Mactastic! Or not...

I don't think I could ever get a Mac for personal use. I might work with a company Mac in the future, but I would never get one myself. I think I will compile a list as well as a strip to why. But for now, this blog is taking a break. Too bad no one has commented on this blog, but oh well, thats the way it is right?

Its not very effective.

Anyone who has played the game has had this happen to them. You have all 8 Gym Badges and have probably beaten the elite 4, so you travel around the world in search of secrets that are now available to you thanks to all your HMs. But while you are going back to old ground, you get attacked by wild Pokemon. Theres a difference of 98 between your Pokemon and the enemy. You use an attack that really isn't effective against that type, but its so much fire power that it kills them in one hit anyways. Then the game has the nerve to say that this instant kill "wasn't very effective".

Conceptual artistry

I was rooting through some old games and found my Playstation version of Final Fantasy 1 and 2. It had some concept art (not the originals mind you) from both games by the lead artist. They were absolutely beautiful pieces of art. Yet you play the games that they come from and wonder, is it really worth designing like that?

In the pre 8 bit era games were pretty much interactive abstract art that you had to take everything for granted (thats a bullet, thats health, thats an enemy) so I wonder why some people took so much trouble to draw such great concept art when it wasn't going to look anything like that in the end.

Today its totally different. Anything someone draws we can replicate in games, not having to worry about if its possible or having to make compromises.

Wii vs PS3

I do this from time to time. I don't own a PS3, but I gladly speak of its benefits as a game machine and its array of games. Wii is fine, but I wish it started making some more proper games, not these family stuff that is only mildly interesting.

Guerilla Warfare

Killzone 2 looks pretty cool. Not that I'm too interested in shooters, but the setting and premise sounds good enough. I also like the idea of Sony having a kin of Halo, but I do hope that the game is made for its own right, not specifically made to compete with Halo.

Starcrafty

Seriously, this is very greedy of them. But to be fair, it seems to be a growing trend, which might be due to my otherwise favorite type of gaming: episodic gaming.

The idea of making a game in parts is smart in terms of the publishers. You get to charge full price for an unfinished game, and then make sure people will buy the upcoming 'necessary' expansions. However, they are going at it the wrong way.

Episodic gaming that works is something along the lines of Telltale or Penny Arcade: a full game that is cheaper by comparison, shorter, but will have the story continued in the next episode. With this idea of Starcraft, you won't have the same kind of game in that respect. One game you play as Terrans, one as Zergs, and one as Protoss. First of all, this is very bad for new players of the franchise (the original is over 10 years old, of course not everyone remembers it or played it) since you will only get to know the Terrans properly in terms of story and gameplay, and thus feel alienated when playing online as either Zergs or Protoss.

I most probably wont get this game, but I probably will play it with people who have it. Distribution system aside, the gameplay will most surely KICK ASS!

Metal Gear Twist

After watching the 6 part series "Metal Gear Retrospective" I was amazed at all the plot twists in the series. And I still haven't beaten the original Metal Gear Solid!

What I have played of it though is solid, though frustrating at times.