So at this point, I don't have any major gripes, thoughts, or even problems that i have interest in writing in. After my last Blog post, I frankly have lost the urge to write on anything controversial or non-game related. (It's amazing the kind of hate mail you'll get when all you really want is for everyone to get along). But here's one thing we can hopefully all agree on: this has been, and continues to be, a GREAT year for games and gamers alike.  
 
While we've been inundated with an alarming number of sequels - Left for Dead 2, Modern Warfare 2, Uncharted 2, Assassins Creed 2, Forza 3, etc. - for the most part they have been alarmingly good. Looking back on this year in gaming, it's very difficult to figure out exactly what the GOTY should be. While we've had a string of awesome titles since Batman: Arkham Asylum pleasantly shocked us all, we can't forget the Street Fighter 4s and Resident Evil 5s that dropped during the first quarter. 
 
It's fair to say that we're all in troubling economic times. I myself have had to skip a few meals to feed the gaming habit, and even for those in the industry, futures aren't bright. EA's closure of Pandemic is heat breaking, and this time I will agree with Adam Sessler's most recent rant: it's such a shame that EA's flirtation with creativity and original IP didn't bear the fruit it should have. He's right in saying that much of it had to do with the economic changes as of late. In short gamers aren't too willing to take $60 chances on games that don't have proven track records. So while some might gripe about the over-serialization of some franchises, I figure that it's probably smart to play it safe right now. And what's wrong with improving on already good games? As far as I'm concerned, nothing. 
 
So as I watch the stack of unfinished games continue to grow on my desk, I'm thankful that quality is still being produced in the midst of a flagging economy. This is the season to be thankful, after all. I'm also thankful to Giant Bomb and its community, cheers all around. I'll be losing sleep playing some real gems over the next couple months, and that, my friends, is a good thing.

 
Oh man, here we go: it's time to open the floodgate that is the "free speech debate" in society and video games. Even before writing this, I know it's going to make some people agree, and others say all sorts of nasty things, but nevertheless I feel compelled to write about the issue. So I know this is a lose/lose situation. But I'd ask you read everything I'm saying before posting here... at least do me that favor.
 
Today, G4 posted this weeks episode of "Sessler's Soapbox," in which he criticizes Infinity Ward's  viral video about supporting the "Fight Against Grenade Spam." If you didn't see the video, you can probably still find it; but although it's an interestingly conceived piece, the acronym it creates was indeed ill-advised (it's "F.A.G.S." if you didn't notice).  So this week, Sessler takes it upon himself to rant about the use of the word- whether it was intentional or not- acting as though it's tantamount to genocide and the end of human decency. It's not the first time he's been the stalwart champion of political correctness in video games, and I'm sure it's not the last. But while I can agree with his general point, I think his reaction, and consequently, many people's reactions to certain terms, are a bit much. My point is simple: lighten up, if only a little. 
 
Now before anyone starts flaming me on the matter, please hear me out. First and foremost, I always make sure that I keep my dialogue "classy," I don't use offensive language like this, and when my friends do, it bothers me. I think we should all try to be as kind and considerate to each other as possible no matter what the forum. However, the problem is that because of media voices like Sessler, so many words get placed on the "politically correct" blacklist, that it has begun to erode the concept of free speech. To some extent, it's limited the ability to just have fun with each other, even if it is sometimes in bad taste.  
 
It's a situation where I have to maintain that "even if I don't like what you say, I'll defend your ability to say it." I believe we ALL say dumb things from time to time, and we should be able to apologize and move on, or simply be recognized as an idiot by virtue of our conduct. I DON'T believe that demonizing people who say certain things or share specific views is right. All too often, one bad comment can ruin the life of a public figure, and it's people like Sessler who make recovering from that impossible.  
 
Here's my main point: nobody has the right to never be offended. There is this popular perception out there that certain groups of people simply cannot hear or deal with offensive language or imagery, and that's what propels these sorts of arguments. To a lesser extent, this also was true of the Resident Evil "racism" debate, in which again, Sessler was perhaps the most vocal about (even more so than N'Gai, go figure).  
 
The problem is that "freedom from offense," at least for those who carry the banner, is almost always a double standard. In particular, it's a double standard for those on the political left, which characterizes much of the games press. These same people, like those at G4, have absolutely no problem demonizing and ridiculing conservatives, Christians, or anyone vocalizing opposing views for that matter. Take for example, EA's marketing of Dante's Inferno. At E3, they staged fake "Christian" protests of the game, in a display that, at its best, was a mockery of Christian culture. Could you imagine if they'd picked on fundamentalist Islam? I have no problem saying that I'm a man of faith, and that I'm often extremely offended by some of the content I've heard on various podcasts and shows. In fact, I'd say that Giant Bomb is the ONLY podcast that doesn't wear it's political/religious affiliations (or lack thereof) on its sleeves, and I love them for that. In contrast, over the years I've heard some remarkably partisan things from Joystiq, 1up, G4, Gamespot, and more recently, Rebel FM (I am still a fan of most of these shows though).
 
Here's the kicker: for most people who are devout- (and I mean devout), Religious beliefs matter far more than personal preferences in sexual/relationship matters, yet they're fair game if they get network ratings.
 
BUT I'm trying to say this is okay, because we live in a country where people can hold and express these views, and I respect that. My problem with Sessler here is that such strong reactions lead us down a dangerous road, where more and more things become taboo, and freedom to either have fun (or be a moron) does not exist. So I'll defend the morons and those who make missteps.  
 
At the end of the day, actual hate-speech is bad, and I cannot stress how important it is we all keep our language clean and respect those around us. But to a greater extent, we should all be willing to lighten up, and take the good with the bad, because who wants to live in a society where nobody is willing to speak their mind or express their genuine opinions? I fear we're headed that way, so let's just take a step back.
 
 

Well, it's halloween, and therefore only fitting that I want to talk about horror games. Survival horror is a genre very near and dear to my heart. Since I first played the original Resident Evil back in 1995, I've had a soft spot for games that make me jump, give me nightmares, or just amp up the tension in some meaningful way. Over the years, I've made it a point to play almost every major horror title: the full Silent Hill, Fatal Frame, and Resident Evil Franchises, and even the one shot games like Haunting Ground, Siren, Fear, and Condemned.  
 
But while I love these games, the releases this year has had me wondering whether or not the genre itself is dead. Is it? In my opinion, the only "scary" game to come out in the current console generation was the original Condemned. Dead Space, albeit an amazing game, was built on tension, and never inspired that kind of "man, I do not want to go in that door" feeling that say, Silent Hill 2 thrived on. In a similar vein, Resident Evil has become an action-based series, and Silent Hill has lost its punch since Americans took over development and began copying the style of the movie ad-nauseam. For those who remember, the Playstation 2  and GameCube yielded some of the best games to fit the genre- Silent Hill 2 (my personal favorite), the Resident Evil Remake, and one-offs like Eternal Darkness.  
 
But what made these games so great? in part, it was the storytelling, which- particularly in the case of Silent Hill- was solid. However, much of it was due to the limitations of the system that made for clunky gameplay mechanics. For many games, this included tank-like character movement, poor combat mechanics, and in the case of resident evil, fixed cameras. While in some cases, these limitations reflected poor design, in effect they tended to amp up the tension of the games. However, these days, companies cannot release games with rough control and hope to sell them. Silent Hill Homecoming and Dead Space represent the alternative- a "functional" protagonist who can defend themselves. But here's the problem- because their lead characters were capable, it was hard to be scared or worried about what might happen. Isaac Clarke was too much of a badass to worry whether some necromorph was going to bust through the ceiling.  
 
So where is the old-school, clunky video game horror these days? Well, oddly enough, on the Wii. Between the Resident Evil and Dead Space light gun shooters, the new Silent Hill Remake, the new Fatal Frame, and pitiful games like Cursed Mountain and Ju-On, the Wii is not lacking for horror titles. But who is buying these games? With the exception of the resident evil franchise, all these games have been complete flops (we'll see about Silent Hill: Shattered Memories). In some cases, this is for good reason. Ju-On in particular is laughably bad.  Has original horror IP been reduced to shovelware?
 
While it might seem like I want another old-school horror game, I honestly don't. Having recently replayed the original Silent Hill, it's become clear that you can't go back again. But with the right measure of atmosphere, storytelling, and audiovisual design, horror can still be achieved. For an example, play the original Condemned: Criminal Origins. The later levels of that are truly great horror experiences. But here's the problem, that game didn't sell well, and neither did the sequel (although it too was a solid game). 
 
So to sum up: can actual horror games still be created, certainly. Is there a market for these games? Well, that's another story. I truly hope that we will see another Silent Hill 2- level game, but I'm not optimistic. This time of year, I can't help but feel that it's a loss for everyone. Thoughts?

Maybe this is the result of seeing too many outwardly-biased headlines on N4G, or maybe I've just reached my limit, but I'm starting to wonder why it is that any topic regarding any console, its exclusives, or its affiliation, inevitably devolves into a forum-based flame war. It's not that I never was a fan of a specific system, or that I don't have my own preferences, I just don't get the level of vitriol that comes out of relatively innocuous topics. 
 
While I know i'm not the first person to bring this subject up (not even recently), I have to wonder: what is it that makes people want to denigrate other opinions, to want to police editorials, and to "censor" anything that doesn't follow their own perceptions of what is good? If you're a PS3 Fanboy, why do you want to see games like Halo: ODST fail, and if you're an Xbox 360 person,  why would you want to see Uncharted 2 bomb. And more than just market results, why would you react defensively towards reviews you perceive as too positive or negative? 
 
Put a little more simply, what's the point? I can happily claim that I have not one, but two 360s AND two PS3s, each has their relative advantages and disadvantages. Chances are, if you're a member of this site, you already know what these pros and cons are, and you've already made up your mind on what constitutes "value." 
 
But this goes beyond the console wars. Why flame? Why antagonize views you disagree with? Note the word "antagonize." I did not say "criticize." If you're willing to make valid points, be respectful, and avoid personal attacks and labels, then please contribute. But if your whole purpose of writing is just to say "Halo is teh suxors,"  or  "PS3= fail," then you're not doing anyone any favors.  This can even go for boards about websites, artists, teams, developers, etc. I recently saw a blog post criticizing the GB staff's videos. Going beyond the obvious question, the post devolved into an angry mess of posts and replies. Way to keep it classy folks.
 
Look, having opinions and perspectives is fine, we all do. But slamming others' perspectives because they're different is never going to make anyone agree with you. And if you actually derive some level of satisfaction by antagonizing others, then it's just sad, at least in my view. 
 
I'm not above admitting that maybe I've missed something here. So if you are a fanboy, I'd just like to know what motivates you. As far as I know, most of it probably comes from the fact that you've got one console or game, and you want to further validate that purchase decision. In other words, you want to feel better about things at the expense of everything else.  
 
So seriously, I'd love to hear someone justify the kind of fanboyism that leads to flame wars all the time. Why?  
 
I ask, because as far as I can tell, it only reinforces the idea that gamers are antisocial, misanthropic basement dwellers. Yeah, I do believe in the idea that internet + anonymity= asshole, at least in practice, but these are the communities we build. For some of us, we look at this as an extension of society, and not a place to abandon its precepts.  
 
But if there's a good reason, I'd love to know.

When I was growing up, my family more or less always had a computer. We began with the Commodore 64, which segued into a series of Mac LC computers and low end PCs. While you can't quite talk about graphics cards and powerful hardware in 1990 the way we tend to now, most of the machines we played on were competent. Regardless, being an NES/SNES kid from day 1, computer games were always something of an anomaly. In short, I didn't get a chance to play many. The big exception was the many Lucasarts games that emerged in the late 80's/early 90's. We used to find value packs of these at Sams' Clubs and Wal-Mart stores, and over time I played all the classics: Indiana Jones, Day of the Tentacle, Full Throttle, the Monkey Island series, etc. While some of these frustrated me all the way from start to finish- there was no Internet- I loved them for their simple interface and story elements.