So, for months now, my friends and I have been following the synchronous multiplayer aspect of Sim City. With being tired of more popular multiplayer games, and with lack of time because of work and family stuff we decided it would be fun to get on Skype and play while trying to mess with each others cities.

For MONTHS my friend has been joking with my about superheroes because I keep threatening him with a crime rate issue. After laughing it off for months now I got to pre order and see this:

http://www.amazon.com/SimCity-Limited-Edition-Pc/dp/B007FTE2VW

"Pre-order SimCity and get the Limited Edition Heroes & Villains content..."

He was JOKING, but they added super heroes and villains to Sim City. I texted him at work and I could practically feel him through the Force trying to get to a computer to pre order. It's cool that they added this, but since I'm not a regular Sim City player it seemed out of left field. Still amped though

So anyone else excited about this?

First off, I should say sorry. I'm "That guy". The guy who plays things on easy mode when its a single player experience.

It was December 2010 and in the campaign for CoD:Black Ops. I was on rooftops in China, playing on the second hardest difficulty. Failure after failure led to frustration and stepping away. Knowing that a friend wanted to talk details about the story, I entered into a screw it mode, cranked down the difficulty to its easiest, and ran around like a mad man...

...and I was having fun doing it.

For me, difficulty comes in hunting the most dangerous animal of all: The Zookepper, oh wait! I mean man. Battlefield 3 is my bread and butter, as well as games like Guild Wars 2. Games where I can't adjust the difficulty, but its easy enough to contribute to the overall victory with friends.

When it comes to single player though, eff it.

This started years earlier when Halo 3 came out. I was chatting with a guy about playing through with friends when I used the phrase "I beat the game". He scoffed, and asked me if I had finished it solo on legendary mode. I told him no, that if Bungie bothered to put in 4 player co op thats how I was going to play it. According to him, I still have never beaten Halo 3.

Years later the same person (A friend of a friend) would vent his bitter hatred towards the Mass Effect series. How much he hated 2, how horrible it was and how much he wasn't looking forward to playing it on the hardest difficulty. Yes, you read that right, and he was playing it for the achievement points.

I'm 29 years old, and I love games. In a few months my palm will glow red to signify 30 (Logan's Run reference kids) and yet another year will be lost to jobs, times with friends and family and of course, video games. This whole rant started because I bought Dragon's Dogma yesterday, and while at work today, before I've even fired it up, I was reading about them patching in a new Easy Mode, as well as Hard Mode. When the easy mode was added back in August, the internet cried out with "WHY?!" and the answer in short, is for people like me. I play games because they're fun, and one day years ago I got sick of breaking my controllers on the table, or going to be angry at that undefeated boss. That is simply because I do not want to, or can not handle the stress. Some people thrive on it, and to you I say godpseed. Play the hardest of the hard modes, and stand triumphant on your day of victory. For me, I simply set it aside because I game for 2 hours a night, 3 nights a week. Honestly, I don't want to spend that time on the same section over and over again, and I'm looking forward to the time I'll spend in easy land.

So once again, sorry guys, and I would love to know your thoughts on difficulty in games.

OK, now it's hysterically out of control:

Between last month's Steam sales, local retailers and of course the used game market, it's fair to say that the idea of a gaming backlog has reached critical mass. My biggest sins right now are the GTA collection for 12 bucks (thats GTA all the way through episodes of Liberty City) and the D&D Master collection for 11 bucks (Baulders gate-Neverwinter 2).

On top of this, I have the God of War trilogy for my PS3, Syndiacte and Far Cry 3 for the Xbox 360..so on and so forth...

So my gamer brethren, profess your gaming sins, and may you be more focuses for it. That's my goal at least, to play through these games before the Spring when the cycle refreshes.

So through my web browsing I noticed that gamestop has Halo 4 and Hitman: Absolution on sale for 40 bucks each (Which why buying games for 60 is silly). I think this is just a seasonal promotion and would like to take advantage of at least one of these but I'm not sure which one. Apples and Oranges I know, and I've been estranged from both franchises (even though I did own Reach and Blood Money eventually) for a while now. Either title worth picking up? Is anyone disappointed with their purchase?

With the launch of the new 007 movie "Skyfall" this weekend, my local used book/music/movie store has dusted off the DVD copies of "Dr. No" and such to create a display to remind us that we should prepare for a marathon. Whether you take on the task of all the movies, or simply do a Daniel Craig double feature, if you're planning catching the new escapades of 007 this weekend it seems that there will be plenty of love for your DVD or Blu-Ray player.

Today's topic is a dangerous one because as a fan of the series, its a tough one to fess up to. Looking at the idea of who is the best James Bond brings on a cavalcade of factors. Is it based on who did it first? What about who did the most? Are there disqualifying factors? Most importantly, does Daniel Craig even qualify in you're own mind?

For me, Daniel Craig is James Bond. Going back to Ian Flemming's first novel (Casino Royale) bond is treated as ruthless, a characteristic not seen in many Bond films. In the days prior to Craig, Sean Connery would have been an easy win. At my current age of 29 years old, it is safe to say that my childhood Bond is Pierce Brosnan, but outside of "Goldeneye" and a few choice moments of "The World is Not Enough" I never really called him my Bond. Brosnan's greated contribution is the N64 videogame tied to his name sake, but it doesn't help in qualifying him as the Best Bond.

So for his cold nature, well paced action and true spy work over silly gadgets, Daniel Craig is my 007. Who is yours?

(I promise to get to video games on the next post, there's plenty to talk about)

This is an idea I've been kicking around for a blog/podcast/website and I thought I'd turn to the GB community for help. I wanted to dive off the concept around geek and nerd culture, but keeping it to a grounded level. So hopefully through the weeks and months of blogging we can form a sub group on the site in the pursuit of talking about movies, art, books, music and of course video games. The idea of a bunch of working stiffs looking for a creative outlet, and if that strikes your fancy feel free to contact me.

I wanted to kick this one off with a quick question. Why did I love the movie "Abraham Lincoln:Vampire Hunter"? Realistically, I shouldn't have. It didn't rate well and I'm not a fan of the director. Last night however, even beyond the point of ironically enjoying a terrible movie, my friends and I found ourselves laughing and screaming at the absurd action on the screen. Another thing to note is I hate trendy sci-fi/horror. I hate the Resident Evil movies (mainly for not drawing on good characters.) and I hate Underworld (mainly because its boring). So the question to drop on the group today is this:

Where is the line in a movie between absurd action and a good movie?

Well I guess thats two questions...

Good examples are movies like "Shoot Em Up" "Give em Hell Malone" and "Dylan Dog, Dead of Night" Movies that by critical standards are not well off, but still bring a fair amount of comedy inspired absurdity to the table.