New Years Resolutions (the late edition)

Firstly, apologies for my absence. It seems that like all good new years resolutions, I've completely ignored mine.

It seems that I was supposed to be writing more in the year 2008 - however, it also seems that I'm 0 entries for 4 months ever since I was allowed into the fold of content contributors for this group. A truly pitiful state of affairs, I'm sure that you'll agree.

I suppose a part of this is when I look at the rest of the content that is supplied here, I get a certain sense that I have nothing of merit to contribute. When I try to sit down and think 'Right, intelligent and thought provoking comments!' I draw a complete blank. Whether or not this is because I'm sober, and therefore everything seems more complex than it really is, I'm not entirely certain, but nonetheless, I feel that my ramblings wouldn't go down too well.

Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe you're sat there, reading this and thinking 'Well, why have you started rambling now?' - you're onto something there, by the way. I'm not sure either.

I suppose partly, I wanted to discuss the latest (now outdated) news about Blu-Ray finally overcoming the HD-DVD. Then I realised that the only statement I had to make was something along the lines of 'Thanks for not taking a generation' and lamenting about Sony's continuing march to own peoples souls through the medium of PS3 (honestly, it's just a cheap Blu-Ray DVD player / multimedia-centre/ overpriced games console/ please enter your credit card details here.)

Then, moving on from that little gem (I'm not done on the Sony wheel of evil yet.) I wanted to discuss mobile tariffs. Apart from the fact that they are all painfully expensive (I don't understand how, if we're getting all of these fantastic savings, they can still post record profits year after year. Surely, if we're saving money with them, they should be looking at more modest profit margins?) I was hoping that someone could point me in the direction of the best smart phone on the market at the moment. I'm about due an upgrade anyway.

Back to Sony. Have you ever noticed that if you walk into any high street retailer, you can pick up the same game, on Xbox and PS3 formats, and have a difference of anything up to £10 for each one? Is this to cover the difference in production costs? Probably not, because if Blu-Ray cost £10 more a pop to produce, there's no way that it would've made if off the ground. Is it to cover the additional cost of development for the 2 different consoles? Probably not, most developers follow the crowbar approach, which means that they make minimal adjustments to allow the game to run on the other console, be that Sony or Microsoft. Although, as most games are developed for Xbox, you pay more money for an inferior copy of games on PS3 - a situation which is less than desirable. The main differences are games that are developed for Sony specifically (and these are very good for the most part), and a few companies that have taken time to redevelop the core aspects of the game to properly fit the Sony. These rare occurrances do produce games that are merit worthy, and that's not to be sniffed at. Shame they're so rare.

Hopefully, I'll be able to make headway on producing something that would be described as 'readable' in the coming days. I once again feel as though I've sneezed at the screen and forgotten to wipe the words away.

Stranded in a Sea of Silicone

Initially, I’d love to be able to say that this article is about breasts. However, I can’t, as it is about something that you’d normally associate with the kind of person who hasn’t seen a real pair of breasts without parting with a considerable sum of cash.

Over the last few years, the face of gaming has changed significantly.

Now, please accept my sincere apologies for the lengthy pre-amble that I am about to embark upon, but I don’t want to give the impression that I’ve only just arrived on the gaming ‘scene’ – I believe that I’ve certainly seen and done enough on consoles and actual computers over the years to be able to share an enlightened opinion with you. What that opinion is, I’m not entirely certain, as I’m letting my brain wander between the various hemispheres of my limited intellect until it arrives at the right spot by accident.

I first got into gaming with a Commodore 64 in 1986 – and have been going since then, getting most major consoles on the market and additionally a fair share of gaming quality PC’s – safe to say, I’ve paid my fair share towards the technology boom enjoyed by the companies in pursuit of the best profits, er, games.

There have always been great rivalries between the various factions of Hardware developers. Sinclair, Amstrad, and Commodore. Sega, Atari (remember the Jaguar?), and Nintendo carried this on in the early 90’s, but it’s worth mentioning that Commodore tried to prize their way in here, but failed, with the CD32, which indecently, is believed to have been largely responsible for their downfall. A trend emerges from all this, and it seems to be that eventually, all great console developers eventually meet their end. Looking at the successive generations of consoles, only Nintendo have been able to avoid bombing out at some point. But they’re the exception, as they were very quick to embrace innovation, and genuinely offer something new. This, along with a near fanatic army of lifelong fans, has guaranteed they will remain for a number of years yet.

The current generation of games sees the 3 great foes, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo, battling for our hearts and TV’s with their latest generation of offerings. Technology has always been an expensive hobby, but these days, it’s moving into the realm of idiocy. At least with the previous generation, you could get the most from a console with a normal television. Nintendo, maybe to their credit, have not deviated from this line of thought. Sony an Microsoft have basically asked you to shell out an additional £300 minimum for a shiny HD TV to fully utilise what they are offering you, making your minimum purchase around the £600 mark. Depending on how much you like gadgets, this quickly rises above £1,000 – then games on top - £40 – 50 each. Quite soon you find yourself very poor indeed.

Then, there are the target audiences. I’ll be honest here. I’m a sucker for marketing. I actually believe all the hype that they spin. I’m hopeless and completely beyond help. I fall for it time and time again. On no less than 3 occasions I have found myself in a line outside a gaming retail outlet waiting for the very latest release of something, what exactly, I couldn’t honestly tell you. Over the years I estimate that I have spent over £25,000 on consoles, televisions, games, controllers, PC’s, online subscriptions, and the like. Please be aware that this is not a boast, it’s an admission of idiocy.

So, Sony and Microsoft want to get their mitts on the ‘serious’ gamer, the kind of person that will happily sit down and plough through 6 hours of their life in a mystical world full of intrigue and adventure until the story plays out. The sort of person who looks at information such as frame rates, resolutions, textures and sound modes. The person who will analyse the layout of a level, and maybe even look at the statistical odds of success of any given section before undertaking it.

Nintendo are different. They want the more relaxed gamer. They are more interested in people that want to have fun. The kind of person who will happily pick up the pad/wand/glove/other unusual and original control device and just dive in to the game. They may not play another game for months, but they will remember their console experience more fondly.

So, the obvious choice is to go for the Nintendo console, the fun angle. Simplicity itself. It gets to live for a further generation, and Microsoft and Sony can taste crushing defeat. Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. The decision between the various consoles is mired by the choice of Software available. The latest, greatest, best marketed and shiny games tempt the consumer one way or the other. The truly damned try to go for all, and discover that only 5% of the software market is unique – and that they have just shelled out a considerable sum of money for a shiny book-stop.

Then, in the way that it inevitably comes about, there is the rivalry. Oh joy, the fanatic baying of the hordes, locked in an eternal struggle to see who’s expensive toy will ultimately reign supreme over the inferior products of the competitors. Power versus functionality, graphics versus speed, online play versus social life, the debate is endless. The internet, once it was firmly established that everyone had a voice, seemed to be the ideal place for these electronically minded enterprises to fight the newest incarnation of the console war, but they quickly realised that they didn’t have to, as people would do it for them, in huge numbers, for free. Imagine if that kind of enthusiasm could be generated for actual combat. The concept is terrifying once you think about it. Religious extremism would seem tame in comparison.I’m rapidly running out of space, and getting no closer to something resembling a point, so I think that I’ll try to establish that one now.

Ultimately, there comes a point when technology will cease to be as innovative as it at this present time – there is only so far one can push graphics before you cease to notice differences. There will always be the 'next generation' of systems, but we are going to eventually ask ourselves why we continue to shell out large sums of cash for something that takes no significant step forward. Surely we should be more concerned about the enjoyment derived from a console, and therefore, we find ourselves back at Nintendo.

Ironically, this is the one manufacturer that I own no consoles from – you see, SEGA won my loyalty back in the summer of '94 with the Megadrive II.

Funny how these things come about.

---

The fun is back, oh yes siree,
It's the 2600 from Atari! (or from Little Man, What Now?)