Killing Orcs and Taking Names
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor unlocked on Steam at 6:00 PM today and within minutes I was back in Mordor murdering Orcs once again. It is interesting sequel, to say the least. First off, I’ve not seen quite as much mainstream publicity for a game for a while. There has been a fair amount of TV advertising and every London Bus I see, seems to be adorned with promotional posters for the game. Next, this game is acutely aware that it’s a sequel and does everything it can to improve and embellish upon the previous instalment. Such a policy broadly works but there are times when there seems to be an overabundance of choice. Many of the core skills from the first game make a return but have a subset of modifiers. Not all of them seem that important or relevant. However, the new double jump is invaluable for navigating the environment which features numerous iconic locations such as Minas Ithil and Cirith Ungol. There’s also a far greater number of mobs about this time so stealth is not always an easy option.
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor unlocked on Steam at 6:00 PM today and within minutes I was back in Mordor murdering Orcs once again. It is interesting sequel, to say the least. First off, I’ve not seen quite as much mainstream publicity for a game for a while. There has been a fair amount of TV advertising and every London Bus I see, seems to be adorned with promotional posters for the game. Next, this game is acutely aware that it’s a sequel and does everything it can to improve and embellish upon the previous instalment. Such a policy broadly works but there are times when there seems to be an overabundance of choice. Many of the core skills from the first game make a return but have a subset of modifiers. Not all of them seem that important or relevant. However, the new double jump is invaluable for navigating the environment which features numerous iconic locations such as Minas Ithil and Cirith Ungol. There’s also a far greater number of mobs about this time so stealth is not always an easy option.
As with the previous game, if you’re a Tolkien purist then you may object to some of the liberties that the writers have taken with existing lore. Talion is still connected to the spirit of Celebrimbor and the game starts with the forging of a new ring, free from the power of Sauron. However, the crafting process weakens the Second Age Ñoldorin prince and he is separated from Talion. The Grave Walker eventually tracks him down, finding him in the clutches of Shelob. She will release him only if Talion freely gives her the new ring. As he has no other option Talion agrees and Celebrimbor is restored to him. Shelob encourages them to make war upon Sauron and suggests that the Palantir of Minas Ithil will aid them. However, Sauron has plans of his own and lays siege to the Tower of the Moon. Celebrimbor deems the city lost but Talion feels obliged to fight with his people. However, will the pair of them be able to withstand the Nazgûl and their leader the Witch-King of Angmar.
It's a bold narrative despite the canonical inconsistencies. Minas Ithil fell to the Nazgûl 939 years earlier in the third age but to be honest it doesn’t really matter. This is a game set more in Peter Jackson’s version of Middle-earth, rather than Tolkien’s. And once again it is the nemesis system that is the major selling point. The Orcs, Uruks and Ologs all have incredibly well written personalities and can be either sinister, repulsive or just plain crazy. They often have curious quirks and foibles that come dangerously close to parody but the humour is kept on the right side of the line, so it doesn’t get too silly. The game also has a wealth of minor quests and collectables, that some would describe as busy work. There are dozens of lore items to discover, each with a short-narrated anecdote connected to them. Then there are fragments of Shelob’s memory to collect. Furthermore, this time round there is gear to collect and upgrade.
So far, it all seems highly polished and very familiar. Having maxed out my previous character in the last game it is a little odd to be starting from scratch again and to be missing many of the skills I came to rely puon. They all have to be earned from scratch again. At present I cannot dominate Orcs and so I have had no reason to look any further in to the Fortress Siege system. I’m not required for the meantime to recruit an army to rival Sauron’s. I suspect that mechanic will be part of the endgame along with the requirement to use the loot box system. Exactly how long it takes to get there, is a subject of interest to me. The marketing of Middle-earth: Shadow of War suggests there is fifty to sixty hours of gameplay in the campaign. Considering that I spent £59.99 for the Gold Edition of the game, I hope that is the case. As and when I have to use the microtransaction mechanic in this game, I will write another blog post to discuss how I find it. For the present I will simply say, so far, so good.
Gaming Heresy: Part 1 My Gaming Epiphany
It’s been a while since I’ve had a rant, frothed at the mouth and vigorously shaken my clenched fist at clouds. If you do this too often when running a blog you can paint yourself into a corner. Ranting then becomes the defining aspect of how your writing is perceived. Another reason why I don’t want to write an endless succession of irate screeds about the failings of the gaming industry and its associated player communities, is because as I get older, I simply do not care as much about these things. The recent debacle about microtransactions in Middle-earth: Shadow of War, garnered nothing more than a raised eyebrow from me. A decade ago I would’ve been marshalling a restless lynch mob, armed with hoes, rakes and flaming torches. Time and old age have a habit of cooling one’s ardour. However, letting off steam can be very cathartic, so I’ve decided to inaugurate this infrequent column in which I shall vent my spleen about the things that displease me and express views that may well fly in the face of the prevailing consensus.
It’s been a while since I’ve had a rant, frothed at the mouth and vigorously shaken my clenched fist at clouds. If you do this too often when running a blog you can paint yourself into a corner. Ranting then becomes the defining aspect of how your writing is perceived. Another reason why I don’t want to write an endless succession of irate screeds about the failings of the gaming industry and its associated player communities, is because as I get older, I simply do not care as much about these things. The recent debacle about microtransactions in Middle-earth: Shadow of War, garnered nothing more than a raised eyebrow from me. A decade ago I would’ve been marshalling a restless lynch mob, armed with hoes, rakes and flaming torches. Time and old age have a habit of cooling one’s ardour. However, letting off steam can be very cathartic, so I’ve decided to inaugurate this infrequent column in which I shall vent my spleen about the things that displease me and express views that may well fly in the face of the prevailing consensus.
So, let us begin. Here’s a thought. Gaming is just another commercial leisure industry that is of no greater merit than TV, Movies and popular music. It’s driven primarily by commercial considerations, with art are ethics being secondary issues. Like other entertainment mediums it can be pitched at various ends of the intellectual spectrum and made to varying degrees of quality and professionalism. Although gaming can highlight specific issues and offer social commentary it has no more significant power to impact upon events than other artforms. Games themselves can on occasions be “art” but by and large, most products are just disposable entertainment. Just like a sitcom, an action movie or a pop song. Games are not special, important or unique, when compared to other leisure activities. The social aspects that so many extol exist because of the players themselves and the games are merely a conduit. Essentially, the expression “it’s just a game” is true. It’s not a denigration but simply a statement of fact.
Richard Nixon has no relevance to this article...
And if gaming per se is simply a commercial exercise in mainstream leisure and thus nothing exceptional, then surely the same must be said for fandom? Therefore, claims of gamers being problem solving savants and alternative, high end achievers are bogus. Gaming and its subset of related fandom is a breeding ground for a myriad of unpleasant opinions and facilitates antisocial behaviour. It is a microcosm of the entire “first world problems” mentality that blights Western popular culture. It contributes to the growing infantilization of public discourse and social interaction as well as playing directly into the hands of the “bread and circuses” policies of the political classes. Why waste your time campaigning, lobbying and fighting for universal healthcare, affordable housing and accountable government? Someone on a game development team has nerfed the Sword of Kagnazax and gimped your build, so why not send them death threats?
I was walking around a very large branch of WHSmith recently. Despite the proliferation of digital media, magazines have not yet vanished from the shelves. In fact the number of fan and enthusiast based publications available is still prodigious. Gardening, fishing, mud wrestling are all represented. It’s a similar story if you go online. There are forums and subreddits for every conceivable leisure activity. If you decide to dip your toe in the respective waters of each community you will find one common factor in them all. Drama. All discuss the minutiae of the object of their affection as if it were the meaning of life itself. It soon becomes very apparent that it is not really fandom that is the issue but people. The bastards. Show me a problem and I’ll show you someone called Colin who’s responsible. All of which is just further evidence that gaming is merely another facet of humanity’s habit of slapping itself on the back, while simultaneously kicking some other poor sod in the nuts. When put in such a context, the reality is clear. Gaming ain’t all that.
This is my gaming epiphany. It’s not something that happened on the road to Damascus or overnight in a Premier Inn outside of Chester. It has come about over a period of time in which the iniquities, trivialities and pomposities of both the gaming industry and its fans have been dripped upon me like Chinese water torture. Don’t get me wrong, irrespective of this rant, I enjoy gaming and do not regret the time I’ve spent pursuing it. I just see it for what it is; an amusing diversion, an enjoyable challenge and one of the many pointless activities we fill our lives with before death cold embrace and the inevitable void. Sadly, it is because my perspective is not a common one, that the gaming industry acts with the impunity that it does and treats its customer base so poorly. I wonder if there will be a major shift in perception among fans, in another twenty years? Only time will tell. In the meantime, a percentage of gamers will continue to shriek “Git Gud” and I’ll continue to shake my head at their misplaced sentiments and watch as democracy is dismantled around them.
Game Graphics: A Question of Aesthetics and Personal Taste
The "cartoon versus realistic graphics" debate is a perennial one and regularly appears on gaming websites, often on slow news days. A variation of this question appeared on Massively Overpowered yesterday and reminded me once again that a games aesthetic is a really important selling point and that players tastes are far from universal. There’s a lot of buzz at present associated with the indie run and gun platform game, Cuphead. The game has a striking visual design inspired by the work of Polish-American animator Max Fleischer. Think Betty Boop, Popeye and Color Classics (which were a direct rival of Walt Disney's Silly Symphonies). It certainly gives the game a charismatic look and feel, making it stand out from the crowd. However, choosing such a radical style can also have a very polarising effect. Where some may find a quaint charm in the graphic design, others may abhor it.
The "cartoon versus realistic graphics" debate is a perennial one and regularly appears on gaming websites, often on slow news days. A variation of this question appeared on Massively Overpowered yesterday and reminded me once again that a games aesthetic is a really important selling point and that players tastes are far from universal. There’s a lot of buzz at present associated with the indie run and gun platform game, Cuphead. The game has a striking visual design inspired by the work of Polish-American animator Max Fleischer. Think Betty Boop, Popeye and Color Classics (which were a direct rival of Walt Disney's Silly Symphonies). It certainly gives the game a charismatic look and feel, making it stand out from the crowd. However, choosing such a radical style can also have a very polarising effect. Where some may find a quaint charm in the graphic design, others may abhor it.
There are many reasons why a developer may elect to choose a specific visual style when creating their game. Firstly, it may be a question of choosing a visual aesthetic that matches the idiom of the content or genre. Would an ultra-realistic Mario Kart be as charming as the its present incarnation? Production design (or whatever the appropriate gaming terminology is) sets the tone and can greatly influence consumers perception of the game. When WildStar was in development, I remember watching various videos that promoted the game. They had a very knowing and tongue in cheek tone. Despite the games science fiction setting it expressed this in a very satirical manner. That allowed for all established genre tropes and clichés to be utilised under the blanket of postmodern irony. The new MMO Wild West Online has elected for a more graphically realistic aesthetic. However, it has chosen the look and feel of the Hollywood West, rather than an historically accurate one.
Graphics also have an impact upon such things as a games rating, which can be an important factor when it comes to sales and marketing. Although a percentage of parent and stores are oblivious to ratings, there are those who do take a keen interest in a games content. Characters exploding in a puff of smoke, followed by a cartoon skull falling to the ground in a comical fashion, is a different kettle of fish to wall to wall blood and gore. A game graphic style, if cleverly done, can mitigate violence, potential offence and fosters an entirely different atmosphere. Conversely, the hyper realism of some games, particularly those in the RPG and FPS genres, bolsters the drama and th atmosphere that they are trying to create. It becomes a selling point in itself. This is why Lego games opt for the former and titles such as Middle-earth: Shadow of War and World War II, latest instalment of Call of Duty, elect for the latter.
Then of course there are technical factors to consider. Cutting edge PC graphics often need cutting edge hardware to run on. Not everyone has high end gaming rigs at their disposal. Console systems have set specifications that cannot be upgraded and therefore can only perform up to a certain standard. By opting to create a game that has a very stylised graphics, performance overheads can be lowered and developers can produce a product that can run on a very broad range of hardware. Increasing accessibility is always good for business. Excluding customers or forcing them into a hardware upgrade is a riskier strategy, although PC gamers do tend to embrace the notion of change more freely than other groups. This is one of the reasons why the MMO genre often has a look and feel that is somewhat dated compared to single player games. It has to ensure that its product is scalable to a broader set of customers and can accommodate the additional technical pressures that multiplayer environments create.
However, logical arguments aside, gamers often have preferences regarding graphics based on far more emotive considerations. One must never under estimate the power of consumers personal preferences and tastes. We are a species that rightly or wrongly, place a great deal of stock on aesthetics. Our choice of foods, clothes, interior design, even those we form relationships with is frequently influenced by our own personal views of beauty, or prevailing cultural trends. I personally like the realism achieved by Frostbite 3 engine from DICE. The preview footage available for Star Wars Battlefront II is outstanding. I would love to see an MMO powered by it, although that is unlikely to happened due to licencing costs and the impact it would have on the minimum specifications required to run the game. Conversely, this is why World of Warcraft looks the way it does. I’m not a fan of that particular design style, although I totally understand why the developers elected to make such a choice.
On a positive note, there are many players who will side line their personal graphical likes and dislikes if a title offers good game play. Then there is the recent trend of remastering games and giving old classics a fresh paint job. And let us not forget those titles that are mod friendly. These offer players a further opportunity to correct those visual aspects they don’t like. All of which goes to show that beauty truly does lie in the eye of the beholder. Game developers cannot please everyone, all the time and the reality is that they recognise that they’ll always lose a percentage of potential sales over a game’s looks. As much as I like the merits of logical thinking it is not the driving force behind human decision making. Therefore, the cartoon versus realistic graphics debate is ultimately redundant. There is no right or wrong answer, just individual preference.
Playing PC Games with an Xbox Controller Instead of a Keyboard and Mouse
To fill the gap in my current gaming activities, I decided to try one of the various titles that I have stockpiled. Often these have been bought on a whim but there’s always something of interest to try and explore. So, having recently enjoyed the open world of Mafia 3, I decided to return to GTA V. I’ve owned this title since December 2015 but have never seriously played through in story mode. Last time I dabbled with it was when I bought it and I just fooled around with the various cheat codes that are available and spent a few hours causing mayhem. This time round I’ve decided to apply myself to all facets of the game. However, I ran into one issue with GTA V that I can usually ignore with other titles. Namely, the control set up. I’ve previously played many games that have been developed for multiple platforms or have been direct console conversions. Although such games are intended to be played with traditional games controllers, I have happily managed to play them using a keyboard and mouse. Sometimes I’ve had to spend a lot of time re-mapping keys but I've always got by.
To fill the gap in my current gaming activities, I decided to try one of the various titles that I have stockpiled. Often these have been bought on a whim but there’s always something of interest to try and explore. So, having recently enjoyed the open world of Mafia 3, I decided to return to GTA V. I’ve owned this title since December 2015 but have never seriously played through in story mode. Last time I dabbled with it was when I bought it and I just fooled around with the various cheat codes that are available and spent a few hours causing mayhem. This time round I’ve decided to apply myself to all facets of the game. However, I ran into one issue with GTA V that I can usually ignore with other titles. Namely, the control set up. I’ve previously played many games that have been developed for multiple platforms or have been direct console conversions. Although such games are intended to be played with traditional games controllers, I have happily managed to play them using a keyboard and mouse. Sometimes I’ve had to spend a lot of time re-mapping keys but I've always got by.
However, on this occasion I found that that was not the case. The games driving mechanics simply do not lend themselves to keyboard use. The weapons system and object interaction also consist of a very esoteric selection of keys. I spent a considerable amount of time trying to relocate specific functions but it simply wasn't viable. Often, I would solve one problem only to create another. GTA V with its combination driving, third person shooting and point and click narrative simply favours a bespoke device. So eventually I gave up my experimenting and simply fetched my Xbox controller. As this Xbox peripherals is compatible with the PC, it was no problem to install it and set up the device. However, the next stage was not so easy. Namely, becoming accustomed to using the Xbox controller. It’s a major mental and physical change. I found that driving vehicles was an easy transition to make. Using the left and right triggers to brake and accelerate is extremely intuitive and feels very natural. Controlling my avatar was far more challenging. Walking, climbing and interacting with objects felt far more sluggish and unwieldy. Aiming via the thumb stick takes a long time to get used to. It doesn’t feel as accurate or as responsive as using a mouse.
This “problem” is very much a case of “conditioning” and “muscle memory”. I made the transition from console gaming to the PC in the middle nineties. There was a time when I use to play both platforms but the PC ultimately won because it’s a multifunctional tool. So, for over twenty years, the keyboard and mouse have been my primary means for interacting with games. I assign the most commonly used keys around WASD, so they could all be easily reached with my left hand. My right operates a five-button mouse. The system works for me and trying to change such a mindset is a big ask. However, it can be done. I am now able to navigate the open world of Los Santos using my Xbox controller. The key is patience and perseverance. You have to stop relying your reflexes and get into the habit of thinking in advance, exactly what it is that you want to do, then implementing it via the Xbox controller. I’m reminded of how Nigel Hawthorn told Clint Eastwood in the movie Firefox to “think in Russian”. However, I cannot see myself playing all future titles with a game controller. It is something I have done out of necessity to accommodate GTA V. A keyboard and mouse remains my primary choice for playing games, although using an Xbox controller has been an interesting experience.
Gaming and Voice Chat
I was reading through the patch notes for the latest test build for LOTRO (Bullroarer Update 21.2 - Beta 1 Take 2) and was interested to find down at the bottom of the list, a reference to some changes that are coming to in-game voice chat. Namely, party member voice volume can be adjusted individually. Party volume control visibility can be toggled by clicking on the party voice chat icon for party members. Default Group Volume preference are to be added to the Voice section of Audio options. The volume slider can be used to set the default voice volume level of new group members. Its 75% volume by default. Well, huzzah with highly polished brass knobs on. I’m pleased that this is being done but isn’t it somewhat late? We could have done with these improvements a decade ago.
I was reading through the patch notes for the latest test build for LOTRO (Bullroarer Update 21.2 - Beta 1 Take 2) and was interested to find down at the bottom of the list, a reference to some changes that are coming to in-game voice chat. Namely, party member voice volume can be adjusted individually. Party volume control visibility can be toggled by clicking on the party voice chat icon for party members. Default Group Volume preference are to be added to the Voice section of Audio options. The volume slider can be used to set the default voice volume level of new group members. Its 75% volume by default. Well, huzzah with highly polished brass knobs on. I’m pleased that this is being done but isn’t it somewhat late? We could have done with these improvements a decade ago.
For years LOTRO players have had the benefit of an in-built voice chat service, rather than having to install and configure a third-party application. It was quite a far-reaching thing to do by then developers Turbine, when the game launched back in 2007. However, for years we’ve also had the endure the following issues. Players whose volume levels are simply too low. Players whose volume levels are simply too high. Microphones picking up and repeating voice traffic. Microphones picking up ambient background noise. Poorly configured microphones, producing "pop", distortion and feedback. For every good experience I’ve had with LOTRO voice chat, I also had a bad one. I’ve spent evenings either being deafened by my colleagues or struggling to understand them due to low volume or distortion.
So, I guess it’s good that these problems are being addressed but I must admit, it’s because of them that I’ve been running a TeamSpeak server for the last seven years. However, third party solutions come with their own set of issues. Some solutions such as TeamSpeak have to be paid for. It’s not a fortune but it does add to your ongoing gaming costs. Other services like Discord are free but that can be subject to change. I’ve always been reticent about becoming reliant on free online services as we have no consumer rights should they change business model or decide to discontinue. Which then returns me LOTRO’s built in voice chat service. Considering how crucial voice chat is to the game and the MMO genre, you’d have thought such a facility would have been more common place in other titles.
Star Trek Online is the only other MMO that I’m aware of that boasts in-game voice chat. Perhaps the increasingly solo friendly nature of subsequent MMOs has meant that voice chat is no longer considered important. Or perhaps the licensing of the technology added too much to development costs. However, where the significance of voice chat may have diminished in some genres, it has increased in others. Overwatch, Grand Theft Auto Online and PlayerUnkown’s Battlegrounds all include an in-game voice chat service. PUBG actually has a proximity based chat service as well as team support. It offers a rather interesting perspective to be able to hear your opponent. Then of course there is voice support built into software distribution clients such as Steam and origin. It would appear that third party retailers still deem voice chat to be of merit, even if some developers do not.
However, I do acknowledge the fact that not every user is comfortable speaking publicly and that for everyone who is happy to converse whilst playing a game, there others who are not. However, even if you don’t wish to participate in group chat, you can always mute your microphone and still benefit from being able to hear what’s going on. Sadly, it would be naïve to ignore the fact that voice chat can be a gateway into one of the lower circles of hell and that it can be abused. I have voice chat muted whenever I play Overwatch unless I’m among friends. Bearing that in mind, I guess another reason why some developers won’t include voice chat with their products is that they don’t want to be lumbered with the responsibility of having to police it. Not that Blizzard does much in this respect. Anyway, despite the disparity in up take, I believe the ongoing popularity of co-op based games (as opposed to MMOs) will ensure that in-game voice chat doesn’t vanish. Perhaps as the technology improves, it may evolve beyond just audio into video. There’s a scary thought.
Star Trek Online: Beyond the Nexus
One of the major selling points of Star Trek Online is that it features voice acting from artists who appeared in the various TV shows and feature films. From Star Trek: The Original Series, Leonard Nimoy and Walter Koenig reprised their iconic roles, bringing Spock and Chekov to the game. Michael Dorn and Denise Crosby beamed in from The Next Generation, adding the voices of Worf, Tasha Yar and Empress Sela to several featured episodes. Chase Masterson and Aron Eisenberg came to us from Deep Space Nine to reprise their roles as Leeta and Nog. From Voyager, we have the talents of Tim Russ, Robert Picardo, Jeri Ryan, Ethan Phillips, Garrett Wang, Robert Duncan McNeill, Kim Rhodes, and Lisa LoCicero. Kipleigh Brown and Matt Winston from Enterprise recently joined the roster. The legacy of James Doohan was represented by his son Chris, reprising his father’s role as Scotty. And Zachary Quinto and Joseph Gatt from the Kelvin Timeline Star Trek film franchise have joined the ranks of esteemed Trek alumni in the game.
One of the major selling points of Star Trek Online is that it features voice acting from artists who appeared in the various TV shows and feature films. From Star Trek: The Original Series, Leonard Nimoy and Walter Koenig reprised their iconic roles, bringing Spock and Chekov to the game. Michael Dorn and Denise Crosby beamed in from The Next Generation, adding the voices of Worf, Tasha Yar and Empress Sela to several featured episodes. Chase Masterson and Aron Eisenberg came to us from Deep Space Nine to reprise their roles as Leeta and Nog. From Voyager, we have the talents of Tim Russ, Robert Picardo, Jeri Ryan, Ethan Phillips, Garrett Wang, Robert Duncan McNeill, Kim Rhodes, and Lisa LoCicero. Kipleigh Brown and Matt Winston from Enterprise recently joined the roster. The legacy of James Doohan was represented by his son Chris, reprising his father’s role as Scotty. And Zachary Quinto and Joseph Gatt from the Kelvin Timeline Star Trek film franchise have joined the ranks of esteemed Trek alumni in the game.
More recently we saw J. G. Hertzler reprise his iconic role as General Martok; a much beloved character among Star Trek devotees. However, this week we saw a milestone in STO as LeVar Burton returned as Geordi La Forge in the latest featured episode “Beyond the Nexus”. I must say I was surprised that Cryptic had managed to facilitate such an appearance, considering it has been discretely pointed out in the past that the cost of certain hiring certain actors is prohibitive. But, not being one to look a gift horse in the mouth, I duly logged into STO today to check out the new featured episode and see if Cryptic’s writers had managed to create a vehicle suitable for Star Trek favourite Geordi La Forge. I was intrigued by the concept of revisiting the Nexus that feature in the film Star Trek: Generations. On paper there’s a lot of narrative scope with such a violent, destructive temporal energy ribbon.
Sadly, “Beyond the Nexus” proved to be a squandered opportunity. The story is somewhat formulaic and distinctly average. During the mission, Captain Geordi La Forge and of course yourself investigate two starfleet ships that went missing while studying the infamous energy ribbon, the Nexus. It's discovered that both ship's crews have been taken over by a powerful psionic entity called Khaj'Buur, who has been imprisoned in the Nexus for unknown reasons. The story then becomes a rather linear adventure in which you have to rescue the crew and then defeat Khaj'Buur. Once this is done he surrenders and is imprisoned pending further enquiry. It is mentioned in the mission's conclusion that Khaj'Buur's wish to leave the Nexus is highly unusual, considering the realm surrounds you with the things that make you the happiest.
There are some positive aspects to “Beyond the Nexus”. Part of the story takes part on a Galaxy Class vessel, so traversing the ships interior and engine room is a big plus for fans of ST:TNG. As these assets are now in the game it was inevitable that Cryptic would make them available for purchase in the C-Store. Geordi also sports a Type 3 Phaser Rifle which is pleasing to see if you are a lore buff and like things canonical. The weekly rewards are not too shabby either with a three-item gear set on offer. And with regard to the story, although it is rather perfunctory, it does have a few subtle embellishments. The rogue holoprogram written by Ensign Barclay is a nice touch and raised a wry smile. As for Khaj'Buur, I suspect that he’ll feature in later episodes and his back story will be expanded upon. It is also likely that Captain Geordi La Forge has a larger role to play, in next years expansion.
How Do You Solve a Problem Like You Tube?
You Tube like any other online platform has a wealth of rules, term and conditions and other policies. Sadly, what we have seen over recent years is an organisation that has precious little inclination to use them. The facilities that are currently in place are often abused and there are no consequences for misusing the “disputes” procedure. Furthermore, there are still multiple You Tube channels that peddle hate and You Tube personalities that endure without any real sanction for their transgressions. It seems that popular You Tubers are not held to any standard but their own. There is no formal regulation from an external body for this or any other comparable platform. The rules that govern conventional media don’t apply here. It’s a classic example of the law falling behind the technology and change.
You Tube like any other online platform has a wealth of rules, term and conditions and other policies. Sadly, what we have seen over recent years is an organisation that has precious little inclination to use them. The facilities that are currently in place are often abused and there are no consequences for misusing the “disputes” procedure. Furthermore, there are still multiple You Tube channels that peddle hate and You Tube personalities that endure without any real sanction for their transgressions. It seems that popular You Tubers are not held to any standard but their own. There is no formal regulation from an external body for this or any other comparable platform. The rules that govern conventional media don’t apply here. It’s a classic example of the law falling behind the technology and change.
That is not to say that you can get away with anything on You Tube. Theoretically, if you cross certain lines then legal action may well be applicable. Then there is always the threat of the loss of advertising revenue, prestige and sponsorship. However, so far there has not been any major test cases where reality has bitten a wayward You Tuber on the ass for their iniquities. Even if an individual was banned from the platform and had their channel closed, they would still be walking away with their coffers bulging. More than likely, they’d simply pitch their tent elsewhere. One companies embarrassing controversy is another another’s new selling point. We see it in the tabloid press all the time. An odious pundit crosses a line and says something beyond the pale, gets sacked and subsequently gets a new gig with a rival publication. The other problem associated with such issues is the public have very short memories.
Obviously, PewDiePie AKA Felix Kjellberg and his recent behaviour has added fuel to the fire with regard to You Tubes inability to police itself effectively. The platform is now at a crossroad in its business life. The audience that You Tube serves is now so big that third parties cannot easily dispense with it. However, outside business doesn’t like the “frontier town” ethos that still permeates the online portal. The recent Adpocalype shows that advertisers don’t want to be associated with certain channels and personalities. But due to the blunt tool nature of the withholding of revenue and the nebulous criteria of what exactly is “family friendly”, there’s been a lot of collateral damage. And because of Mr Kjellberg’s stupidity we see the use of weaponised DMCA takedowns raising their ugly head once again.
The main risks at present are twofold. You Tube will take action but in a knee jerk fashion, imposing draconian rules and effectively queering the pitch for all parties regardless of what side of the line they are on. Alternatively, if they prevaricate any longer someone outside may step in to deal with the situation. For example, if some idiot is dragged into court, the somewhat grey area of “fair use” which is the foundation of so much content on You Tube, could be scrutinised and a more definitive ruling made. If a precedent is set and it is not a favourable one regarding this catchall term, then it could mean that a hell of a lot of content and channels go the way of the Dodo. Furthermore, such drama and shenanigans could attract the attention of the political classes and the last thing we need is for things like You Tube and Streaming to fall under their remit in any way.
To avoid catastrophe, You Tube should act now but act in a sensible measured way. As a company, it need to start policing its own backyard in a viable fashion. That means not rely on automated procedure that can be gamed but employing moderators who work to a clear set of guidelines. When someone transgresses the rules, action should be swift and clearly explained as to why it has been taken. There also needs to be a fair appeals procedure to ensure that the door swings both ways. Yes, such an undertaking means spending money but considering the alternative, allocating resources wisely now may prevent a massive loss in revenue later. Also, Joe Public needs to up their game and stop cutting offenders so much slack. We as viewers need to stop sitting of the fence and hedging are bets for our own personal convenience. Sooner or later we all need to pick a side, like it or not.
Finally, a few words about PewDiePie. Everyone makes mistakes. I believe in giving people a fair hearing and a second chance where appropriate. Sadly, this individual has proven to be a repeat offender. If your go to curse of choice is a racial slur, then that frankly speaks volumes to me. As far as I’m concerned “I didn’t mean it in a bad way” is the 21st Century Nuremberg defence. You cannot divorce this word from its racially pejorative roots. It exactly the same as calling something “gay”. You may think you’re simply implying that something is not good but you are establishing your proposition by equating being gay as something inherently bad. Considering the diversity of profanity available in the English language, if you wish to express disdain then there are plenty of alternatives words that do not have the same complex socio-political heritage of the term Mr Kjellberg chose to use.
I have seen the term “influencers” bandied about with regard to You Tube and the likes of PewDiePie. It’s a very vague term like so much of the marketing speak we have to endure these days. Its greatest weakness seems to be in the way it is allocated. To be an “influencer” you just need to have a large following. There is no requirement for expertise and talent is a broad and subjective term. It’s time for business to rethink the nature of “influencers” and perhaps reconsider who they show favour too. It is naïve to expect ethics and integrity by default. If you require these virtues then it is incumbent upon you to establish their existence beforehand in those you groom for fame and fortune. However, when one considers the track record of the gaming industry, advertisers and You Tube themselves, I cannot help but be somewhat sceptical that these groups will tackle their respective problems with any degree of success.
Games That Pass You By
Like many gamers I try to keep abreast of new releases and titles that are in development. Because of my personal likes and dislikes, I filter out a lot of material I don't personally care for. For example, I'm not really au fait with the sports genre or real-time strategy games. I read several news websites and follow a few "gaming commentators" on Twitter and that usually keeps me informed about the things I feel I need to know. However, it is not a full proof system and every now and then I become aware of a title that has completely passed me by. In some respects, this can be quite beneficial as it means I have bypassed several months of hype, marketing and general bullshit and can now potentially jump into a new game without any major prejudice or baggage.
Like many gamers I try to keep abreast of new releases and titles that are in development. Because of my personal likes and dislikes, I filter out a lot of material I don't personally care for. For example, I'm not really au fait with the sports genre or real-time strategy games. I read several news websites and follow a few "gaming commentators" on Twitter and that usually keeps me informed about the things I feel I need to know. However, it is not a full proof system and every now and then I become aware of a title that has completely passed me by. In some respects, this can be quite beneficial as it means I have bypassed several months of hype, marketing and general bullshit and can now potentially jump into a new game without any major prejudice or baggage.
A while ago, I bought a 2K gaming Bundle that was packed with quality titles. It featured Mafia 2, Spec Ops: The Line and the Bio Shock series. It also included the original XCOM franchise which I knew was both critically acclaimed and well received by gamers. However, as I'm not that heavily into turn based tactical games with an overhead POV, I didn't install any of them. Also included in this bundle was The Bureau: XCOM Declassified. I paid little heed to it at the time thinking it was more of the same. Then I stumbled across a review of the game and was surprised to see that it was a departure from the established format. This instalment was a third person, squad based cover shooter with some strategic and RPG elements. The review was actually quite indifferent, neither praising nor damning the game, yet my interested was piqued. So, I subsequently installed the game.
Now the point of this post is not to critique the game in question. Let it suffice to say that it was entertaining in an undemanding way. I liked the sixties setting and the storyline. What I am more interested in is the fact that a major release such as this completely escaped my notice. The game had a troubled development and was delayed several times. Originally it was intended to be a first-person shooter but there were several radical changes in design during its development. Retrospectively I can see that this was well covered in the games media. Yet I remained totally oblivious to it all. I don't even recollect seeing any headlines and just filtering them out, which is something that often happens. It would seem that an entire marketing campaign just passed me by. Something I find on reflection to be rather amusing.
With regard to the games promotion, I have subsequently discovered a series of live action trailers that feature the actor Dominic Monaghan, star of The Lord of the Rings Trilogy and Lost. They are well made and show that a sizeable advertising budget was spent promoting the game. However, it seems that the game ultimately met with mixed reactions and was not as successful as other instalments in the franchise. Perhaps the departure from the established format was the root cause. I find all of this fascinating because I came to the game "cold" and found it to be adequate and acceptable. I had no major preconceptions or baggage to deal with and got a week or so entertainment from a product that cost me very little money.
Since this incident, other examples of game’s that I’ve missed have come to light. Ryse: Son of Rome, Sleeping Dogs more recently Watch Dogs 2 all failed to appear on my radar during the run up to their respective release. All were titles I subsequently discovered through bundles or discount sales. Furthermore, it’s highly likely this will happen again, as I tire of the excessive hype that is now de facto with the launch of so called triple A titles. Personally, I find it a rewarding experience to discover games in this manner, especially if they then prove to be hidden gems or just undemanding entertaining. The Bureau: XCOM Declassified falls into the latter category but was still a pleasant surprise. As a result, I shall be paying closer attention to the various gaming bundles I’ve purchased and have outstanding keys for. I have a suspicion that I may well be sitting on more interesting titles that up until now, I've been unaware of.
Mafia 3
As I’m between MMOs at present, I decided to purchase a single player game to keep me occupied, until Middle-earth: Shadow of War is released. I settled on Mafia 3 as I had played the previous instalment of the franchise and enjoyed it. As this title came out last October it can now be picked up at a substantial discount if you’re prepared to shop around. There is no game of the year edition at present but I did manage to buy the digital deluxe version for £22, which is a good price. This includes a season pass so I have all the currently released DLC. There is sufficient content available to keep me busy for a month or so. So far, I’ve clocked up 40 hours in-game according to Steam.
As I’m between MMOs at present, I decided to purchase a single player game to keep me occupied, until Middle-earth: Shadow of War is released. I settled on Mafia 3 as I had played the previous instalment of the franchise and enjoyed it. As this title came out last October it can now be picked up at a substantial discount if you’re prepared to shop around. There is no game of the year edition at present but I did manage to buy the digital deluxe version for £22, which is a good price. This includes a season pass so I have all the currently released DLC. There is sufficient content available to keep me busy for a month or so. So far, I’ve clocked up 40 hours in-game according to Steam.
The most striking aspect of Mafia 3 is the story. The game has a very strong narrative that is well written and researched. Set in New Bordeaux, a fictitious version of New Orleans, in 1968 the plot plays out against a background of unrest, civil rights activism and entrenched racism. The writers haven’t shied away from exploring the big socio-political issues of the time. Lincoln Clay is a great protagonist and the supporting characters such as Father James and John Donovan are far from two dimensional. It’s also nice to see the return of Vito Scaletta from Mafia 2. Overall the performances from all the voice actors are good. Although the revenge story is formulaic, the gold is in the depth of characters and the credible reflection of the era, politics and mood of the time.
Mafia 3 offers a very diverse open world environment. There are modern business and civil districts, along with rich and poor residential areas. The game sports a sense of contemporary sixties architecture, as well as colonial elegance. However, if you journey into the bayou you’ll find an abandoned amusement park and decaying shanty towns. As with most games of this genre, there’s a well-defined network of roads and players are encouraged to travel by a wide range of vehicles. The game radio stations are an interesting mixture of music, talk shows, news and faux adverts. The developers have paid top dollar to get the licenses for numerous high profile sixties hits. The game features songs by Jimi Hendrix, The Rolling Stones, Sam and Dave, James Brown and Jefferson Airplane.
However, where the game setting, environment and narrative are all top drawer, the nuts and bolts of Mafia 3 are somewhat formulaic. The third person, cover based combat system is nothing unusual. It’s functional but not sufficiently different or innovative. Once you’ve completed the first act of the story, the game settles down into a series of repetitive quests. To secure each district you have to do the same things, namely destroy or disrupt existing operations, take out key intermediate figures then dispose of the zone boss. Takedown animations also lack variations. The AI is somewhat wonky. Mobs will openly hunt you down which can be a little taxing at the beginning but once you have the right weapons and perks, it becomes a turkey shoot. There are other minor niggles such as no fast travel and a limitation on the number of weapons you carry.
However, the failings of some of the game mechanics are offset by the collectables system and mini games such as racing. These offer a sense of variety. Collectables include albums, Playboy magazines, various types of posters and even religious literature. The Playboy magazines are actually reproductions of genuine issues from the time. I was surprised to find that the old cliché about them featuring “good articles” was actually true. There was an extensive four-page discussion with Stanley Kubrick which was very informative. However, collecting offers no tangible benefit other than the fun of acquiring items. It doesn’t impact upon the game in any way.
From what I’ve seen so far after a week of playing the Mafia 3, the game has pretty much all the same pros and cons as it predecessor Mafia 2. The story and characters are by far the best aspect of the game and if that was lacking, you’d be left with a somewhat average and undistinguished game. But because I favour games with strong story based narratives, I am happy to play through some of the more grindy content to access the major set pieces that punctuate the proceedings. As gamers, I think there is often an unrealistic expectation for ever new game to be a unique experience. For me Mafia 3 is flawed with good and bad points but overall the good outweighs the bad. I enjoy the RPG elements of the game the best. Trying to secure the outcome I want is certainly an amusing challenge. And because of the price I paid, the fun to cost ratio is satisfactory.
Classic Game Themes: EVE Online
EVE Online is in many ways the most complex, absorbing and time consuming MMO that I've never played. I didn't survive beyond a twenty-one-day trial and found that the exacting minutiae of the game far too demanding. However, although the mechanics were not to my taste, my limited experience left a strong impression upon me and I still have a healthy respect and a strong sense of fascination for this niche market product. I'm not alone in this. Many gamers do not play EVE Online but are fascinated by both its intricacies and community.
EVE Online is in many ways the most complex, absorbing and time consuming MMO that I've never played. I didn't survive beyond a twenty-one-day trial and found that the exacting minutiae of the game far too demanding. However, although the mechanics were not to my taste, my limited experience left a strong impression upon me and I still have a healthy respect and a strong sense of fascination for this niche market product. I'm not alone in this. Many gamers do not play EVE Online but are fascinated by both its intricacies and community.
Because of the sandbox nature of EVE Online, it's soundtrack is designed to be ambient rather than event specific. Yet the electronic score by Jón Hallur Haraldsson superbly embellishes the games overall atmosphere. CCP have made much of games music (about seven hours in total) available on Soundcloud. If you like such artists as Tangerine Dream and Vangelis you'll find many common parallels with Haraldssons's work.
Although there is much to choose from, I have decided to use the track Below the Asteroids as an example of the composer’s contribution to EVE Online. It has an introspective quality that draws the listener in and adds to the ongoing immersion. Due to its space setting the game has less visual input to engage the player, so must rely more on the soundscape and complexity of the game itself. This track highlights exactly how Jón Hallur Haraldsson does that.
Do We Need a Face of Gaming?
In recent years there have been several gaming related stories that have become big enough to gain the attention of the mainstream media. Sadly, when corporate news encounters anything that falls outside of their immediate understanding or frame of reference, they need to package it into terms they and their audience can comprehend. This means simplifying the subject in to binary terms and convenient sound bites. They also like to have a “public face” that can be the go to expert. Someone who can be clearly identified with the issue and then championed or reviled by the public, according to which side they choose to support. That beggars the question do we need a " face for gaming"? If we do then who should it be? It's quite a thought provoking conundrum and raises a lot of issues about the nature of representation. Especially in light of the fact that contemporary media likes to have specific subjects neatly packaged with easy to grasp, core ideas and a photo-friendly public face.
In recent years there have been several gaming related stories that have become big enough to gain the attention of the mainstream media. Sadly, when corporate news encounters anything that falls outside of their immediate understanding or frame of reference, they need to package it into terms they and their audience can comprehend. This means simplifying the subject in to binary terms and convenient sound bites. They also like to have a “public face” that can be the go to expert. Someone who can be clearly identified with the issue and then championed or reviled by the public, according to which side they choose to support. That beggars the question do we need a " face for gaming"? If we do then who should it be? It's quite a thought provoking conundrum and raises a lot of issues about the nature of representation. Especially in light of the fact that contemporary media likes to have specific subjects neatly packaged with easy to grasp, core ideas and a photo-friendly public face.
Although I’ve raised the question as a thought experiment, rather than a genuine request for potential candidates, there may well be some people out there that would like to see such a thing. For me the concept of a "face of gaming" is just another name for "community leader", which is a term I dislike due to is inherent vagueness and utter lack of accountability. So, no, I don't want anyone to be the "face of gaming". I doubt if you can even get a consensus on what the actual term means and what the specific parameters of such a role are. However, for the sake of argument, let us assume that the position existed. As far as I'm concerned if you wish to represent any body of people in some capacity, you need to have been democratically elected, with a popular majority mandate of at least 75%. That way you can at least claim some sort of legitimacy for your role.
Even if such a framework existed for choosing such an individual, the process would instantly fall foul of all the usual political pitfalls that blight any democratic undertaking. There would be endless debate and disagreement over issues such as nationality, gender and race. Gamers are a very nebulous group and they frequently disagree over many aspects of the own culture. Adding a wider socio-political dimension to the debate would only compound the problem. Plus, the driving principle behind this proposed role is to provide a conduit for the mainstream press. An institution that regularly trivialises matters and panders to the lowest common denominator. If there was a "face of gaming" it wouldn't be long before the press focused on who they were dating and what they were wearing, rather than the topics in hand.
Some have suggested that a community leader may be found from the within the gaming industry itself or from that esoteric group known as experts. I have no problem with the concept of experts and it saddens me that their status in society has been diminished in recent years. The cult of "my opinion is of equal value" has slowly eroded the weight of their position. I don't mind the use of independent experts to provide an informed overview for the wider public but if one became a designated spokesperson, they may well lose that impartial status. As for finding a developer or CEO of note who is universally respected, I think that would prove a difficult task. Gamers can be very partisan with regard to specific gaming companies. They also bear grudges.
The gaming community is not like other traditional social bodies. It is extremely diverse and multi-faceted. It has no structure or hierarchy, nor does it have any universally agreed agenda. What it does have is a lot of high profile personalities within that community, each with their own following. Think Total Biscuit AKA John Bain or Jim Sterling. Then there are Community Manager for game specific forums, a high-profile writer or a popular content provide and critic such as YouTube personalities. Some of these individuals have integrity, others do not. However, the trouble with such individuals is that they often end up being inaccessible by the regular. Does that make them truly representative of the average gamers needs? In the past, I have been involved with the organisation of several online events. I tried to contact several high-profile internet personalities to ask for help with the events promotion. I was universally ignored or failed to get beyond their respective gatekeepers.
Personally, I think that a so called "face of gaming" would do more harm than good if it did exist. It would ultimately end up being about them, rather than games and gamers. There are community figures that I know and respect but I don't see them as "leaders" nor have any of them ever claimed to be so. I guess the nearest we'll ever get to equitable representation is via player councils, as long as they are populated with elected representatives. What is required from a role such as the "face of gaming" is impossible to provide, simply because there is no infrastructure to support it. I think most gamers ultimately look to themselves to represent their own needs. If history teaches us anything, it's that we should always be mindful of the centralisation of power. It has seldom proven beneficial for the majority.
Spec Ops: The Line - Morally Ambiguous and Bleak Gaming
I first played through Spec Ops: The Line back in 2014 when I purchased it as part of a discounted 2K bundle. For once the actually selling point of this action game was the single player campaign, which had a reputation for being well conceived and written, with solid voice acting. After playing for a couple of hours it became apparent that there was a lot more to this third person, cover based shooter and that the praise its received from the gaming press was justified. I have seldom played through a title as compelling as this. This week I re-installed the game and completed it for a second time. This time round I was able to concentrate more closely on the subtleties of the story. For a five year old title, this is still a gruelling experience.
I first played through Spec Ops: The Line back in 2014 when I purchased it as part of a discounted 2K bundle. For once the actually selling point of this action game was the single player campaign, which had a reputation for being well conceived and written, with solid voice acting. After playing for a couple of hours it became apparent that there was a lot more to this third person, cover based shooter and that the praise its received from the gaming press was justified. I have seldom played through a title as compelling as this. This week I re-installed the game and completed it for a second time. This time round I was able to concentrate more closely on the subtleties of the story. For a five year old title, this is still a gruelling experience.
The story is both intriguing and topical. Dubai has been overwhelmed by cataclysmic sandstorms and fallen into a state of anarchy. Troops from the 33rd Infantry Battalion, led by Colonel John Konrad, have gone missing after a failed evacuation. Subsequently a Delta force team is sent to determine what has gone wrong and rescue surviving members of the 33rd. What they find is a city engulfed by sand and a complex tale of mutiny, CIA manipulation and personal insanity. Played from the perspective of Captain Walker, along with a two-man squad comprising of Lieutenant Adams and Sergeant Lugo, the story catalogues their descent into a personal hell and mental disintegration. The game is clearly influenced by Francis Ford Coppola's Apocalypse Now and Joseph Conrad's novel Heart of Darkness, which the movie was based on.
The first thing Spec Ops: The Line does is take all the standard underpinnings from the shooter genre and jettison them. There is no binary conflict between the morally righteous US forces and some generic foreign adversary. The enemy in this fight turns out to be your own side. The game does not glamorise war nor does it offer the FPS gamer the usual experience. Tactical decisions come with consequences and the moral choices offered in the game seldom provide a positive solution. The narrative clearly explores the psychological burden that comes with command and it's not pretty. The games mechanics are somewhat standard but perfectly adequate. Although scripted, the action scenes have a genuine sense of confusion and at times even panic.
Spec Ops: The Line has a worryingly credible narrative that challenges the player to be more than just a voyeur in the proceedings. Many of the standard tropes that you find in this genre are reversed. As the story gets more involved and morally ambiguous, the dialogue between the Delta Force team becomes more agitated. The cool, calm radio chatter we saw at the beginning of the game becomes, accusatory, bellicose and even scared. The strain of having your world view shattered is cleverly reflected in the script. As a result, playing Spec Ops: The Line feels very different to other shooters. Even if you have the flintiest of hearts, the game may well surprise you with its difference and honesty. It’s gameplay and mechanics are formulaic but the story is dark, foreboding and disturbing.
Gaming seldom has narratives as strong as that found in Spec Ops: The Line. Hopefully it provides pause for thought as well as entertainment among those who play. War is still grossly misrepresented in gaming and caricatured in the most abhorrent way. This game challenges the established business approach and raises many ethical questions not only about the nature of warfare, but whether it should be trivialised and used as a means of entertainment? At the very least Spec Ops: The Line is an interesting experiment in gaming narrative and is worth a look on those grounds alone. Whether the gaming industry sees fit to take such an approach with future titles remains to be seen. Recommended but no to the faint hearted.
Game Maps
I've been pondering of late the subject of game maps and how they can vary quite radically from title to title. Size, content and instancing can all have an impact on a maps accessibility and the way they are perceived. Then there is the issue of individual player tastes and preferences. Those who like to explore will happily spend time attempting to access remote nooks and crannies. Others will quickly become frustrated if there is no direct route to their goal, as with Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns. A games genre also has a significant impact upon map design. A FPS or MOBA has different requirements from it virtual environment that an MMO. I'm sure there are far more variables involved in a maps creation. However, I think most gamers seem to inherently know when the developers have got it right.
I've been pondering of late the subject of game maps and how they can vary quite radically from title to title. Size, content and instancing can all have an impact on a maps accessibility and the way they are perceived. Then there is the issue of individual player tastes and preferences. Those who like to explore will happily spend time attempting to access remote nooks and crannies. Others will quickly become frustrated if there is no direct route to their goal, as with Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns. A games genre also has a significant impact upon map design. A FPS or MOBA has different requirements from it virtual environment that an MMO. I'm sure there are far more variables involved in a maps creation. However, I think most gamers seem to inherently know when the developers have got it right.
For me one such example of a map being "just so" is Skyrim. The landmass is about sixteen square miles, which is big but pales into significance when compared to Just Cause 2 which clocks in at four hundred square miles. However, the thing that Bethesda has got right with Skyrim is the balance between the size of the area, the amount of content and aesthetics. The day and night cycle, coupled with procedurally driven events makes it feel like a living environment. You can watch as villagers go about their tasks and farm animals graze for food. The fact that there's no instancing when travelling above ground until you entered a building, also provides an air of authenticity.
In the halcyon days of LOTRO, Bree-Land was prime example of a rich and varied MMO game map. Although it doesn't have the faux living dynamic of other games, it remains a large and varied landmass with plenty of content to seek out. It also makes a half decent attempt at realising the geography as written in Tolkien's source text. LOTRO still remains a game with a handsome world design but the regions that have subsequently been added of late are far more functional in their construction. Players often cannot access certain areas due to rivers and mountains and find themselves funnelled through pleasant zones on the way to the next quest hub. However more recent MMO's such as ArcheAge and Guild Wars 2 still encourage the exploration of their game worlds and have devised content around players desire to do so.
The open world cities of Mafia 3 or GTA V can also be compelling environments to immerse oneself in. Like their real-world counterparts, both New Bordeaux and Los Santos have distinct zones such as commercial and residential areas. Again random events occur to the citizens as you travel through the map. Weather systems and a customisable day and night cycle again lend credibility to the setting. Unlike fantasy games, these titles have the advantage of contemporary embellishments such as radio stations, roadside advertising and inner-city congestion; all adding to the overall ambience. You can visit bars and diners and watch “life rich pageant” unfold, or at least the developers nearest approximation of it.
However, game maps are still very much determined by the prevailing technology and although things are progressively getting better, there are still limitations. The MMO genre not only has to consider such factors as draw distances and texture loading but there is the question of the players themselves. The game engine has to accommodate both the environment and the population. Unless you have a very high-end gaming PC, then you will often notice system foibles such as "pop-in" as objects appear as you get closer to them. SWTOR and LOTRO are two older MMOs that suffer from this technical idiosyncrasy. Often developers will try to fudge this by blocking line of sight or introducing haze, fog or some other environmental workaround. Single player games have different demands upon them, allowing titles such as Crysis to have draw distance of over nine miles.
Irrespective of a maps design, its success ultimately depends upon how well it is integrated into the game. The two zones of Mordor and Nurn in Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor are relatively small but diverse and well implemented. There is a wealth of topographical features that break up the landscape in a very organic way. Unlike some MMOs, this is not done is such an arbitrary and linear fashion. North Africa is well realised in Sniper Elite III, affording the player multiple routes to various targets, across varied terrain. This greatly enhances the re-playability of the game. In Sniper Elite IV, the Sicilian villages and seaports are extremely credible and authentic. The rolling fields and forests of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt are expansive and atmospheric with a distinctly Eastern European feel to them. Furthermore, the landscape is populated in a credible fashion. Bandits will make use of remote and covered areas. Regions of Wilderness are appropriately empty with minimal amounts of NPCs.
Conversely the London maps in a game such as Sherlock Holmes: Crimes and Punishments are far less dynamic and more functional. They are mainly there for ambience and provide little more than a conduit between each crime scene. The maps in both FPS and MOBA genres, have additional criteria to consider. The fluid nature of their game play requires a different approach to their construction. Multiple routes and chokepoints are common place in such designs. Snipers require vantage points but these need to be relatively exposed to ensure that a single location doesn’t dominate the game. The Battlefield franchise takes map design a stage further, with a mechanic that allows players to destroy the environment and thus change the dynamics of the game. This was to be an integral feature of the now defunct EverQuest Next, although I suspect would have been subject to a wealth of caveats.
As players, we also bring a human element when we interact with game maps and there are many factors that shape our perceptions. Ambient music or when or who we’re playing with, influence how we feel about specific in-game zones. As a result, we often have personal favourites. Evendim in LOTRO is an example of a map that I have fond affection for. More recently the region of Toussaint in the Blood and Wine expansion for The Witcher 3, attracted my interest. It’s a sunny and luxuriant zone and a radical change from the usual ice or desert archetypes you find in so many games. Hopefully, as game technology and the hardware it runs on evolves, we will see map design advance accordingly. I look forward to experiencing larger, more detailed open world environments populated with flora and fauna that have their own lifecycles.
Lockboxes
It would appear that lockboxes are being discussed once again. Bhagpuss wrote a post over at Inventory Full yesterday, which subsequently got used as a talking point on Massively Overpowered today. What made the debate a little different this time around, was that Bhagpuss doesn’t object to lockboxses per se, merely that in most games that have them, the content is frequently lacklustre and uninspiring. A point I am compelled to concur with. I too have no major objection to lockboxes in principle and partake of them from time to time in various games. However, they seldom seem to contain anything that I consider to be of tangible benefit to me. I want pets, gear and weapons. But because of vocal complaints from certain quarters, we are more often than not saddled with inconsequential convenience items and minor cosmetics baubles and trinkets.
It would appear that lockboxes are being discussed once again. Bhagpuss wrote a post over at Inventory Full yesterday, which subsequently got used as a talking point on Massively Overpowered today. What made the debate a little different this time around, was that Bhagpuss doesn’t object to lockboxses per se, merely that in most games that have them, the content is frequently lacklustre and uninspiring. A point I am compelled to concur with. I too have no major objection to lockboxes in principle and partake of them from time to time in various games. However, they seldom seem to contain anything that I consider to be of tangible benefit to me. I want pets, gear and weapons. But because of vocal complaints from certain quarters, we are more often than not saddled with inconsequential convenience items and minor cosmetics baubles and trinkets.
Lockboxes in Star Trek Online are themed and are only available in the game for a limited period of time. There is a nominal percentage chance to win gear, or even a ship if you are “lucky enough”. However, at the very least, each lockbox yields a quantity of Lobi crystals which are a barter currency. If one ever buys keys to open lockboxes it is best to consider the transaction as a means of buying currency that can be traded in for items. Winning a desirable item on top as that is then an added bonus. That is how I think of things on the occasions I purchase keys. Such an outlook then mitigates concerns over gambling although I have no major qualms about that subject either.
However, where STO handles lockboxes in a manner I like, many other MMOs do not. I have yet to find anything of note from one in LOTRO, Guild Wars 2 or Overwatch. The propensity to provided cosmetic or housing items means that lockboxes are often the prerogative of the role players or the game completists. I’m sure the developers target such a market because they pay dividends but if they could broaden their outlook and diversify the rewards there is scope for lockboxes to appeal to a wider number of consumers. Offering bag or bank space, or further character slots could potentially be attractive. Personally, I would like to see more game gear included but that would result in sabre rattling form the “pay to win crowd”. I certainly think that all lockbox rewards should be bind on equip and if not wanted available to sell via the game auction system.
Ultimately, lockboxes are symptomatic of game developers struggling to find a universally acceptable means to finance their game. The demise of the subscription model has left many MMOs in the thrall of an unsatisfactory hybrid F2P business models that have done precious little to improve the overall quality of the games. Monetisation of this kind impacts upon the conception and design of both content as well as game mechanics and seldom in a positive way. If this business model can be overturned for something better, then lockboxes may well go the way of the Dodo. However, that is not something that seems imminent at present so what can’t be cured must be endured. The current debate will more than likely have no effect on developers who have a propensity to repeat their mistakes and so the lockbox will continue as a gaming bête noire.
Gaming and Relationships
I stumbled across a lurid tabloid headline recently that read “Fed-up welder divorces his missus because she’s addicted to Candy Crush”. This reminded me about an article I read several years ago regarding gaming and relationships. Divorce Online, a website facilitating non-contested divorce proceedings, claimed that 15% of the cases it has administered in 2011 can be attributed to one party allegedly being addicted to gaming. As per usual, top titles World of Warcraft and the Call of Duty franchise were cited as examples. As I thought that this subject may make for an interesting blog post I decided to do some cursory Google searches on the matter. Within minutes I found numerous links to stories and research on the matter. It would appear that the impact that gaming has upon relationships is a common theme and is widely reported to varying degrees of intellectual and scientific rigour.
I stumbled across a lurid tabloid headline recently that read “Fed-up welder divorces his missus because she’s addicted to Candy Crush”. This reminded me about an article I read several years ago regarding gaming and relationships. Divorce Online, a website facilitating non-contested divorce proceedings, claimed that 15% of the cases it has administered in 2011 can be attributed to one party allegedly being addicted to gaming. As per usual, top titles World of Warcraft and the Call of Duty franchise were cited as examples. As I thought that this subject may make for an interesting blog post I decided to do some cursory Google searches on the matter. Within minutes I found numerous links to stories and research on the matter. It would appear that the impact that gaming has upon relationships is a common theme and is widely reported to varying degrees of intellectual and scientific rigour.
Whenever writing about that nebulous group known as gamers, it's very difficult not to invoke all the standard clichés. Furthermore, if you even hint at going down this route, you will receive a deluge of rebuttals from those who are affiliated to this group, providing a detailed analysis of why they are an exception to the (ambiguous) rule. This is hardly surprising, as no one like to be criticised or associated with a stigmatised social group. It should also be noted that where the online community seems to have a broader understanding about gamers, the tabloid press still like adhere to their hackneyed, eighties perceptions. So, a lot of the headlines I’ve read about this subject, lack a degree of impartiality and favour hyperbole.
So rather than start focusing on the gaming aspect of the subject, let us first look at the subject of relationships itself. Oh the duality of relationships. They can be sublimely simple or fiendishly complex or even both. Although the principle of a relationship is a simple one, there is no dictionary definition or universal standard that all individuals abide by. Although the dynamics of any relationship are theoretically the same, everyone is ultimately unique. Context as ever, is everything. A lot is dependent on the emotional baggage that each participant brings to the situation. Their world view, cultural and religious experiences etc. However, let us not muddy the waters so quickly in the proceedings. Let us agree on some basic concepts with regard to relationships. Such as mutual respect, shared time and the mother of all problems, compromise.
If you are in some sort of a relationship, there is inevitably an expectation that you will do activities together or at least spend some time in each other’s company. This is having to be balanced with the desire to pursue pastimes your partner may not wish to participate in. As there are only a finite number of hours in the day, sometimes choices have to be made and one individual may have to forgo a personal indulgence for the sake of the relationship. For example, Mr and Mrs Coltart are coming round to play Bridge, so you can’t spend the evening paying Hang Gliding Dachshund Simulator 2017. This is not rocket science. It happens in every aspect of life. The simple fact is you want to function within the confines of society you have to give and take. It's not mandatory but if you've never had to do it, then you are a.) lucky, b.) selfish, c.) heading for a major fall at some point.
Back to gaming. It is, as far as I can see, one of the most self-absorbed leisure activities I can think of. I'm not saying that in a judgemental way. I am simply trying to articulate its purpose. Gaming is all about indulging in virtual activities that apart from providing a transient pleasure, serve no wider purpose. Gaming doesn’t produce anything tangible apart from may be RSI. Yes, some will argue that there is an element of social interaction in MMO's but this is a secondary result, a by-product and possibly even a conceit. Therefore, it is fair to say that gaming is inherently solitary in nature which makes it a divisive pastime. Unless you are into gaming, then watching somebody else spend hours online poking trolls with a pointed stick, is hardly entertaining. It is also pointless to try and talk to someone who is engrossed in an MMO or a FPS. You'll only be met by a series of grunts or possibly a tirade of abuse if you put them off. However, getting your partner to agree to less enjoyable activities such as shopping, dinner parties with trying friends and DIY can be cunningly arranged during these conversations.
Naturally, any activity that is undertaken at the expense of time with your partner, is going to cause friction. This is not exclusive to gaming either. Other leisure activities such as fishing, football, train spotting, interpretative dance or being the First Minister of Scotland can keep you from your loved one. However, as gaming can be accessed more immediately than these other activities and is not subject to the weather or a regional election, it can be abused far more easily. Furthermore, the indulgence of profligate gaming is often blamed or labelled as an addiction. However, this is not always the case. The criteria for psychological addiction are very specific. I suspect that some folk conveniently choose to misappropriate such terms to cover for their own hedonism and selfishness.
A simple way to negate this perceived battle between the gamer and non-gamer, is to find another activity that can be shared together. There are plenty to choose from and it can be beneficial in many ways. Mud wrestling, river widening and Kabaddi spring to mind. It will certainly reduce the animosity felt by both parties towards separate hobbies. Of course, there are also couples who share an interest in gaming. Why not try to find a genre or title you can mutually enjoy? MMOs often spring to mind in this respect. I know several couples who play LOTRO together. Indeed I actually know of two people two met specifically because of the game. I'm not stating that MMO's are a bulletproof online dating services and would remind readers to be cautious when meeting someone through a game. However, the social nature of the genre is applicable to relationships.
Ultimately, like everything in life, the question of whether gaming is good or bad for relationships comes down to the choices that each individual makes and their disposition towards their partner. I won’t bore you with details of my personal life but I’ve managed to balance my gaming interests with a relationship. I happily admit that I’ve spent nights staying up late with the latest release. But it’s never became an issue for the simple fact I prefer my significant other’s company to gaming. Common sense dictates when enough is enough. All things considered, whenever someone finds there’s a conflict between their gaming and their relationship with another, is not the game or gaming per se that is the problem. The fault lies with the individual and the choices they make. If you want to spend as much of your leisure time gaming the best way to achieve that is not to have a relationship. You get your game time and no one else gets hurt.
Game Pricing
Okay let’s begin with a poncey quote “plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose” which usually translated as “the more things change, the more they stay the same”. So said French critic, journalist, and novelist, Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr in 1849. This epigram seems especially applicable to the gaming industry because I regularly see the same topics of debate coming up, year after year. It would appear that both developers and gamers seldom learning anything along the way. On this particular occasion, the point in question is that old chestnut about game pricing. This debate was brought to my attention by a post from a fellow blogger Wilhelm Arcturus. Here’s the tweet made recently by Michael Hartman, CEO of Frogdice, a company that makes mobile games that started the debate.
Okay let’s begin with a poncey quote “plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose” which usually translated as “the more things change, the more they stay the same”. So said French critic, journalist, and novelist, Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr in 1849. This epigram seems especially applicable to the gaming industry because I regularly see the same topics of debate coming up, year after year. It would appear that both developers and gamers seldom learning anything along the way. On this particular occasion, the point in question is that old chestnut about game pricing. This debate was brought to my attention by a post from a fellow blogger Wilhelm Arcturus. Here’s the tweet made recently by Michael Hartman, CEO of Frogdice, a company that makes mobile games that started the debate.
It would appear the gentlemen is somewhat frustrated by the intransigent nature of consumer spending. It’s a complaint I’m sure that’s common to most businesses. Trying to determine a price for your product that allows you to adequately cover your development costs and make a profit, yet at the same time is attractive to your customers, is very difficult. Joe public will often apply concepts such as value for money to one product, yet consciously overlook it in for another. The fickle nature of consumer behaviour, is a science in itself. Having spent a decade of my working life self-employed I appreciate the frustration associated with pricing, operating costs and trying to get customers to fully comprehend why things cost what they do.
However, having said that, this is where sympathy starts and stops. I understand and relate to the frustration of this tweet at a business level but I do not agree with the subsequent sentiment, tone or false equivalence of the argument. A percentage of any businesses customers will be “difficult”. It’s always been that way and probably will never change. There’s always someone who wants something for nothing or has a different perception of “value”. Criticising those that pay for your products is short-sighted at least and at worst crass. It comes across as entitled, puerile and as a text book example of biting the hand that feeds you.
For me the point of failure in Mr. Hartman’s argument is comparing a $5 latte to a $5 game. They are not comparable products and consumers motivations to buy both are radically different. A coffee bought from a chain outlet is a fixed product. The whole of the fast food industry is predicated on homogeny. A large Stoat and Chive, Guano free Latte bought from chain store is the same every time you purchase one. It guarantees a standard and so the customer knows exactly what they’re getting. Value for money is very much a personal state of mind and not subject to a universal standard. Peoples relationship with spending is also complex and hard to quantify. Being profligate with money and fiscal prudence are habits applicable to both rich and poor alike.
A game, be it is a mobile app or a triple A title, is effectively an unknown quantity. One can read reviews where available and watch live stream or You Tube videos but you can never be fully sure that you’re going to enjoy it until you’ve bought and played it. Unlike the latte this is not a fixed quantity but a proposition filled with variables. Plus, lattes are disposable pleasure bought on a whim or as a convenience. They are intended to satisfy a simplistic urge. A game is a far more complex purchase, being seen as something that will yield more than instant gratification. Therefore, its purchase will simply not be considered in the same arbitrary terms as buying a drink. Irrespective of whether the game is a budget item or a new release, it will be subject to the cost to fun ratio that most gamers use as a yardstick.
Michael Hartman subsequently tweeted that customer apathy towards paying a fair price, is why games are subject to season passes, DLC and microtransactions and that gamers should not complain about such business models. Again, from a purely logical standpoint there may be a degree of truth in his words but it is a school boy error to assume that your customers give a shit about your business problems. Your problems are exactly that. To hector your customers in such a fashion is again very short sighted. The most likely outcome is that the customer will find something else to do or purchase some other product. They may not get what they want but they’ll get something. Whereas the developer will have to endure a drop in sales and will have to deal with the consequences of that. Companies needs customer more than customer need them.
No one in business is entitled to any sort of grace and favour. You have to fight for every sale. Sometimes, bad products get an easy ride and sometimes worthy and good products get over looked. You have to fight your own corner and just deal with the consequences. I’m not obliged to go and see a movie just because the producers want to see a return on their investment. I’m not going to download an album just because the artists needs to clothe their children. If you want me to buy your product you have to ensure that its worth my while. Furthermore, you can do everything right and still fall flat of your face because customers can be dicks at time but that is their god given right. Come to terms with this and focus on doing your job, rather than carping that life ain’t fare. If you want a more level playing field then look for another line of work that’s more likely to yield one.
How Videogames Changed the World (2013)
Considering the mainstream popularity of gaming, there is a distinct lack of related content on television. Journalist, writer and social commentator Charlie Brooker attempted to address this in 2009 with Gameswipe but the show remained a one-off production. Then again in late 2013, he had another crack at the subject with the documentary How Videogames Changed the World, providing a broad overview on the genre, exploring key events and titles from the past forty years. As ever with Mr. Brooker, the commentary was intelligent and acerbic. There was also an interesting and diverse selection of talking heads who spoke from personal experience, rather than the usual scripted garrulous inanities.
Considering the mainstream popularity of gaming, there is a distinct lack of related content on television. Journalist, writer and social commentator Charlie Brooker attempted to address this in 2009 with Gameswipe but the show remained a one-off production. Then again in late 2013, he had another crack at the subject with the documentary How Videogames Changed the World, providing a broad overview on the genre, exploring key events and titles from the past forty years. As ever with Mr. Brooker, the commentary was intelligent and acerbic. There was also an interesting and diverse selection of talking heads who spoke from personal experience, rather than the usual scripted garrulous inanities.
The documentary covers a lot of ground, exploring a lot of the usual controversies and debating points that inevitably stem from gaming. The subject of violence is objectively pursued with a very even hand. The cathartic nature of managed fantasy compared against the mean-spirited nastiness of certain titles. Cyber-psychologist Berni Goode raises the matter of "flow; the concept of being totally absorbed in an activity. It would appear that gaming, like knitting can be very theraputic for low-level mental health issues, such as mild depression. Then off course there’s the thorny issue of sexism, misogyny and the objectification of women. Perhaps writer Keza MacDonald sums it up the best.
"It's not so much gaming culture that's unfriendly to women. It's internet culture".
How Videogames Changed the World is far from a male dominated undertaking, with women tech journalists and game writers being fully represented, by the likes of Kate Russell, Aoife Wilson and Rhianna Pratchet. The ubiquitous Felicia Day also makes an appearance; however it would have been a serious omission not to have done so. The show also references Anita Sarkeesian and Feminist Frequency and the associated hate campaign that has arisen. The old chestnut regarding whether game icon Lara Croft is a role model and an empowered female, or just a male fantasy is dutifully trotted out, with surprising results. One conclusion was that over the last three decades, in-game avatars have evolved beyond their original questionably purpose into clearly defined characters. Commander Shepard being a prime example of this.
What How Videogames Changed the World manages to achieve is show how gaming had become a mainstream cultural norm. The rise of "inclusional" gaming via the Nintendo Wii and the significance of Minecraft as educational tool demonstrates the wider impact of games. The rise of e-sports seems to have put pay to the notion that people don't want to watch other people play games. People often find the undertaking of any competitive, skilled based activity to be compelling viewing. Comedian Dara O' Briain also layed to rest the rather tedious argument that gaming is a solitary pastime of little value. A sound-bite that is frequently espoused by those who's major leisure activity is passively watching television.
Given the ninety-minute running time and the scope of the project, it would be unfair to expect How Videogames Changed the World to be the last word on the subject matter. It does however choose a very eclectic selection of key titles to validate its arguments such a Shadow of the Colossus and PaRappa the Rapper. The documentary does not make the fatal mistake that many gamers do, of being too defensive about that which they are passionate about. The unpleasant world of FPS culture and trash talk is not justified in any way and shown for exactly what it is. Mr. Brooker also shows how games had developed a greater sense of narrative depth and social conscience with titles such a Papers Please and The Last of Us.
Perhaps the real reason why gaming has not become a regular feature of the television schedules, is because it has outgrown that particular medium. May be Twitch TV and the like are now the true home of gaming, providing content, news and information on demand direct to a suitable platform. Certainly, the integration of gaming and social media continues, as the next-gen consoles so clearly demonstrate. It can even be argued that Twitter itself is a form of "gamification". Overall it seems that it is not just the technology but the culture and even the ideology of gaming that continues to bleed out in to popular culture.
How Videogames Changed the World is unfortunately no longer available on the 4OD website. However, I would suggest a search of YouTube as an alternative source. Sadly, there are precious few quality documentaries about gaming at present. What is available is either too niche or made by those who are a little too close to the subject, thus lacking in objectivity. Therefore How Videogames Changed the World comes highly recommended to both lifelong gamers and those who have an interest in what "all the fuss is about".
The Cat Lady's House
Earlier in the year I wrote about the Abandoned Graveyard that is located in Bree-land and how LOTRO has several curious locations that appear to be residual abandoned quest lines. Someone today left a comment and mentioned The Cat lady’s House in Bree. For those who are not familiar with landmark, it can be found as you enter Bree via the Eastern gate. As you proceed up the hill, you pass the stable to your left and the forge of Flint Oakhewer to you right. After the forge, there is a flight of stone steps going up through several terraces of houses. This is the Scholar’s Stair. At the top of the stair the passage widens. To the right is a door with a cat outside. It is opposite the recently added Scholars Hall.
Earlier in the year I wrote about the Abandoned Graveyard that is located in Bree-land and how LOTRO has several curious locations that appear to be residual abandoned quest lines. Someone today left a comment and mentioned The Cat lady’s House in Bree. For those who are not familiar with landmark, it can be found as you enter Bree via the Eastern gate. As you proceed up the hill, you pass the stable to your left and the forge of Flint Oakhewer to you right. After the forge, there is a flight of stone steps going up through several terraces of houses. This is the Scholar’s Stair. At the top of the stair the passage widens. To the right is a door with a cat outside. It is opposite the recently added Scholars Hall.
Once inside you will find a lot more cats. The house is full of them. Four of them are named. These are Oliver, Horatio, Wink and Sylvester. At first glance, this may seem like nothing more than a piece of whimsy or a developer’s in-joke. Or you may think that this is another example of the quest hub that was removed from the game, such as the abandoned graveyard. However, The Cat Lady’s House does play a functional role in LOTRO. It is a specific destination in one of the sub quest of the infamous “Chicken Run”, or what the developer more formally refers to as chicken session play. If you are unfamiliar with this mini game then the following link below will provide you with all the details.
There are still a lot of unanswered questions regarding The Cat Lady’s House. It does seem to be a rather large embellishment just to provide a NPC (Wink the cat) for a solitary quest. So perhaps it did have greater significance during the games development. What is the purpose of Oliver and Horatio? Note also the creepy picture on the wall. It seems a little out of place does it not? Does it have any wider significance? Also, who and where is the Cat Lady herself? Or was the name simply added so the location wasn’t called the cat house which has other connotations. It should also be noted that according to the LOTRO Wiki the house used to be only accessible by drinking from the Inn League Keg. Your character would land inside the house drunk and would have to hearth home.
The LOTRO Wiki also indicates that The Cat Lady’s House is linked to several Spring Festival quests. One of which involves some poor love-sick NPC in the Bree market, who wants you to deliver some flowers. Due to a mistake with the address, the quest takes the player to The Cat Lady’s House and allegedly she is in. Sadly, I cannot confirm whether this particular quest is still active. Either way, the entire location is a very nice embellishment to LOTRO. Like so many others, this dates back to games launch. I am not aware of any similar examples being included in more recent content. The last jovial embellishment that I remember is the “Killer Rabbit” homage to Monty Python and the Holy Grail, in The Wailing Hills in Enedwaith. The game does seem to be getting more functional with each expansion and update. So please take note Standing Stone Games and indulge yourself from time to time. Including such whimsy adds to the games overall fun.
MMO Burnout
Although I have played numerous other online games, LOTRO has been my main MMO for the last nine years years. I have invested a great deal of time into it, which is hardly surprising as that is the entire raison d'etre of the genre. I recently purchased the Mordor expansion for the game which offers a wealth of new content. Yet despite having all this available I have done precious little in the game of late and have made no significant progress. Currently, I have Guilds Wars 2, The Elder Scrolls Online, Secret World Legends and Star Trek Online installed on my PC. I have dabbled with them all over the last few weeks, trying to rekindle a sense of enjoyment and pursue content that I have not completed. Sadly, none of them seem to hold my interest. I log in to them in the hope that something will grab my attention but I always seem to find myself just kicking my heels and aimlessly wandering through zones with no sense of focus.
Although I have played numerous other online games, LOTRO has been my main MMO for the last nine years years. I have invested a great deal of time into it, which is hardly surprising as that is the entire raison d'etre of the genre. I recently purchased the Mordor expansion for the game which offers a wealth of new content. Yet despite having all this available I have done precious little in the game of late and have made no significant progress. Currently, I have Guilds Wars 2, The Elder Scrolls Online, Secret World Legends and Star Trek Online installed on my PC. I have dabbled with them all over the last few weeks, trying to rekindle a sense of enjoyment and pursue content that I have not completed. Sadly, none of them seem to hold my interest. I log in to them in the hope that something will grab my attention but I always seem to find myself just kicking my heels and aimlessly wandering through zones with no sense of focus.
The social side of MMOs can also be an issue at times. You log in to a game hoping to find something you wish to do, only to be met with a barrage of welcomes and offers to join groups or participate in some collective event. In different circumstances, this can be a wonderful thing. The restorative properties of friendship can wash away the ills of a bad day and can replace a dark mood with a good humour. However, there are occasions when the attention can be somewhat overwhelming. There have been times when I’ve been upon the verge of logging in to an MMO but after reflecting upon athe gauntlet of upbeat cheerfulness that lays ahead, I’ve decided to do something else instead. Joking aside, there are times when socialising can be wearing and you just want to be left alone.
The consensus seems to be among gamers, as we get older we become far more particular about how we spend our time. I have purchased several games this year that I knew from the beginning would have a relatively short lifespan. Single player games often present a core campaign, online multiplay and DLC over a six-month period. You can effectively complete a game and gain a sense of closure that you’ve had your fill. Sniper Elite 4 has provided me with a solid five months of entertainment. I’ve progressed through all the content that I care to play through and have no desire to pursue it any further. Conversely, I have also returned to Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor, in anticipation of the sequel that comes out in October. I have managed to complete a campaign that previously alluded me and now feel that I’m ready to move on.
It is this sense of finality, short and limited gameplay as well as the option to play alone, that MMOs cannot compete with at present. Gamers are fickle creatures. There are times when I want to invest time, work towards long term goals and chat with my fellow man. Yet after doing those very things for three to six months they can become somewhat smothering. Sometimes virtual worlds are a welcome respite from the daily tragedy and horror on real life. Yet I still cannot help but think that it is not healthy to make them too much of a focus and a permanent substitute for real world engagement. I tend not to regret the time I have spent gaming, yet from time to time, I do question the hours required to make progress. Often this happens when a new mechanic or goal is introduced into a game and I calculate exactly how many days it will take to achieve it.
As I am currently without an MMO, I find myself in need of an alternative distraction. However, when I look at the various titles that are currently available through a vendor such as Steam, the first thing that strikes me is the interchangeable and homogeneous nature of them all. This is hardly a revelation as most industries tend to follow tried and tested formulas. At present, mainstream films and music are staggeringly bland and uninventive, so it is almost inevitable that the gaming industry should follow suit. This perfunctory style is a major obstacle for me. For example, after pondering on whether to try Black Desert, I concluded that it simply didn't have sufficient difference from any other MMO to warrant a purchase. And of course, at times like this, EVE: Online raises its head once again, offering a wealth of perceived opportunities. Yet the reality of the situation is that I do not want to take on a game with such a steep learning curve. Neither do I have the time required to be successful at such a game.
So, it would appear that I’m currently suffering from a gaming, specifically MMO "burnout". Perhaps fatigue would be a better term on reflection. Although I have currently tired to a degree of the MMO genre, I still find myself interested in gaming. What I find trying is that I cannot seem to find that many titles, both new and old, to get excited about, especially MMOs. As a genre, they have so much potential but are simply hamstrung by a lack of vision and innovation. Perhaps single player game with co-op are the answers. Furthermore, I’m tired of the noticeable disparity in game engines between MMOs and other genres of game. I appreciate that developers have to lower the bar for entry to lower specified PCs but too many MMOs look and more importantly play as if they hail from a different era. It would be nice to have an MMORPG that had the combat of either For Honor or Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor.
Fortunately, I have not put all my eggs in one basket and made my online activities the focus of all my friendships and socialising. This can be a real issue for some people when confronted with potential burnout, as loyalties and social ties can compound the problem. Gaming by its very nature can be indulged in to a far greater degree than say fishing or other traditional hobbies. It is not seasonal and is accessible 24/7.You don't have to go anywhere, prepare in advance and be mindful of things like the weather. Subsequently, unless we consciously decide to regulate ourselves it will simply swallow all our leisure time. Burnout is not a term I associate with train spotting, stamp collecting or campanology. As gaming continues to become a more mainstream activity, burnout is a phrase I think we shall hear more often.
Is Co-op Gaming King?
“Is the popularity of smaller-scale co-op (games) hurting MMORPGs?” This interesting question was posted on Massively Overpowered today as part of their regular Massively Overthinking feature. The subject was explored by members of the writing team then thrown over to reader comments, many of which were very thought provoking. The subject was similar to one we debated recently on the Contains Moderate Peril podcast. That focused on whether traditional MMO players were now outsiders within their own genre of choice. Both of these discussions are about change and a shift in player habits. And change is frequently unsettling and potentially comes at the expense of something else.
“Is the popularity of smaller-scale co-op (games) hurting MMORPGs?” This interesting question was posted on Massively Overpowered today as part of their regular Massively Overthinking feature. The subject was explored by members of the writing team then thrown over to reader comments, many of which were very thought provoking. The subject was similar to one we debated recently on the Contains Moderate Peril podcast. That focused on whether traditional MMO players were now outsiders within their own genre of choice. Both of these discussions are about change and a shift in player habits. And change is frequently unsettling and potentially comes at the expense of something else.
A good MMORPG offers a complex persistent world that can be explored and enjoyed both as a solo player and as part of a group. A decade ago, the genre was very much focused on group run content and I have spent many a rewarding evening running dungeons with my guild mates. These sorts of social activities foster close bonding with fellow players and can be extremely uplifting. Yet raiding culture is by its nature time consuming and requires a lot of organising and commitment. Co-op play in other genres of games can offer the same sort of fix but without half as much baggage.
Running The Rift in LOTRO a decade ago meant everyone turning up on time, with the right gear and consumables. Everyone needed to know their job. Even the most casual of raid groups would have to give up a lot of time and if someone fumbled the ball it meant you got nothing for all your work, bar the fun you had. Teaming with your friends in Overwatch is quick and simple. Within minutes you’re in the middle of the action. You can play as casually or as hardcore as you like. If you fail epically, you still get XP points that can unlock loot creates. Such co-op games may not have the immersive world trappings of an MMO but they offer all the fun without the grind. No wonder so many players gravitate towards them.
I enjoy MMOs but play them differently today than how I did ten years ago. I have written recently about how Sniper Elite 4, For Honor and Overwatch can be great fun when played co-operatively with friends and for me I think this is the future. Co-op scratches that social gaming itch but in a manner that allows you to filter out much of the less desirable elements you find in MMOs. The risk of toxic team mates is far less and you aren’t faced with complex barriers to entry. There’s no need to wait for players to change their gear or empty their bags. Where the MMO player is still martialling his team mates, fifteen minutes after the raid was due to begin, the co-op player is knee deep in action, making the most of their precious game time.
If you look back over the last fifty years of popular culture, you’ll find a long list of popular genres, formats and mediums that have bitten the dust. It is sad but ultimately how markets work. Musicals and Westerns came and went as the most popular movie genres. TV saw the rise and fall of the Variety show. The FPS genre moved beyond the confines of World War II and MMOs evolved from open virtual worlds to tightly scripted and managed theme parks. All of these things happened because the public wanted something else that offered them better value for their time and money. At present, co-op games appear to be king by offering what the MMO genre either can’t or won’t. Developers working with such titles should take note but I’m not sure if there’s time left to fix this.