The context of what’s going on where they live, the context of what’s happening in the history of the world at this time: serious as a heart attack. They’re just really chill about it. This is no joke. This is not a throw-away silly-silly ha ha funny expansion set; it is absolutely the next vital chapter and as things ratchet up, they’re gonna get really gnarly.
It’s about as rich a kit as anything we’ve put out so far and it’s definitely got its intrigues and its dangers and its drama. It ain’t armies of the dead and it ain’t demons fallin’ out of the sky, but it’s definitely gonna have some flavor and some teeth.
Thứ Tư, 26 tháng 10, 2011
New Skyrim teaser does the live action thing
How was that, then? Funny, I hadn't realised how CG the CG dragons looked until they plopped one down in a film set. With a game as beautiful as Skyrim seems, you almost forget that graphics aren't actually at photo-realism yet.
Still, makes you think, right? Who are these live action trailers for? It's not like the old Atari days when if you didn't have the boxart you had no idea whether you were playing Red Square Castle defence or Green Square Squadron takes Flight. You only need a bare minimum of imagination to believe in today's sophisticated game worlds; do we really need male models flouncing about in historically-inaccurate armour to put us in the Mood for Love?
Oh maybe it's for those blokes down the pub who hear "video games" and think Space Invaders is the height of the art form. We have dragons now! What a future.
Still, makes you think, right? Who are these live action trailers for? It's not like the old Atari days when if you didn't have the boxart you had no idea whether you were playing Red Square Castle defence or Green Square Squadron takes Flight. You only need a bare minimum of imagination to believe in today's sophisticated game worlds; do we really need male models flouncing about in historically-inaccurate armour to put us in the Mood for Love?
Oh maybe it's for those blokes down the pub who hear "video games" and think Space Invaders is the height of the art form. We have dragons now! What a future.
Lavender Pink 3DS hits November 17
The notorious "for girls" 3DS is to get an Aussie airing next month. But we won't take Nintendo Japan's casual sexism lying down, will we? No my friends: I know I can trust you to dress as masculinely as possible and exude testosterone when you lay down your cash for this little beauty. Real men love pink.
Thứ Ba, 25 tháng 10, 2011
Some Guy Recreated A Country In SimCity
SimCity 4′s world creation suite is a wonderful thing, allowing players fine control over the hills, valleys and rivers of their virtual building plot. It’s so fine, in fact, people can try and recreate entire countries. In this case, Taiwan.
OK, so it’s a small country, but at 3,902 square miles and with a population of just under 25 million, it’s not exactly a small hamlet or fishing village.
This amazing creation was built by Reddit user sneakypanda86 over a period of around nine months, and while it doesn’t use any cheats, does use a mod or two, both for ease of creation and to get things looking a little more realistic.
Note that it’s not a literal copy – streets and city outlines aren’t exact – but considering the way the game generates plots of land it still looks great.
OK, so it’s a small country, but at 3,902 square miles and with a population of just under 25 million, it’s not exactly a small hamlet or fishing village.
This amazing creation was built by Reddit user sneakypanda86 over a period of around nine months, and while it doesn’t use any cheats, does use a mod or two, both for ease of creation and to get things looking a little more realistic.
Note that it’s not a literal copy – streets and city outlines aren’t exact – but considering the way the game generates plots of land it still looks great.
The Next Call Of Duty DLC Has…Muppets?
Oh, if only that were the case.
This fan art from poopbird, dropping the Muppets in as Call of Duty characters, certainly has me wishing.
Though, when you think about it, it’s not that crazy an idea. It’s not that far a leap to go from soldier dudes to zombies to Muppets. Is it?
This fan art from poopbird, dropping the Muppets in as Call of Duty characters, certainly has me wishing.
Though, when you think about it, it’s not that crazy an idea. It’s not that far a leap to go from soldier dudes to zombies to Muppets. Is it?
Chủ Nhật, 23 tháng 10, 2011
If I Never Write Another Review As Long As I Live, I’ll Die A Happy Man
Every now and then I’ll get an email, hidden in my inbox. Sometimes it’s just a comment, sitting amongst a horde of others in a story I’ve written. “Why doesn’t Kotaku Australia write its own reviews?” It’ll say.
Then sometimes I’ll get a different kind of email, saying roughly the same thing, only it doesn’t take the form of a question it’s more like a quasi statement. It’ll say something along the lines of, “oh, but you guys don’t really do reviews, do you?” Those ones are normally from the representatives of a games publisher.
Usually that statement will be a response to why Kotaku Australia didn’t get early access to a new game, or why we were last in the queue for a review copy. But that’s OK — I’m more than happy to wait until the game’s general release to play.
And if I never have to write another video game review as long as I live, I’ll die a happy man.
I’ve written hundreds of product reviews and the wide matrix of issues you have to navigate, particularly in video games, is nigh on unmanageable, to the point where you have to ask yourself: What is the purpose of this, and what do reviews even mean anymore? What are they for?
First you have the scale itself — do you risk going against the traditional video game scale in attempt to bring more legitimacy to your review, or focus attention on the content of the review itself? Do you succumb to pressure and the need to remain relevant by reviewing games like every other media outlet, or do you plough your own path? The idea of a 7 out of 10 or an 8 out of 10 is so engrained on our psyche after decades of reading reviews that stepping outside that lexicon is risky.
Then comes the process of writing your ‘opinion’ — a process fraught with more doubt, and more issues to tackle. Do you review your game like a product, is it a series of experiences that you should judge? Should you take into account your knowledge or lack of knowledge — do you review from a fan’s perspective? Should your review be objective or a written piece focusing on what is essentially a subjective experience?
And that’s just the beginning — do you consider your audience? You are writing for them after all. I have no personal interest in, say, Modern Warfare 3 — but thousands of Kotaku readers do. Is this review for them? Do I have to take my own dislike of war-based shooters into account?
Normally this sort of self-indulgent navel gazing should be of no consequence or interest to anyone, but in an environment where EA Norway sending a series of demanding questions to prospective reviewers of Battlefield 3 becomes the biggest games story of the day and inspires thousands of seething comments and retorts — it’s clear that people really do care.
And I care — I really do. Enough to honestly admit that my opinion of any game — shrink-wrapped and squeezed into a totemic number to be sacrificed at the altar of metacritic — is really of little value to anyone or anything. So why bother?
What do we do with these reviews? In an age where we can watch trailers the instant they’re released and drown in details of development from the minute a game is greenlit, what is the consequence of another review? Why does it need to exist; particularly in a place where reviews are so ubiquitous. Do I really want to add my voice to that mashed up chorus — simultaneously chaotic and synchronised — what would be the value of that? What would be the point? I’d like to trust that you’ve already made a relatively informed decision what games you want to buy — slapping a numerical score on a game and beating my chest like King Kong probably won’t change that.
Don’t get me wrong, I admire those who manage to navigate this whole minefield and come out intact, people like Adam Mathew over at Game Informer/OPS, or Junglist, or Joab Gilroy at Game Arena. I may not always agree with their opinions, but I want to read what they think, even if I disagree with them. In fact, that’s arguably what video game reviews need more of. Proper, well justified, dissenting voices where necessary.
I enjoy reading well-written reviews, particularly when I’ve already played a game and it feels like a chance to exchange notes. But I don’t want to participate in that dialogue anymore. Not if I don’t have to.
For me writing about video games is something different. It’s the chance to share experiences and make some sort of connection — it’s a chance to find common ground in a shared moment. It’s not about a product and whether or not you’ll buy it.
Then sometimes I’ll get a different kind of email, saying roughly the same thing, only it doesn’t take the form of a question it’s more like a quasi statement. It’ll say something along the lines of, “oh, but you guys don’t really do reviews, do you?” Those ones are normally from the representatives of a games publisher.
Usually that statement will be a response to why Kotaku Australia didn’t get early access to a new game, or why we were last in the queue for a review copy. But that’s OK — I’m more than happy to wait until the game’s general release to play.
And if I never have to write another video game review as long as I live, I’ll die a happy man.
I’ve written hundreds of product reviews and the wide matrix of issues you have to navigate, particularly in video games, is nigh on unmanageable, to the point where you have to ask yourself: What is the purpose of this, and what do reviews even mean anymore? What are they for?
First you have the scale itself — do you risk going against the traditional video game scale in attempt to bring more legitimacy to your review, or focus attention on the content of the review itself? Do you succumb to pressure and the need to remain relevant by reviewing games like every other media outlet, or do you plough your own path? The idea of a 7 out of 10 or an 8 out of 10 is so engrained on our psyche after decades of reading reviews that stepping outside that lexicon is risky.
Then comes the process of writing your ‘opinion’ — a process fraught with more doubt, and more issues to tackle. Do you review your game like a product, is it a series of experiences that you should judge? Should you take into account your knowledge or lack of knowledge — do you review from a fan’s perspective? Should your review be objective or a written piece focusing on what is essentially a subjective experience?
And that’s just the beginning — do you consider your audience? You are writing for them after all. I have no personal interest in, say, Modern Warfare 3 — but thousands of Kotaku readers do. Is this review for them? Do I have to take my own dislike of war-based shooters into account?
Normally this sort of self-indulgent navel gazing should be of no consequence or interest to anyone, but in an environment where EA Norway sending a series of demanding questions to prospective reviewers of Battlefield 3 becomes the biggest games story of the day and inspires thousands of seething comments and retorts — it’s clear that people really do care.
And I care — I really do. Enough to honestly admit that my opinion of any game — shrink-wrapped and squeezed into a totemic number to be sacrificed at the altar of metacritic — is really of little value to anyone or anything. So why bother?
What do we do with these reviews? In an age where we can watch trailers the instant they’re released and drown in details of development from the minute a game is greenlit, what is the consequence of another review? Why does it need to exist; particularly in a place where reviews are so ubiquitous. Do I really want to add my voice to that mashed up chorus — simultaneously chaotic and synchronised — what would be the value of that? What would be the point? I’d like to trust that you’ve already made a relatively informed decision what games you want to buy — slapping a numerical score on a game and beating my chest like King Kong probably won’t change that.
Don’t get me wrong, I admire those who manage to navigate this whole minefield and come out intact, people like Adam Mathew over at Game Informer/OPS, or Junglist, or Joab Gilroy at Game Arena. I may not always agree with their opinions, but I want to read what they think, even if I disagree with them. In fact, that’s arguably what video game reviews need more of. Proper, well justified, dissenting voices where necessary.
I enjoy reading well-written reviews, particularly when I’ve already played a game and it feels like a chance to exchange notes. But I don’t want to participate in that dialogue anymore. Not if I don’t have to.
For me writing about video games is something different. It’s the chance to share experiences and make some sort of connection — it’s a chance to find common ground in a shared moment. It’s not about a product and whether or not you’ll buy it.
This week’s best free PC games
Telling the tale of a young fisherman setting out to build his career, Fisher-Diver is an unusual fishing game that sees you – a strange, line-drawn eyeball character – diving below the water’s surface to blast various intricate sea creatures and collect their carcasses to sell back on the surface. Smashing them to smithereens won’t do much good, though, as keeping their bodies relatively intact will allow you to reap more money. As you progress through the game, earning cash allows you to unlock new fishing licenses and helpful items, drawing you on a journey deeper below the surface in search of diary entries dropped into the sea by the fisherman who came before you.
It’s a slow-paced game – agonisingly so at times – but the journey is an engaging one. And the story, sparse as it may be, is enough to keep things interesting as the in-game days tick by. There’s a wonderful sense of exploration, complemented by music whose mood changes the deeper underwater you go. The game ends on a surprising note, too: a nice, unexpected payoff for the time it’ll take you to get there.
It’s a slow-paced game – agonisingly so at times – but the journey is an engaging one. And the story, sparse as it may be, is enough to keep things interesting as the in-game days tick by. There’s a wonderful sense of exploration, complemented by music whose mood changes the deeper underwater you go. The game ends on a surprising note, too: a nice, unexpected payoff for the time it’ll take you to get there.
Đăng ký:
Bài đăng (Atom)