Review/Control Freak: Armored Core Verdict Day

I couldn't keep the review going for long. I'm done with this game. Welcome to a new entry into my Most-Hated Games List.

Armored Core premiered in 1997 on the original Playstation and with its combination of mech action, customization, and RPG-based credits reward system, it quickly became one of the best examples of mech simulation games to have ever been produced. The follow-up games being expansions took the game on a single-player quest and subsequently into the arenas. Fast forward 16 years later to 2013 where FROM SOFTWARE is still creating new Armored Core games and expansions. Verdict Day is not the initial release as it follows Armored Core V and even continues the story past the single-player campaign. But in these days of DLC add-ons and microtransactions, is it really worth it?

Earth is now a barren wasteland as three major corporations vie for control over territories that hold the remaining resources. The big three have worked out an uneasy truce among them but are still prepared for war with hired mechs and teams able to be dispatched at a moment's notice. The single player campaign puts you as a mech pilot working for a mercenary company when you're given the order to attack certain patrols in order to incite another war among the big three, just so they'll have reason to hire mercenaries again to do their dirty work, putting you back in a better paying job. Along the way you'll encounter other mercenary mech pilots who want to end you and the collect the bounty on your head, as you must do them also. You can form teams with AI-controlled mechs to help with completing the more difficult objectives, but it never really beefs up the difficulty enough until after about a dozen levels are completed.

If you find the single-player campaign to be too dull (and you probably will), you can open your game to the multiplayer section where you can hire other players to help you with your single player campaign missions, hire yourself out as a mercenary to help others, or have big team corporation battles (this all pending on whether the servers are up, of course, which is only half the time). And even then in the big team battles you'll come across a group of Koreans with the Windows logo who will completely obliterate whatever team is pieced together. Its this cross-cultural imbalance that makes this part of the multiplayer not even worth considering playing. They control most of the game and why servers aren't region separated is a painful reminder that FROM SOFTWARE only cares about its Far Eastern audience.

Inside the cockpit, you'll find that the action is just as chaotic and fast-paced as its ever been. Kinetic, Chemical, and Thermal Energy weapon types once again play a role in the game. Mech customization can prepare you for certain weapon types but leave you vulnerable to others. This same rule also applies for the one-on-one missions. After a short while they'll require careful planning and the right parts equipped to take down enemy mechs.

In order to advance in the story you need to defeat these other mercenaries, but when it becomes impossible to do so, it gives you no alternative to continue forward and brings the game to a grinding halt. Seasoned vets will find no fault in this and will find a way to work around it. All others will be turned off and will find no reason to continue playing. Its this exclusivity that the series has always had that prevents it from becoming something enjoyable by everyone.

The game engine is the same as 4 and 5, so you won't find much spectacle in the graphics. The whole thing is just as gritty as it was before and even though its a separate release, its already a tired view of things. With the exception of the new mech parts and the new maps, you'll find everything is the same.

The sounds of battle provide a very stark contrast to the calming nature of the menus, which features an operatic score backed by guitars. Guns in every form have different sounds and could shake the windows if turned up. The chaos of so many sounds happening on the battlefield is short-lived since some fights can take as little as two minutes.

CONTROL FREAK

Where the previous entries before Armored Core 4 were balanced between single and multiplayer, here most of the attention is on just the latter. It wants you to join a team, play through seasons, and play with others all online in order to get the better part of the experience. But what it boils down to is the same formula as the games before it: build a mech, defeat other mechs to unlock new parts, win until you have enough money to buy those new parts. It goes to show that FROM SOFTWARE has put the Armored Core series into a niche corner and shows no signs of advancing it with new ideas. Where creating teams and selling yourself as a mercenary are good ones, it seems they didn't bother to plan what to do for the rest of the game. If this is how the next few titles in the series go, with an ignorable story and a lot of repeated mech parts, then you should just ignore it. Armored Core Verdict Day is not a bad game, its a bad game to keep playing.

I looked up synonyms for the word "okay" because "okay" just sounded too dull. What I found was "acceptable," "permissible," "competent," and "satisfactory." I guess I could say that it is a competent game in that it knows what its doing but I just can't in good conscience use the others words to describe how much of a letdown Armored Core Verdict Day really is. There are other mech games that are taking the same ideas but in different and exciting directions; Hawken coming to mind first. But if this is what an old veteran of the genre has to offer then it should be put to rest for a few years.

If you have Armored Core V then you don't need Verdict Day. I understand that releasing expansions as separate games is what the series has always done but in the year of 2013 this is a tired practice. This idea of nickel-and-diming the players has already outlived its welcome. What could have been just a $20 DLC add-on was instead released as a $50 entry into the franchise. For that price the amount of content offered is simply not worth it. Companies need to understand that this will not get us to buy new games. You do not need Verdict Day. If the series continues along this path it will eventually do itself in. And maybe, just maybe, we'll get a mech game worthy of all of us playing.

Keep Playing

Control Freak: A Bone To Pick

Looking through my traffic sources on Blogger I've come across a few interesting findings; It seems that the majority of my page views have come from outside of the US. Not that I'm complaining about the total count but I'm a US-based blogger for games released mainly in the US. I don't have a PAL converter and I don't import any games; so I find it rather odd that in the last DAY alone, as of writing this, I received 50 page views from Indonesia. 

What do I have to do with that country??

This is just a gaming blog and if there are gamers in Indonesia who like to read my reviews then by all means that's awesome. Leave a comment (in English) and let me know what the gaming scene is like there. But if a website is redirecting people here for some unknown reason then I apologize. 

I am not affiliated with any website, professional or amateur, corporate or independent, in any way, shape, or form. Its just me at home pounding out my thoughts about games on my laptop. I do post my reviews to ScrewAttack and maybe some community-based sites but other than that I am not getting paid to do this. No corporation has given me review copies or codes. I didn't win any contests and I don't know people in the industry.

(On a side note: most of you are viewing from Internet Explorer. Time to drop that and get with Firefox, noobs. Also, 25 of you have viewed this from a PSP. Wow, way to stick to your guns. *thumbs up*)

Besides that incoming of views from outside the US, I've apparently been trafficked by a local sex/hook-up site. By local I mean that it has my city's name on the front page. While I make no bones about where I'm from, I try to not discuss it openly due to stereotypes. I have been called names because of my locale so to avoid any misconceptions about the people surrounding this town I prefer to stay away from them and write like I have a little intelligence. I'm open about being just a human. I'm not an Internet God and I don't conceal who I am. Some bloggers do that and it seems they're just trying to live a second life.

I just find it rather odd that I all of a sudden have views coming in from a foreign country. I'm also glad that so far no one has associated me with being a REAL mercenary. I don't think I've ever explained the meaning behind my gamertag:

I was once in a gaming clan for Counter-Strike, mainly Source. We had a decent-sized group of individuals and we were never serious about playing professionally, mostly pubs and scrim matches. It eventually came to a point where there were suddenly too many members for our leader to control. One day it just went away. I still talked to some of the members and they asked me to play with their new clans. So I would jump between clans, changing my clan tag with each one. I became a mercenary for them. At the time I was also playing Mercenaries on Xbox so the name seemed to fit. As for the BIG part... well I'm fat. Need I say more about that?

That's pretty much all I have to say. So if you've come here due to a redirect then I apologize. I don't have any affiliations with any website so they're linking to me without my knowledge. If you've found my blog somehow through a shady website that has nothing to do with gaming, then I apologize again. I'm just an amateur writer with a passion for gaming. I mean nothing in the grand scheme of the Internet. All I do is play games and write about them.

Keep Playing.

Control Freak: Is There Any Hope For the Future of 1up.com?

 2003 - 2013

I suspect by now that most of the editors have cleared out their desks and may occasionally check the site at home from time to time. I imagine the server(s) that hold 1up in the digital spaces of the internet are ticking away the miliseconds to their inevitable unplugging but are still slowly working to post what few blogs come through via the users that still come here. I can only guess that the big business of Ziff-Davis has no intention of selling the site or name because they don't want to lose the ad revenue. And, I like to think that the users still care.

I have been a member of dozens of gaming community sites over the years. Some of them have been good to me, others I'd like to see burn to the ground with the creators trapped in the building.
I first heard of 1up through a magazine advert, the one with the kid holding the Dreamcast, I believe that was back in 2003 at the site's launch. I wasn't on the internet til 2001 and didn't really get into gaming until 2004. Back then I had never imagined there were gaming communities. GameSpy Arcade was my first real taste of online gaming and it opened the door to many of the big name review sites. I wasn't a member of 1up til about 2006 (under a different name) and what attracted me was the 1up Show. I had just gotten into podcasts and I genuinely loved it. The talent of production and the easy-going natures of Matt Chandronait and Ryan O'Donnell had me anticipating it each week. It was one of my few favorites. Sadly, out of the almost dozen or so I used to listen to, only 2 are still around.
It seems these days most people are migrating to the independent review sites for fear of pressure from the game companies or corporations. Ever since the Gerstmanngate debacle, writers have been called into question along with review scores. (And really, if a 5/10 is "average" then why is the average game a 7/10?) Its been hard to take anyone's word for how good a game really is these days.

1up had the best straightfoward writers that gave you the facts, it was never clouded with opinions. They had the wherewithal to know what the readers wanted. The only things I was ever disappointed with on this site was the game search, (it never had the little-known games that I have in my collection. While my count shows 452, its more like just over 500.) and the lack of reviews for old games. But those are minor mainly because I keep a list of everything on my computer and I know there wasn't enough manpower to review *picks absolute random game from the list* Silent Scope on the Dreamcast.
Along with that, the community has been one of the most mature I've ever come across. There was never any room for fanboys and the ones that I saw that made their way onto this site were largely ignored by those smart enough not to feed the trolls. I know my blogs were never A+ material, but getting one or two thumbs up for effort was good enough for me.

IGN had no real reason to buy 1up and Gamespy, UGO had no reason to merge with them, and neither should have let Ziff-Davis. What was the point of having a giant congolmerate of game review sites? Were they hoping to create a monopoly? I always felt 1up was more "raised on games" whereas IGN was for new gamers who only cared for the AAA titles. This site was about the gamers themselves, the community was always the main attraction. It was about finding people who were interested in certain games and geeking out about your favorite ones. You could post a blog, forum, or group message and have a game day with total strangers and make friends. You could even find people who liked the same music as you. No other sites did that.
It was about US. THEY created this site for US. For us to celebrate ourselves as gamers. To figure out why people loved the terrible games, to hate the draw distance on Turok 2, to praise the textures and polygon counts of a Sega Saturn game. From the headache-inducing pain of the Virtual Boy to discussing the rapid rise and fall of the 3DO. For tearing the newest video game movie a new one, to painfully admitting that Super Mario Bros was the worst movie we always love to watch. 1up.com was here for that.

"Where Gamers Call Home"

Yeah, I'm sorry I was never around the whole time to see just how great this site truly was. I don't want to start throwing out suggestions because the site is stable enough as is (just... fix the box art problem on some games, go look up Unreal Tournament) and I just don't know if, in the future if the site survives, anything will be changed.

If 1up were to rise again, I suspect it would be less like a phoenix rising from the ashes, and more like starting a New Game+: We have all the equipment, we know the storyline and what choices to make for a reinvention. The only thing to do is gather the crew and go after the Final Boss.

Keep Playing.

Control Freak: Reviewer Pro-tips.

Time and time again I come across game reviews that make me lose faith in humanity, ones that are atrociously bad, make no sense, and make English teachers cry. Ones that have no rhyme, reason, or right to be on the internet. 

I've compiled a short list of tips for those who do write those bad reviews. I know a lot of people won't care to follow these. I also know that some people will be outright indignant about these tips. "A hit dog will cry" is all I'm going to say to them. Meaning if you're offended, then you're guilty.

I'm presenting this as a simple guide to people who write bad reviews of video games or any other medium for that matter. It's also a straightforward guide to those who are unsure about their reviewing prowess.

We've all been guilty of bad reviews in our days, some of us still are. I'm not criticizing any particular person's review(s), but rather the people who just don't get it.

 

 

You are not the Angry Video Game Nerd or Nostalgia Critic, do not pretend to be so. If you're going to spout curse words at random intervals, don't do it so often to the point that your review is outright unreadable/unwatchable. If you can't think of anything else to say besides a hundred curse words in your review, then don't do the review at all. With luck I'll never read or watch it and that makes me happy. Cursing at a game is pointless. Instead, curse your lack of skills to play the game.

 

 

We don't know you, we don't know what games you like to play, we don't know who you are off of the website your review is on, so please don't interject your own personal opinions into your review.

If you are a person who would rather do a review based on just your opinions, you can always start off by saying "I'm a big fan of *genre or series* but I have a problem with *insert problem.* It wasn't up to my standards of blah blah blah..." That helps us get to know you a little better and why it was a problem for you.

Dictionary.com, and more than likely a printed dictionary, defines the word Opinion as "a personal view, attitude, or appraisal," meaning your own thoughts are written down into your review. These are the things you experienced and, in your mind, decided whether or not it was good.

Parallel to that definition, Fact is described as "something that actually exists; reality; truth."

Mario jumping higher after running is a fact. Mario being better than Luigi is an opinion.

See what I'm getting at? A very hard level in a game may seem unfair to you in your opinion, but the reason that it's supposed to be a challenge is a fact.

In simple terms: what may suck to you may be good in someone else' mind.

Punctuation: It's not an STD.

One paragraph is not a review. We need content, descriptions, a voice for the whole of the game. Don't worry if you think its "too wordy." Some people will say TL;DNR, but if you can grab my interest early on you may very well have my attention for the entire review.

Talk about graphics: how they hold up on the console, don't compare to another game unless it's in a series.

Gameplay: is it bugged? Is it perfect in your eyes? Does it remind you of another game?

Sound: Bullets and explosions are fun and all, but did you step back to hear voice chatter or the environment?

Value: How long do you expect to continually play the game? Will you come back to it years from now?

Add a personal opinion: what you wished the creators added or left out. Is it a rental or a buy?

Never.

Ever.

EVER.

Are you listening to me yet?

EVER!

Under ANY circumstance directly compare one game to another, especially if they are of two completely different genres. (But as I've said before: ideas are fair game.) I have seen the genre mishap done before: someone compared the driving in GTA: San Andreas as being superior to that in Need For Speed Underground 2, and furthermore someone else compared Underground 2 as being better than Gran Turismo 4. (That's an arcade vs sim argument. We'll save that for later.)

Spell check is your friend, don't be afraid to use it. Some people don't bother with spell check because it makes them feel inferior only to be lambasted by readers later on. That's all a sense of pride and ego, just use the spell check.

What's that you say? One, small, single, little aspect of a game completely ruined the entire experience for you? Awwww poor baby. Well guess what? Tell us instead what you liked about the game. Don't dwell on one area for the entire review.

"I don't care if you agree with me or not, you're going to have to sit here and listen to me rant!"

Umm... no I'm not. I'm going to close out the tab and look for another review that's worth my time.

While we're on the topic: don't "rant." "Rant" is becoming an overused word meaning "I didn't think things through and plastered my opinion into an area of writing on the internet!"

Don't be a graphics whore: The Playstation 3 IS better than the 360 in terms of graphics but only because it is more powerful. Shut up fanboys, I own a 360.

Don't shoot off your mouth and disrespect another console in your review. Doing so certifies yourself as being on the bottom of the barrel of internet reviewers.

Graphics don't make a good game, gameplay does.

Don't contradict yourself. I.e."I did, but I didn't." End of discussion.

We all know there are bad games out there, if you happen to review one, don't throw out random sentences of anger. Try making fun of the game, add a little humor if you can. Satirize!

Halo, Metal Gear Solid, Devil May Cry, Grand Theft Auto, Gears of War, Need For Speed, World of Warcraft and Call of Duty are not the only games ever created. There is variety out there. Other games ARE NOT "ripping these games off."

Don't get involved in the hype machine. Try not to have preconceived notions, good or bad, about the game before playing it. Tell me what you think of it, not what you heard everyone else say. The hype surrounding certain games can be a huge letdown. (Thanks to Andre the Black Nerd for that one!)

Don't diss the old school and retro games: without them we wouldn't have games today.

Okay. Okay. You can hate on E.T. for the Atari all you want. That's fair.

Don't insult your readers.

I hope a lot of you can fair better from what I've presented. I have come across a few mind-numbing reviews in my time, ones that physically hurt to read. Some people just don't know that their reviews are bad, they post them and ignore the wave of facepalms.

Now, I want to know what you all think: what's the one thing you hate when people do in their reviews?

Keep Playing.

Control Freak: GT PSP: My own thoughts

With my review of Gran Turismo for the PSP I tried to hold back my own personal input from the game, I wanted to deliver a straightforward review. I did add a few examples from my own personal playthrough when I mentioned the driving line and not being familiar with it, but that however was an example rather a personal injection. This blog is just my passable thoughts on the game, what I liked, what I didn't like.

The reason I try to distinguish the game review from my personal thoughts is this: The reader may not like the same things I do. In addition, the reader doesn't know me in real life, so by adding my own thoughts to the review, I taint the reader's knowledge of the game. But without further adieu, this is what I really think of GT PSP. Be warned, it isn't pretty.

GT PSP holds no new tracks, no old tracks, and no surprises. It's a copy and paste job of previous entries into the Gran Turismo series, stripped down so it's small enough to fit on a UMD.

Polyphony Digital: Do we really need 6 types of one car? (i.e. over 6 types of the Mitsubishi Lancer.) That just takes up disc space for other cars that could be used. (GTO Judge? Hello?)

And speaking of the Judge: why so few American muscle cars? It seems like a bit of a biased towards America when coming from a Japanese game developer. 

60 frames per second? Give me 30 and better track design, no pop-ups in the background, and no breakthroughs on the course. I know the PSP can handle better graphics than that.

I'm not trying to say "make a completely cartoon version of GT," I'm saying it's a release on a handheld, time to do something different. Surprise us. Wow us. Make us want to play the game.

Only 4 manufacturers at a time? Like I said in the review: it forces us to decide whether to buy this new car presented to us, or save up for the one we want. That's understandable. Problem is it's almost a rarity if you want a certain European or American car. 19 times out of 20 one of the manufacturers is either Nissan or Toyota. As I said earlier: biased much? 

I started and ended over a hundred races (without playing them) just to get the day count up to get to the next manufacturer set in hopes of finding Subaru or Chevy. 

The last DLC given to us was a set of the high price cars: Bugatti Veyron, Enzo Ferrari, GT by Citroen, etc. Cars that would take us all a while to save up for (not to mention longer to find because of the manufacturer limit). So now I have no need to save up that money to buy a Veyron. Thanks.

As for DLC: Give us NEW cars, and NEW tracks. Heck, I'd settle for old tracks (Clubman Stage Route 5 plz?) if it meant I could do something more with the game.

Why no tournament races or individual challenge races? Something separate from the Challenge Mode presented in the game. I understand it's a game meant to be played in between time periods, but you've got to make me want to play it.

What's wrong with the control stick? There is no sensitivity. I push it to the left just a little and the car fully steers left. I know it can handle differing degrees of motion because it's possible in the SOCOM games. Regardless, the physics are similar to what you find in GT4, making me think a certain department was too lazy to improve upon things.

As for the rank up system: What am I supposed to do? I've tried over 20 laps on each track, with new cars, or cars that I've never raced with, and single manufacturer races, but still nothing has changed. Are there certain hidden requirements for each track? If so, what are they because I'm lost and, literally, going around in circles trying to figure this out.

After buying a larger memory card, I found out that I was wrong about installing the game to the memory. Sure it's faster, but it eats up a lot of the battery, despite what the game manual says. . And you need at least 1GB of space to do so. Funny how the game says you needs over 200MB and the manual says 700MB. Good job lying to us. You also need to have the disc in the PSP in order to play it, much like the PS3.

Overall, unless you really want a new Gran Turismo game, and you don't want to wait until 2015 for GT5, it's a definite recommendation. Just don't expect to find this game as great as you would initially think.

(Ha, now that I think about it, it's been said that you can transfer your car collection to GT5. So if you buy every car then you're pretty much set for this game.)

Keep Playing.

But don't keep playing GT PSP, because I don't think I am.

Control Freak: DLC and You

(Welcome to the newest part of this blog. The part where I can openly RAGE about something that's bugging me within the gaming world. This is NOT a light-hearted expression of what I think, or a See-It-From-My-Point-of-View blog like the Random Blogs. This is me, yelling at you, yelling at the companies, yelling at the games, yelling at a wall about what's being done wrong.)(Or what's being done right but I still hate it anyway.)

As the inaugural blog for Control Freak, I think it's best I start with a particular topic that strikes many gamers as unfair: DLC, or Downloadable Content for those not in the know.

DLC is what is offered over a console's Internet service as part of the ever-expanding experience. The type of DLC ranges from menu themes, new level maps, new cars, new songs, new costumes, new characters, new game modes, new game chapters, harder difficulties... basically anything that can be added to a game these days to make your life a living hell -- I mean steal your life away from you by making you play the game longer -- I mean... no wait, that is what I mean.

Keep in mind, non-gamer readers, that all DLC is entirely optional. There is no need to download a part of the game in order to keep playing it. You can think of it like a navigation system in a car: It's optional but not necessary.

There are some cases where DLC is offered on release day simply for the fact that there was not enough room on the disc to handle all of it. That can be understandable, but to most gamers it really pushes their buttons (seriously no pun intended) and they continue thinking it was done to make money.

That is the case when content is left out of a game on purpose so it can be sold either on release day or later as DLC. This makes gamers mad in the fact that:
A: It was withheld so the companies can make more money.
B: Some DLC can be seen as outrageously priced ($5 for one costume).
C: Some DLC should be offered as a patch instead.

Take Resident Evil 5's Mercenaries mode for example: on release day the player could connect to Xbox Live or Playstation Network and spend $5 to unlock the mode.
Alternatively they could have JUST PLAYED THROUGH THE GAME TO UNLOCK IT.
So what's the point of charging $5 for a mode that's readily available and only takes BEATING the game to unlock it?

Then there's the case of Capcom and Super/Street Fighter IV. When SF4 was released, gamers rejoiced. It was the newest offering of the Street Fighter franchise in almost 10 years.
A year later Super Street Fighter IV was announced and fans were pissed.
Why?
Because it's essentially the same game, just SUPER in the title and with more characters. All for a lesser price than the original game.
Non-gamers might be thinking: if there's more content, why don't they just charge more for the SUPER iteration? Or offer it as DLC?
Simple: MONEY. $. DOLLARS. MOOLA. GREEN BACKS. DEAD PRESIDENTS.
If they were to offer it as DLC, it might change the programming of the game entirely: new character selection screen, new intro movie, new title, new move sets, etc. It's not like an update where everyone's copy of the game is patched in order to fix something. They would be losing money in allowing everyone with the game to download the DLC. Not to mention the months it would take to get the DLC approved.
Someone with the original game might not be able to play against someone with SUPER because the programming will be different, and Capcom wants fairness all around.

Is the case of Capcom and SF4 cheap? (Some might say) No.
Is the case of RE5 and Mercenaries mode cheap? Yes.

Charging for content that's already on the disc is a traitorous act. We buy the games, we support the companies and yet we get the shaft.

Now let's talk Game of the Year Editions, what can be seen as some as the biggest rip-offs ever. Microsoft and Xbox 360 are especially notorious for this.
Take Forza Motorsport 2 for example: When the game was released the price was $60. Seeing as how most games this generation are released at that price it's reasonable. Then came the DLC: new race tracks and, over the months, about a dozen new cars. The DLC prices ranged from free to $5 (800 Microsoft points). That's not too bad I suppose.
But fast forward to today where you can go to a store and buy Forza 2 with all available DLC (on a second disc) for the low low price of $20
Considering it was originally $60 + cost of DLC does that make it a rip-off? Yes.
I can understand the value of a game decreasing over time but really? Someone who bought the game new would either have to get the DLC or buy the Platinum Hits version only for the second disc. (I'm not sure about content rights and all that, but someone could probably borrow the game from a friend, install the second disc and play everything. Again, though, I'm not sure.)

DLC, in many rights, is just and fair and adds more to the game. But when there are several chapters added on, taking our money, taking our time, taking our very lives from us... it just gets to be too much.
A player can sink so much of themselves into a game for months, maybe a year or so, only for a sequel or a Game of The Year Edition to be released with all the previous DLC offered up as bait.
"Maybe that'll make more people buy the game and there will be new people to play with!"
Or maybe everyone else already has the game and it's no fun to play against a n00b with zero experience?
Then what good is that game?

Now let's talk about Premium Themes and Avatar clothing.
First the themes: users from both Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 will know what I'm talking about. You can pay so much money for a...
Oh, the non-gamers don't know.
Well a theme is color and picture scheme for the 360 and PS3 that changes the look of the consoles main menu screen and such. Again, it's not necessary, but it can get a little tiresome looking at the same starter theme for months.
Some themes are free. Others can cost up to $5.
$5.
5 bucks to change the look of your console's menus.
It can be seen as pointless on the 360 since you can import a picture file onto the background and use whatever you want. On the PS3 you can change the color scheme and maybe add a picture. Idk since I don't own one.
But as I was saying: you can pay so much for a theme that can be summed up as "putting a dress on your dog." You're going to spend a lot of time playing games or maybe watching movies with your console, not staring at how pretty your theme is. Do you really need to spend $5 to make it look fancy?

As for Avatar clothing: Avatars are Xbox 360's version of you, or a person you send to represent you. Your Avatar doesn't have to be of the same gender. Is an Avatar optional like the themes?
No.
With the release of the New Xbox Experience, the Avatars were made available to everyone who connected their 360 to the internet and updated their consoles. The console update is optional, but necessary if you want to... oh I don't know... keep playing games, getting content, and so on. You're required to select a pre-made Avatar and then adjust it how you want to, there's no getting around it.
When you get bored of the standard set of clothes available for your Avatar, you can go on Live and buy new clothes. But like I keep saying: it's not necessary. And it's pretty pointless actually. You're not going to make your Avatar cute by spending real world money on a fake shirt. Got it?

(And yes, that's my actual Avatar.)

All in all DLC can be evil if you're broke, an evil necessity if you really want it, and gimmicky if you have enough money. The fact that game companies can charge us for our lives is preposterous. The fact that we buy this stuff is even more so.
Try as we might, the game companies have us whipped. They say jump and we press a button and do it.

So what happens when the game companies don't listen to us: the gamers?
I believe that's for another blog.

Keep Playing.

Control Freak: VIDEO GAMES ARE NOT BABYSITTERS!!

(To my Facebook readers: you can see this actual blog post at bigmercenary.blogspot.com. It's my personal blog about video game reviews, issues, my thoughts, etc. Plus things like Tech News. I have it tied in to Facebook so that's why you're all seeing this. Discussions are ALWAYS welcome whether on the blog or on Facebook.)

Let's say a 13 year old kid walks into a gun store and wants to buy a rifle and some ammo, they're not going to let him. But if that kid walks into Wal-Mart and wants to buys an M-rated game, they probably won't bat an eyelid.

Why is that?

The gun store employees are trained (not to mention have enough common sense I hope) to not sell weapons to minors. But the employee turnout in Wal-Mart is so astronomical that they won't care who they're selling the game to (because they probably won't be there next month). Neither will the head honchos of this place because it's just money to them. I've been carded every time in the past few years when I bought an M-rated game from EBGames or GameStop. (Play N Trade has my info on file, so they don't need to ask.)
K-Mart just recently picked it up last year.
Wal-Mart? No idea.

After a school shooting a few years ago, it was found that the kid had access to guns. Where did he gets the guns from? His mom bought them FOR HIM. She didn't recognize what was going on in her son's life that would lead to that debacle. The finger was also pointed at the video games he had played.
In the same way some kid's parent will buy them M-rated games and not even pay attention to the rating or how it will affect the kid playing the game.
It can also be noted that many parents just don't care what the rating is. In this case the store employees can not refuse to sell the game. It may result in legal action, heavy fines, etc.

Some years ago there was a RollingStone magazine with Britney Spears on the cover in her underwear, being interviewed about her home life. The FCC criticized this but the magazine still sold well. So what about this piece of "objectionable material"? I'm pretty sure lots of 13 year old boys bought that issue. It was never pulled from store shelves or boycotted.

I can bring this point up a million times and it may never get through the thick skulls of some people: It's the parent's responsibility to make sure that they're kids are not playing these games.
It should also be noted that a video game system IS NOT A BABYSITTER. It is NOT OKAY for you to sit your kids down in front of a console and leave for work or a dance club.
Video games are no substitute for reality.Time spent with your children is important.

If you do allow them to be played, you need to make sure they understand the difference between video games and reality. AND you need to be there with them to make sure things don't get out of hand.

It requires a group effort for things of this nature to go right. Game store employees already know to card for M-rated games. The parents need to know about the ratings system and to pay attention to the behavior of their children. Those of us who play games as a hobby and beyond shouldn't point the finger back or ignore this issue. We need to encourage parents to get involved with their kid's lives.

These are the current ESRB ratings for video games, direct from the ESRB website:
(Please note, there are currently only 19 games rated Adults Only.)
EC: Early Childhood: Titles rated EC have content that may be suitable for ages 3 and older. Contains no material that parents would find inappropriate.
E: Everyone: Titles rated E have content that may be suitable for ages 6 and older. Titles in this category may contain minimal cartoon, fantasy or mild violence and/or infrequent use of mild language.
E 10+: Everyone 10 and Up: Titles rated E10+ have content that may be suitable for ages 10 and older. Titles in this category may contain more cartoon, fantasy or mild violence, mild language and/or minimal suggestive themes.
T: Teen: Titles rated T have content that may be suitable for ages 13 and older. Titles in this category may contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language.
M: Mature: Titles rated M have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language.
AO: Adults Only: Titles rated AO have content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older. Titles in this category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity.
RP: Rating Pending: Titles listed as RP have been submitted to the ESRB and are awaiting final rating. (This symbol appears only in advertising prior to a game's release.)

Control Freak: Just my thoughts on Nintendo

(Posted this one on Jan 1, 09.)

It's just me thinking all this, and I could most certainly be wrong, but everyone has their own opinions and these are mine. Because, honestly, it's not like you get enough of other people's opinions when you're online. *sarcasm* Whether or not you agree with them, I don't care. These are just thoughts that have been going through my mind for a while now.
Point 1: Nintendo has not abandoned their core audience. I can hear the haters shouting already but let me get to the second part of this opinion: their core audience is in Japan. All the shovel-ware games like WiiMusic, Hula Wii, and the like are aimed at little kids in Japan. Here in America they're also aimed at the young as well as those who have never picked up a controller in their lives. Which leads to Point 2.
Point 2: "They've abandoned the hardcore audience." This depends on your definition of "hardcore." One example could be those who really get into the game, shout when they're losing, or play a game months after the hype is over. Another definition could be those who play a game thoroughly, look for and learn all the secrets, or are avid collectors of a certain genre of game. I remember once upon a time there were people who were "hardcore Nintendo" and wouldn't touch anything Sega made.
Point 3: If Nintendo cared about America, you'd think Shigeru Miyamoto would have learned English a long time ago. I guess since he spends all his time developing casual titles he has no time to learn English. Did you know Nintendo has a lifetime contract with him and essentially owns every thought he has?
Point 4: I know I sound like I'm attacking Nintendo and I probably am, but
fact #1: More American game-makers need to make Wii games, whether they use the Wiimote or find a way to make them compatible with a GameCube controller. Or. heck, they could even make GameCube games and just have people play them on their GCs or Wiis.
Point 5: Not all good Wii games have to be first person shooters. It seems like the "hardcore" crowd flocks to these expecting the Halo-killer and are not looking towards the Wii. I'm pretty sure that, despite it's flaws, Red Steel was okay as well as Metroid Prime being a must-buy for the Wii.
Alternate Point #1: There have been a lot of good FPS games that were overlooked by many people only because game sites compared them to Halo. Area 51, Project Snowblind, Goldeneye: Rogue Agent, and even Serious Sam 2 would brushed to the side.
Point 6 and this is for all those who are old enough to remember: the Virtual Console offers a ton of old school NES and SNES games to play. Not being a Wii owner I can't give you any examples of what games their are but I'm pretty sure you can find a list online. Go Google it. Thing is, most of the young kids dont' care for these old games, making the VC mainly for those who grew up playing them.
Point 7: I would like to see Nintendo create a newer version of the Wii without restrictions, but design it different from the currect console as to make sure the differences are known. The lack of restrictions would allow people to add others without friend codes, Brawl codes, Kart codes, or anything else. Just implement a name system and have it registered to one person. If the person decides to change their names then their friends are notified instantly.
This has been a public service announcement brought to you by me. But honestly, I never really know how to end blogs of this nature. I'm sure I would like Nintendo more if they just paid attention to people and stopped shipping in Japanese games. They could do so much better.