taking some time with my blogs to try and hit actual issues from a logical perspective rather than just talking about what I've been doing over the course of a week.  During this blog, I want to look at a massive issue - the war between PC and console gamers. 
 
The big question:  why is there a war in the first place?  Well, some will blame "PC fanboys" and "PC elitism"...and you'd be partially correct.  Others will blame "console fanboys" and "console ignorance"...and that's also partially correct.  I think the issue really comes down to ignorance on both sides, and neither is superior to the other.  Both are drastically different platforms, and due to recent events like Infinity Ward and id Software announcing a lack of dedicated servers in their newest IPs, it would seem that this war is getting pretty heated. 
 
I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure that piracy happens on both PC and consoles.  Yes, it's more prevalent on PC, but every time an argument starts up where PC users are angered about the loss of a typical PC feature, console users are quick to poke and prod with the "THAT'S WHAT YOU GET FOR PIRATING" argument.  Well, not everyone is a pirate, and even then, that comment makes it look as though PC is the sole platform for piracy...and it's just not true.  Unfortunately, due to the ignorance (not stupidity or any demeaning terms like that, just ignorance) of many console gamers, they don't realize this and instead try to paint a target on the forehead of the PC gamers.  Therefore, the next time a console guy wants to claim this argument, maybe you should take a closer look at the world of piracy rather than just commenting with a "fanboy" response.
 
PC gamers are no better, however, as they'll quickly use the "WELL YOU CAN'T USE A MOUSE AND KEYBOARD LAWLZ" argument.  Really?  Are we still going to use that argument after so many games have come out on the consoles to prove that they are fully competent of having good controls?  They may not be as super sensitive as the PC's control setup, and they may need aim assist to pull a little extra magic work into it, but games like Left 4 Dead and Halo on the console have shown us that sensitivity settings are steadily increasing.  So, the next time a PC gamer wants to wreck on a console gamer with this argument, think about just how dumb of an argument you are using.  Mouse-and-key DOES offer more sensitivity, but nowadays, it simply comes down to these words:  control preference. 
 
Dedicated servers and modding are two things that are featured in many PC games, and there are plenty of reasons for it.  The two biggest reasons?  Community and longevity.  Thanks to dedicated servers that are typically run by clans or groups, you can find a community of gamers that offer something the console rarely does:  friendly competition.  Sure, there are plenty of folks on PC that are trash-talking cumstains just like you would find on consoles (and vice versa, there are respectable players on console just like there are on PC).  Nonetheless, you typically can find at least two or three servers that offer some good conversation along with some good gaming.  Modding offers total conversions of games as well as new maps and features that can greatly increase the longevity of a game's life, as well as even offer an additional ease of gameplay.  A prime example of modding can be seen in something as simple as the interface of World of Warcraft.  Thanks to many mods like Recount, Auctioneer, QuestHelper, and Omen, WoW players are capable of having far more numbers to help their gaming experience be more focused and concise.  Moreover, Blizzard has taken a lot at many popular mods and found ways of implementing their own official interface reworkings to replace those third-party mods.  As far as the typical "modding" that people think of, you can look at things such as Garry's Mod or Battlefield: Desert Combat (which led to much of Trauma Studios being brought on at DICE to make Battlefield 2, and the rest going toward Kaos Studios to make Frontlines and the upcoming Homefront). 
 
Without dedicated servers and modding, this leads directly to a loss of community as well as longevity in a game, but it will also lead to positive things like more control for companies to prevent piracy as well as offering official add-ons for their games.  Nonetheless, many feel that these are "privileges" and even "rights" for PC users.  Guys...shut the fuck up with that argument.  It's pointless and stupid.  You are not owed anything.  HOWEVER, the PC is an open-ended platform for a reason, and developers trying to stifle features like this can cause a major blockage in terms of creative content to further game development creativity, as well as recognition of talent outside of the developers and publishers involved in the creation of a game. 
 
When tackling this argument, though, it's simple:  console gamers don't understand how important these features are to an open-ended platform like the PC, and PC gamers don't understand how vital it is to EDUCATE console gamers about these features rather than just blindly rage at them every time they are called a bad name.  Stop letting your goddamn pride speak and instead use your brain.  Don't insult.  Instead, help to push back the cloud of ignorance.  Not everyone is a computer whiz.  Now, sure, companies like IW and id Software are coming out of the gate and saying that ideas like dedicated servers are "archaic"...but does that mean they are dead?  No, it just means that publishers and developers alike are more concerned with making their games more difficult to pirate rather than trying to enhance the gaming experience for everyone involved.  Some developers have even taken steps to offer some tools to console gamers in order to show just how awesome PC gaming can be, i.e. the map editor found in Far Cry 2. 
 
The last thing that I bring up in this blog is popularity.  Yes, consoles are more popular.  Then again, at $200-$400 in their prime selling period, it's hard for them to NOT sell more than a PC.  Which one is superior?  That's a subjective ideal, as it's based solely on the play style of the individual gamer.  Some people don't need 60fps or higher while they play their games to be entertained, and PC gamers shouldn't try to speak down to those people because of it.  Meanwhile, console gamers shouldn't need to talk down to PC gamers because they prefer to play their games on the Monolith from 2001: A Space Odyssey.  Either way you go, you'll get a way of enjoying an interactive experience, and THAT is the important thing.  Consoles can outsell PCs 100:1, but it doesn't mean either is lesser compared to the other in terms of anything other than performance.  However, so long as the game is being enjoyed, then what's it matter if it is at 30fps or 60fps?  If you feel the need to be that critical, then maybe you should spend some of that time trying to be a professional critic rather than trolling some internet forums. 
 
All in all, the platform war between PC and consoles is tiresome, guys.  I've personally seen far too many ignorant posts from both PC and console gamers in recent weeks that just don't need to be there.  A little more education, a little more teaching, and a little more restraint should be practiced rather than just outright flaming someone because they have a certain preference or they may not understand. 
 
I will say that console gamers might want to try a better demeanor when addressing issues that PC gamers have rather than throwing up uneducated answers like "HAHA PC gamers are getting shafted yet again" or "PC elitist fanboy tears taste good".  Meanwhile, PC gamers should really lay off their typical diet of "mouse-and-keys are better than controllers" and "congratulations on getting duped into buying our patches". 
 
Video games are an ever-expanding market, and there will always be change.  There's a lot of it for the PC that I personally don't agree with (and you all know what that concerns).  Meanwhile, there's a lot of change for the console that I don't agree with as well. 
 
A final question that I pose:  have any of you ever looked at your console and thought "when did my console become more about multimedia and less about games" and then looked at your PC and thought "when did my PC become less about multimedia and more about games"?  It's interesting to me how the progression of PCs and consoles continue to try and make one so much like the other...and then we see all this pointless arguing.  =  / 
 
Then again, maybe it'll be hard for people to take me serious when I have WSAD tattooed on my fingers.  Hopefully not.

Until next time, piece.

There are people that are pissed off about Modern Warfare 2.  Did you know?  If you didn't, wake the fuck up, man! 
 
The internet has been abuzz with what seems like daily bummers flowing out from Infinity Ward, Activision, and other sources in relation to Modern Warfare 2, the game that apparently bears a beard, long hair, sandals, and a couple holes in its hands and feet.  I was personally psyched about it as well.  However, that has changed.  But why?  Is it because of the game? 
 
No.  I haven't touched the game yet.  If IW's track record for making an FPS is any indication, I'm sure Modern Warfare 2 will be a completely capable first-person shooter, more capable than most.  I just don't like the feature sets.  With each announcement, it feels like another nail being driven into a coffin for something that I really don't want to let go of.  Let's go over a list of things and see what's going on in Camp Modern WTFuck 2:

•   No dedicated servers - One of the staples of PC games is the ability to have dedicated servers for game, which allow for two important things that have kept PC gaming alive for many years:  connection speeds and community.  Infinity Ward's response to these issues are that private matches are still available, and that matchmaking capabilities will improve your gameplay experience because you'll be teamed against people of your own skill level.  But will I really?  Red Faction Guerrilla has a matchmaking setup, and even with my team at blue bars (which basically means they are new), I'd still get a group of four silvers showing up in the matchmaking to stomp ass.  Halo 3 isn't that great for matchmaking either, but it is surely better than RFG.  Nonetheless, matchmaking doesn't depend on skill level - it depends on who is available for a match in that playlist at the time you are joining.  Any idea that TrueSkill or any other matchmaking setup actually creates a decently fair match is a misnomer.
• No mod community - Due to the installation of IWNet, Infinity Ward's new back-end server setup, community modding is essentially null and void.  This serves one major purpose:  IW and Activision can now charge for map packs across all platforms including PC.  My question here is why a company that started their development career on the PC would decide to cut the ability to offer mod abilities for the community, especially when a mod community can keep a game alive for many many MANY years after its time has drawn nigh.  People still play Call of Duty 2 in DROVES, and it's mainly because of the mods available for it.  I'm sure there is a way to allow the community to offer mods while also being able to charge for your DLC map packs and such.  Unfortunately, it seems there is no resolution in the end, and PC gamers will have to suffer.
• No PunkBuster - While PunkBuster may seem archaic to some, it's a proven way of keeping cheaters away from servers.  It does have its workarounds and its glitches...and it can even prevent a legit player from playing on a server from time to time...but in the end, PunkBuster has been put to the test through MANY games and it continues to pass.  Now, with the heavy usage of Steam in MW2, the game will now feature VAC.  Granted, with no mod community, there is less fear to deal with possibly getting kicked or banned...as most incorrect VAC cases were caused by simple mods.  However, VAC cases of kicking or banning are rarely overturned, even in many legit circumstances.
• Steam - This is a "love it or hate it" type of ordeal.  Personally, I work at a gaming center where we hold licenses for Steam, and even then, the functionality of it on a network using many other programs is quite difficult at times.  How difficult?  The only two games were run that use Steam are Dawn of War II and Borderlands!!!  If you are a personal home user, then maybe it's a different experience from what I see on a daily basis.  Even on my home computer, though, it can drive me nuts trying to get pre-loads and full loads and file transfers and install recognitions and everything else to work properly!

 
Each day up to November 10th, I feel like we're going to be given more and more disappointing news.  I remember being so incredibly hyped for this game at one point that I was virtually bursting at the seams.  Now, however... 
 
If Modern Warfare 2 were a person, I would tell them to get rid of a lot of the piercings and some tattoos and show off what it's really about:  the gameplay.  Unfortunately, they are overshadowing that gameplay with incredibly DUMB decisions in the game's different feature sets. 
 
What's next?  You can only customize a kit three times, and then after that, you have to call Activision so they can manually reset your ability to customize kits? 
 
So no...I'm not pissed about the gameplay.  Everything I've seen...as well as many others...looks goddamn excellent.  Unfortunately, I just can't support a company that is willing to add these unnecessary features to the game in order to INHIBIT a player's capabilities of enjoying the game.  Then again...it's Activision.  They want to take the fun out of video games.

You think I'm talking about Borderlands, right?  Well...I kind of am.  This is a short blog this week, folks, as I've simply been playing Borderlands, installing Borderlands, playing Borderlands, eating Borderlands, living breathing shitting Borderlands.  The game is so far up my ass that my throat tastes like desert sand and canned skag meat.  I'm level 48, gonna hit 50 after work tonight...and then I start all over again on the PC. 
 
HOWEVER...that is not the true meaning of addiction, my friends.  This is.  I can't get it out of my fucking head.  Amidst listening to the new Breaking Benjamin and Chevelle CDs 'round the clock, this is the only song I've been literally singing for the last week and a half: 
 
     
 
THERE AIN'T NO REST FOR THE WICKED UNTIL WE CLOSE OUR EYES FOR GOOD! 
 
Seems like a fitting song for a game that keeps the controller firmly grasped in your hand, eh?
 
Until next time...piece.

Borderlands.  
 
I'd like to think that's all that needs to be said at this point...but it isn't.  In the course of only two days time since release, we have over 2,000 people registered with the achievements progress tracker here on Giant Bomb.  Needless to say...holy fuck.  Now, with the knowledge that Borderlands has been selling out everywhere (much to the surprise of Gearbox if you keep up with Randy Pitchford's Twitter), it would seem that some of you won't get to play the game until sometime next week.  Sorry.  =  / 
 
So how is it?  Fucking fantastic.  It's great to see an original IP with a new way of approaching how to make a hybrid game actually do it well on their first time around.  Last year, we had Mirror's Edge, which tried to mix the worlds of first-person perspective gaming with world exploration and parkour.  It didn't fair as well as Borderlands, but nonetheless, the excitement I get from well-established developers like DICE and Gearbox going outside their typical realms and trying something new to move their genres forward is something I can only commend, whether the project fails or not. 
  
 

Consider the following to basically be my review of the game.

  
 

• Story that doesn't override the actual gameplay - There is plenty of story there if you are reading the quests and actually listening to all of the little things you are picking up for quest items.   Whether that's enough for you or not is your own thing to judge.  Essentially, though, it's like WoW in the fact that you can get into the game and thoroughly enjoy it without having to know what the hell is going on...but if you WANT to dig up all that story, it's there and ready to be read/heard/seen.
• Memorable NPC characters - It doesn't matter whether it's Claptrap (who I'm SURE will be the new "it" character for people to adore), T.K. Baha, Patricia Tannis, Dr. Zed, 9 Toes, Sledge, or the hilarity of Scooter; I guarantee you that these are characters you won't soon forget.  This is thanks to very original character designs as well as INCREDIBLE voice acting work and well-written, memorable dialogue.  There are even moments that will test your attachment to certain characters.
• Well-balanced gameplay - There's never a point where the game feels like too much of a shooter or too much of an RPG.  As a shooter, it is fully competent in terms of everything from controls to the general feel of shooting a gun.  Meanwhile, on the RPG side of things, it has enough stats and numbers for you to cram into your head that making decisions on switching one piece of gear for the other can sometimes be a bit of a challenge...ESPECIALLY when it comes to class mods.
• Familiarity - One thing that ANY RPG fiend will tell you makes a game worthwhile is the environment you are surrounded by.  I've played through the Arid Badlands in its entirety a total of four times already (that's completing every quest in the area on each run), and I'm STILL not tired of that area.  I can easily identify where I'm at just by looking at a specific pattern of dirt on the ground!  Familiarity is what makes a game like this worthwhile to me.  What's more amazing is that they did all this...in a barren wasteland!!!  Kudos, Gearbox!!!  On the same level, the controls work very much like Call of Duty 4, the "trading" of gear is very much akin to Diablo and Champions of Norrath, and the driving is very much the same as Halo.  However, all of these components combined make for a generally enjoyable experience without having to try and relearn a ton of complicated controls.  Familiarity is EVERYTHING in Borderlands.
• Difficult choices - A good RPG will give you difficult choices when it comes to gear.  "Man, that gun is awesome, but I'm $6,000 short.  Should I sell all this stuff for that gun?"  Even up to the point I've at now (level 24), I'm still sitting back and saying "man, should I get the epic SDU for my shotgun or save up to try and get a better shield"?  Decisions, decisions, decisions.  I made a decision last night to drop my Titan Class Mod (48% max health, +stats for my Tank tree) and instead get a Centurion Class Mod (40% team max health, +stats for Tank tree).  In turn, it was a MUCH better option, as I ended up having MORE health thanks to one of those +stats being for my increased health passive skill.
• Excellent class archetypes - I find it interesting how they were able to take all of the classic RPG archetypes of warrior/barbarian, rogue/assassin, healer/paladin, hunter/ranger, etc etc etc...and turn them into interesting hybrids.  Brick is my main so far, and his ability to be a great tank as well as physical brawling is ASTOUNDING.  Meanwhile, Mordecai is a really well-built ranged class with a "pet" to use for his action skill, but even then, something getting up close to him can go away very quickly.  Roland is an unique way of looking at the healing class, as his heals are TRULY healing "damage" since he has to shoot you for big heals.  It also means that using high fire rate combat rifles in conjunction with big damage is a massive benefit to him.  Sadly, I've yet to try out Lilith, but I'll be playing around with her in the course of next week.
• Reactions - When I shoot someone with a shock-based weapon...and they start going into a convulsion of electrocution, it's one of the funniest and coolest things ever.  Melting someone with corrosive acid, setting enemies ablaze with fire damage, blowing someone up, watching someone's head explode from a well-placed headshot...all of these little things make killing enemies an incredibly fun thing.  It also will result in more "DOOD, THAT WAS FUCKING AWESOME" comments than you've ever heard during the gameplay of any other game.

 
To be honest, the few criticisms that I've heard about the game are really difficult for me to look at, other than a few glitches here and there (brought to you by Unreal Engine 3).  Borderlands is an outstanding piece of work, and there's a reason why it's selling out everywhere.  Hopefully, I'll see some of you online soon enough, but right now, I'm taking my time to learn the areas and getting used to the way the game plays with all characters to do my job of killing things and surviving. 
 
In short...if you aren't playing this game, you are doing yourself a huge disservice.  Hunt it down and obtain it immediately. 
 
Until next time, piece.

Recently, we've seen a lot of activity on the forums about a particular topic:  downloadable content.  Specifically, we've seen two very differing sides.  On one end, we see someone saying "this should've been included in the box".  Meanwhile, the other side is saying "shut the fuck up". 
 
Which side is correct?  Well, ladies and germs, I'm here to tell you this:  it depends.  Let's break down a couple of instances and see exactly when DLC is a bad thing and when it's not a problem. 
 

Resident Evil 5 

While the quality of the game as an entry into the franchise is subjective, there's no doubt that Resident Evil 5 made a big splash upon release.  Maybe it's because it seemed to make a great dive worthy of 9's and 10's, but quickly started losing its ability to execute a good dive.  When the Slayer mode was announced for RE5, people were up in arms over it.  Why?  Because the content was already located on the disc but merely locked by the publisher and developers.  Purchase of the DLC supposedly just unlocked that content.  Is this bad?  FUCK YES!  If something is present on the disc but you are not allowed to play it, then that means the product you purchased is incom-fucking-plete!
 

Left 4 Dead 

The granddaddy of controversy this year (thanks to the announcement of Valve not taking seven years to release a fucking sequel), Left 4 Dead was under heavy scrutiny due to a distinct lack of downloadable content showing up, as well as a late SDK kit.  Valve had already initially said they would support L4D with free updates as well as an SDK kit, but now we are two months before launch.  We've seen one additional update, in the fun-but-broken-as-Hell Crash Course DLC, and we've seen the release of the SDK since the announcement of L4D2 at E3.  Regardless, the question is begged:  was L4D a thin package upon release?  Yes.  It was also a thin package that happened to be a killer fucking game that many people have enjoyed and the console communities decided to turn into a trolling war by acting like their usual dickish selves.  To be quite honest, you console muthafuckers don't deserve any FREE DLC for that game solely based on your love of team-killing everyone and acting like fuckwads.  So...enjoy your buggy-as-shit Crash Course and VIVA LA L4D2!!! 
 

Red Faction Guerrilla 

Having proven to be quite popular in the multiplayer arena (to the point that it's listed on MLG), RFG caught some flack from the community due to two weak DLC packs, in the form of a single player expansion called Demons of the Badlands and a wrecking crew package.  Demons of the Badlands provided a short 4-mission long story that provided less than 30 minutes of total gameplay for $10, while the latest wrecking crew package simply added new levels to a mode that is already pretty useless in the first place.  Meanwhile, two new multiplayer modes and eight new maps were added in their second DLC pack, coming in at $7.00.  This has begged the question:  why hasn't there just been multiplayer add-ons for the game where the multiplayer has been keeping it alive?  It's understandable if a company is wanting to offer something in all the areas of their game, but expecting people to pay $10 for a 30 minute single player expansion is bonkers.  Meanwhile, asking far less for something that you'll get more playtime out of is just a bit baffling in nature.  Given the reputation that Volition gained with their infamously bad DLC for the Saint's Row franchise, we can only hope they are planning more DLC content in the right department for the future, but most signs are pointing to no in that department.
 

Halo 3 Mythic  

In a weird instance of reverse ideology, there are people who are actually complaining about a game including ALL of the DLC, as well as three exclusive maps.  Packaged along with ODST at a price of $60, Halo 3 Mythic features all of the Halo 3 multiplayer component from the 2007 hit, INCLUDING all the DLC packages up to Mythic and three exclusive maps to the disc itself.  Halo fans have found it to be bullshit that this has occurred.  There is only one logical way for me to address this:  go talk to someone who has played Everquest since day 1...and bought every expansion brand new...and then saw the release of the Titanium Edition of Everquest for $19.95.  -_-  If you are seriously so die-hard about the game, then you'll be wanting ODST anyways.  If you aren't that die-hard, it's not like you NEED those three maps in order to play your favorite playlists online still.  So...quichabitchin.
 

Dragon Age Origins 

The new hack 'n' slash RPG from veteran beat-shit-up company BioWare has been taking hit after hit over the course of the year.  First was the trailer featuring the Marilyn Manson track "This is The New Shit", followed by a seeming lack of faith by BioWare in the product in exchange for building hype around The Old Republic, and then came news that the BioWare doctors were going to be taking the reins of Mythic Entertainment and EA's new RPG/MMO division.  Despite positive press coming out saying that the game doesn't suck, that hasn't stopped people from being pissed about the announcement of DLC being launched day 1 of release for DAO.  While the DLC is developed by a different studio, the question has been begged as to whether the DLC was already completed before the game went gold or not.  Should the DLC have been included on the disc?  Well, given the coinciding release date, it would seem there's no reason it shouldn't have been.  With the fact that it will simply be adding a new quest line in a small new area, along with six new abilities, it doesn't seem like something nearly as significant as Fallout 3's DLC expansion sets.  However, is it the equivalent of horse armor in Oblivion?  Probably not, but it's close...and it costs $7.00 to boot. 
 

Forza 3 

People are pissed off that Turn10 announced 10 additional cars will be packed in with BRAND NEW copies of Forza 3, as an incentive for consumers to purchase the game new rather than waiting for it be come secondhand through used game stores like GameStop.  People have then gone on to call Turn10 "evil" and "corporate"...even though they were going to go pay someone who isn't the game developer money for a secondhand copy of the game they were bitching about wanting so bad.  To make matters even worse...that secondhand company...happens to be "evil" and "corporate" as well...and they don't even make high-quality video games.  
  

Borderlands 

The newest cat to the controversy (possibly just as sarcasm and irony), Borderlands has not even hit shelves yet, and the first DLC pack has already been announced.  This DLC will be adding an entire new area as well new quests, items, enemy types, etc.  Should it have been included on the disc?  Look, folks...they've already said it'll be before the end of the year, but that simply means we've got between October 20th and December 31st.  There's absolutely no reason why it should be expected on the disc at all...so lay the fuck off it. 
 
In essence, here's what we have to ask ourselves when we decide to try and make controversy over something like DLC: 

1.  Will the DLC be coming out day and date of the retail game?  If so, is it something so small that it could've been included in the disc but instead is being used to reap more money from people?
2. Will the DLC be a significant change to the gameplay, warranting the price it is being offered at?  For instance, World at War's Map Pack 3 contained one Nazi Zombie map for $10, while Red Faction Guerrilla's second DLC pack contained two new modes of play and eight new maps for $7.00.
3. What is the general amount of gameplay you've gotten from the base game?  If it seems incredibly short, then is the DLC simply present to finally give you the REST of the game?
4. How meaningful is the DLC?  Does it work to the strengths of the game in question?

Personally, I'm sick of seeing all the "controversy" about DLC popping up.  People need to simply ask themselves some basic question before replying to the announcement of DLC.  I wrote this blog mainly as a guide as well as an outrage to the idea that Borderlands' recently announced DLC "should be on the game disc".  Fallout 3 wasn't even out, yet it was already stated that they would have five DLC packs after launch to extend the game.  Should those have been on the game? 
 
People, just please...for fuck's sake...think for once before you open your mouths...or type your words at least. 
 
Thank you, and good night.