The Legend of Batman

As the summer begins in earnest and the blockbuster movies start kicking in I find my thoughts turning to Batman. Of course it's not very hard to get me thinking about Batman, since he's been one of those pop-culture mainstays/father figures I grew up with. I had been thinking about how much I was just tooting my own horn talking about how great video-games are and how much potential they have. So I decided to try and make a Batman Videogame.

Unfortunately, one man cannot make a videogame alone, especially if he has no knowledge of programming, limited time and funds, and a chronically short attention span. 

I have already done a little concept work and have a friend working on a side-scroller engine, but any help/encouragement would be greatly appreciated. 

I hope to post some of the concept work within the week, but any word in the interim is welcome.

GTA IV: Tough Choices

There are many reasons to like GTA IV. It's a technical achievement that has tons of features, great gameplay, a fully fleshed out and realized recreation of New York City, and compelling characters with snappy dialogue. However, as much as I appreciate and enjoy all those, they aren't the specific reason why I, personally, enjoyed and liked GTA.

The Choice is Mine, But Do I Care?

Player choice is not a new mechanic in videogames, it has been utilized in games for a long time now, but often it is not used properly or to its full potential becoming simply a way to have multiple endings for a game, or to choose your "alignment". They often lack depth, emotional involvement, and/or intellectual motivation. In too many games that I've played, the choices are too easy, very few actually make me weigh and consider the options. I am naturally inclined to choosing the "good" option of any choices given to me, and so many games make it so plainly obvious which choice represents the moral high ground and which ones don't. I barely even give that much thought to them, thus the impact of having a choice is lost on me. All I see them as is the different paths to the alternative endings, if I feel so inclined to replay the game.

The first game I've ever played that actually made me sit and consider which choice I should actually take was the sublime Deus Ex. There was no obvious moral high ground in the game, each choice carrying a variety of associated good and bad consequences to it. I really had to bring my own judgment and thoughts to the game to really try to plumb which choice was the best one for me to make, which one would, in the end, would do the most good. It has been a long time since I've come across a game that has made me feel similarly.

Bioshock was the next game that I can recall that added a higher level to the choices they give the player other than "get good end/bad end". The intellectual and theoretical emotional implications between choosing whether to save the twisted girl beings you found, or end their misery (so you might convince yourself) while gaining greater profit, where more profound than many other games. However, I, in the end, could only appreciate the intellectual motivation behind the choices, but emotionally, they were void of conflict or feelings. You profited just as much, if not more so, by saving the girls while also keeping the more empathetic and moral high ground. I read some reviewers having such a hard time deciding what to do with the little gathering girls, but my mind was made up before I even got to them. They were mentally stimulating to consider and think about but, ultimately, they left little impression upon me, which is not what you want to be said of having to make supposedly hard choices.

Difficult Choices

Grand Theft Auto IV was the first of the GTA series that I've actually played through the main story. I've never owned one of the previous installments (by virtue of my parents), and my experience with them was limited to small bursts of random enjoyment. While it seems that they had more side missions and larger maps, the whole experience was aimed to be much more comical and satirical rather than a serious narrative venture. IV, though maybe not having as many sidequests or as much landscape to travel, it certainly seems to have expanded upon and matured their narrative. They haven't entirely discarded GTA's satirical nature though, but it's now made all the poignant and relevant by the equally compelling story and its residents.

That's what really made the experience for me; the characters. They are empathetic yet reprehensible, likeable yet disgusting, they are aspiring yet ultimately their own flawed humanity undoes them. They feel, very much so, like real people; mixed with a bit of good and a bit of bad. You can't really dislike any of them, while you can't really love any of them.

What does this all have to do with choice? At certain points in the game, GTA gives you a choice where you must choose one person to live and another to die. You can't save both and you can't kill both, you can only side with one. It is not the first time such a situation has been brought before me; Mass Effect, for example, did a very similar thing with two of the characters. However, GTA, unlike Mass Effect, does not simply leave you to save someone from a fatal, antagonistic force, but rather it is you that are the fatal force to befall on the character of your choosing.

This was an interesting twist to the choice paradigm normally presented in video games. Most often, the good choice is in the abstaining of an action, usually to kill someone, while the evil choice is to follow through with it (or, vise versa, depending on the situation). However, here, there is no choice of inaction, you have to do something, and no matter which way you choose, you are going to perform an altogther immoral deed. That is ultimately what got the hooked me: not that I had to simply choose between a moral choice and an immoral choice, but that I was now stuck with deciding which was the less immoral choice, the lesser of two evils.

The particular situation in this choice was choosing between killing the characters of Dwanye Forge, or Trey "Playboy X" Stewart, neither of them being either a saint or a demon, further adding to the moral muddiness in choosing between the two. They're both gangsters, both were and are involved in illegal activities, and probably have killed people themselves. But they both aren't psychopathic sociopaths, they both realize, somewhat, the wrongness of their deeds, but yet they cannot do anything else for it is all they know. They are faulted people, trying to survive in a world that is harsh and violent. However, as events turn out, Dwayne and Playboy both end up telling you you must kill the other.

I remember quite clearly, as I was driving along to the district in Algonquin where they both lived, trying to choose which one was the lesser immoral action, in the game, the sun slowly drew down behind dark stormy clouds, from which rain started falling. I drove along slowly, giving myself time to ponder, with Phillip Glass' Pruit Igoe playing on the radio. It was that moment that keenly defined GTAIV for me, driving along, contemplating the consequences of each action, while the deeply melancholic music filled the air, and the cityscape of New York stood towering in the rain. It was then that the narrative took me, and fulfilled me in a way that few other story-telling mediums has managed to, not just videogames themselves. It was then that I finally experienced the interactive experience of choice, and the weight of the consequences that might ensue from that. GTAIV transformed from being merely a great videogame to being a great experience.

Unfiltered japanese internet culture

here are two videos from youtube based around bizzare japanese memes. I really don't have time to try and make something intelligent sounding up about these, so I'll let all 2 of our readers draw their own conclusions.   スマブラxで男女 is a song with lyrics about confusing boys and girls, this other one is just smash bros brawl characters dancing to some sort of terrifying pop song. This may or may not meet with peoples tastes, but what the heck, it's the internet.

psycho mantis

I hope people will forgive my excitable nature, but I probably like and appreciate Psycho Mantis as person more than a lot of people in real life. guess that tells you something about me if you know who mantis is. also, I couldn't sleep tonight b/c people were talking loud outside my room, so if the post is a little disorganized or just cuts out, 本当にすみません(that's "I'm truly sorry" in japanese) 

Anyways, about my good pal. Firstly, his name "Psycho Mantis". This name tells you so much about him from the very beginning. The "Psycho" speaks not only to his powers but his twisted view of the world. What makes Mantis's psychosis so interesting is it's logical basis Depending on the person interacting with him, it may make him appear a brilliant, if mis-anthropic, or if you fear him more than respect him, his utter hatred for mankind can seem so extreme as to rob him of his humanity.

Secondly, he has curiously strong fashion sense. When we first see mantis he is levitating behind snake's ally/love-interest, Meryl. He is dressed in a full trench-coat with straps that pull it so tight to his body at parts, that they seem to cut into him. His face is utterly obscured by a gasmask with orange lenses. If I saw Mantis walking down the street I would probably peg him as a cosplay nerd, or goth gone horribly awesome. Neither, I feel, is too far from the truth. Mantis clearly loves putting on a show, which is interesting, since he seems to hate people. The coat, while it covers him, is also a way to draw attention. Nothing quite says "nut-job" like a guy who goes around all the time wearing a gasmask. But Mantis is a nut-job, and he wants you to know it. A practical meaning behind the mask is given, that it acts as "psychic insulation" to prevent Mantis from constantly have to listen to people's thoughts.

 Mantis is such a powerful "psychic" as he can't STOP reading minds unless he consciously blocks them out. Now, having freudian psychology force-fed to me for the past two years makes me want to analyze this a little closer(thanks a-lot freud. asshole) What if Mantis were meant to symbolize someone so sensitive to others problems and feelings that he is incapable of ignoring them. I, have actually had this problem, as have others in my family. Constantly having to think about other people's psychological bullshit can put a real strain on you, especially if you have problems of your own, and mantis has some seriously screwy shit going on. For a hi-larious and startlingly faithful representation of mantis and fox hound read the webcomic Last Days of Foxhound. here's the dude's blurb on Mantis: "Psycho Mantis' name refers not to his mental health - although that's certainly questionable - but to his powerful mastery of psychokinesis and telepathy. Or, alternatively, telekinesis and psychopathy. Either way, really. Also, for reasons he won't discuss, he's instinctively repulsed by females. He's not gay, just... I don't know. Weird. His gasmask prevents the moment to moment thoughts of everyone in the whole damn world from popping into his head. Think about it - would you want to hear what that creepy guy next to you on the subway is thinking? Of course not." 

It's funny because it's true. I think I'll leave stuff here for now, but I definately have more to say on this stuff.

Metal Gear Solid: Tactical Analytical Essay

firstly I will post a link to a hilarious and extraordinarily intelligent forum thread from my good friend jack, who from here on will be referred to as Mr.Jack. Mr.Jack has been good enough to lend me all 3 metal gears: Metal Gear Solid:Twin Snakes, MGS II:Substance, and MGS III:Subsistance. It is my own goal to replay through the entire series again before 4 and pay as close attention to everything I can, such that I sort of know what's going on. It's like that with a lot of things I like. Metal Gear Solid is such a well crafted gem that each installment seems to come farther and farther apart, and yet each time Hideo Kojima outdoes himself. Metal Gear has changed the way I have looked at videogames and even the world, as a good piece of media should.

I will go into a little personal history here, so if that's boring skip this paragraph, especially if you know me(doug). My first time playing Metal Gear was in fact seeing my friend who had it on Gamecube and him letting me try it. I believe I was in middle school at the time, regardless of what age it was, my tastes in media were just beginning to develop. I was not allowed yet to play M rated games or see R rated movies, so my tastes were still juvenile at best. My friend Chris had no such restrictions and was able to obtain a remake of what was apparently the defining games of the PS1. When I first was shown it I was fascinated, I had only seen a few R rated movies before this and here was an incredibly dark, yet intelligent game. I distinctly remember trying the first part of the game and completely and utterly sucking at it. Not only was this game smart, it was hard. Looking back and replaying through it myself i would certainly say Solid Snake is built for the PS2 dualshock controller. The whole reason my friend Chris has bought Sony game systems, up until the absurd $600 price-tag on the PS3 was Metal Gear. 

The hour grows late. I will try to continue my essay sometime this week, most likely thursday or friday. Hope someone on the internet has enjoyed what I have to say so far...

Sincerely,

Vladbad 

Why Solid Snake matters

Mario and Ms.Pacman art appreciation

A (somewhat) philosophical argument for gaming

In Susan Wolf’s essay “Happiness and Meaning: Two Aspects of a Good Life” she uses many examples to differentiate what she sees as meaningful pursuits and meaningless pursuits. Among the meaningful pursuits Wolf mentions are: “Relationships with friends and relatives…Aesthetic enterprises (both creative and appreciative), the cultivation of personal virtues, and religious practices.”(p.210) When speaking of useless tasks she mentions “crossword puzzles, sitcoms, or the kind of computer games to which I (Wolf) am fighting off addiction.”(p.210)

            I would agree with Wolf that there are certain ways to spend one’s time that are more meaningful than others, and like Wolf I enjoy playing computer games. However, I do not agree with her classification of computer games, which I take to include all forms of electronic gaming, as entire wastes of time. While the majority of electronic entertainment software that exists is mindless entertainment meant to turn a profit, I believe there exist artistic individuals among the creators who seek to deliver important messages. Wolf herself says “History is full of unappreciated geniuses, of artists, inventors, explorers whose activities at their time were scorned”(212) While videogames have been targets for social criticism almost since their inception, there is increasing attention being paid to critical analysis of electronic games as a legitimate form of media, and potential artistic expression.

            As Alexander Galloway says in his introduction to his book Gaming “Our generation needs to shrug off the contributions of those who view this as all so new and shocking. They came from somewhere else and are still slightly unnerved by digital technology. We were born here and love it.”(Preface xii) The year before I was born, 1986, saw the debut of Mario Bros. for the Nintendo Entertainment System. I have grown up with video games around me my entire life. I remember the adamant opposition of my parents to them at first, and the guilty-pleasure of going over a friend’s house to play video games in kindergarten. Our parents eventually softened their restrictions and allowed my brother and I access to a Gameboy when I was in second grade. There being both my brother and I and only one Gameboy, we were forced to share. Already games were becoming a medium through which I interacted socially with others, even though I didn’t know it at the time. Wolf mentions relationships with friends and relatives as one of the things classically seen as leading to a meaningful life, and videogames acted as a conduit and shared interest through which I interacted with others.

            One of the fears voiced by critics is that people will come to see videogames as substitutes for real social interaction, citing such examples as players of massively multiplayer online game World of Warcraft in China, who immerse themselves in the virtual world so utterly that they exclude the needs of the real world and wither away. I acknowledge that this is a true problem, Wolf herself speaks of games in the matter of an addiction, but that means it is the responsibility of the individual, or the parent to regulate the intake of the media.

The argument against new forms have been around for as long as new mediums have been arising, people used to talk about the danger of reading too many novels and being unable to tall fantasy from reality. A more recent, and applicable example may be the movement in the 50s led by Dr. Fredric Wertham who wrote Seduction of the Innocent and led a “crusade” against comic books. Comic books before Wertham were subject to no regulation whatsoever, and could be as subversive or as grotesque as they wished. Wertham condemned comic books as corrupters of the youth of America and attempted to blame all forms of adolescent delinquency on the young, relatively marginal media. Time and time and again the cry that comic book writers and videogame writers are peddling filth to children has been made. While it is true that some of the less scrupulous creators market violent or sexual media towards children, they often ignore the true extent of the media’s demographic in order to make a dramatic point. “Graphic novels” is now the term used to refer to what is essentially a bound collection of comic books. Art Spiegelman’s Maus is a graphic novel recounting Spiegelman’s Father’s experiences during the holocaust and Spiegelman’s own experience dealing with his aging father. Many consider this to be a literary masterpiece and often cite it to legitimate the “Graphic Novel” as an art form worthy of attention. Spiegelman was by no means the first to explore complex themes, even Superman’s creators; Jerry Siegel and Joe Schuster drew from Nietche’s idea of the “übermench” when conceiving their character. While games like the recent Bioshock might not reach the same literary heights as Maus they exhibit the same attention to their artistic heritage in other art forms in attempt to make a statement greater than themselves.

One of my own personal favorite games Metal Gear Solid:Twin Snakes follows the secret government agent Solid Snake and his constant battle against terrorists groups and their attempts to threaten the earth with nuclear terrorism. While the premise may seem like another adolescent-power fantasy, which to a certain extent it is, the attention to detail paid suggests something deeper. The overarching message of the series is an anti-nuclear, pacifist one. This most likely has a strong connection with the creator Hideo Kojima’s Japanese heritage. However, the themes extend all the way to the player’s own interaction with the virtual environment. As Solid Snake, you have the ability to either kill your adversaries, hit them with non-lethal tranquilizer rounds, or avoid conflict whatsoever through clever manipulation of the guards artificial intelligence, such as leaving out a book or tossing an empty ammo magazine. While the detail could be written off as a mere exhibition of technology, you are even confronted by a character at one point in the game, and chastised if you have gone around mercilessly killing characters. The game is clearly meant to spark introspection in the gamer, and yet at the same time it is an extremely entertaining experience throughout.

While games are still relatively young as an art form, the possibilities for intelligent and interactive narratives are truly exciting, and it is heartening to see developers attempting to explore these possibilities and individuals expressing interest in them.

Storytelling Theory: Interaction, Character and Immersion

It is sad to see that in most videogames, the narrative is very much neglected or handled improperly. I can understand that some genres, or particular styles of game do not need much of a narrative, if at all. But for other genres, like shooters for example, story can be a very important, if not necessary, component for the game as a whole. Having a great, immersive, well-designed and structured story can help lift a game from being "average" to something greater and more unique. As the industry continues to refine and reuse gameplay formulas more often than it innovates new types of gameplay, it really comes down to the experience (including the story) that a game delivers to make it really stand out from its peers.

Interact, Don't Just Show & Tell.

Videogames have often relied on cutscenes to tell its story, taking a leaf from its media cousin, film. It's easy to see why. Movies have become the standard for storytelling in the visual medium, ingraining its principals and philosophies into the popular psyche. We tend to inherently think of stories unfolding in a movie-like fashion, making it difficult to think of other ways to tell story. It's unfortunate, since videogames are a very different sort of beast when it comes to storytelling.

There is an adage from the movie business. A very simple mantra that if paid attention to and used, makes a world of difference in the final product (mostly aimed at the screenwriter though). That is "Show, Don't Tell". That is, don't have the characters in the movie simply tell what's going on in the movie. It's boring, cheesy, and, worst of all, doesn't even try to take advantage of the strongest point, if not the point, of film making. Movies are a visual medium, so you should tell your story in the most visual way possible. Don't let people read or listen to your story, let them watch it.

Now, videogames differ from movies in their main strength. While videogames are definitely a visual medium, the visuals should not (are not) the central pillar of what makes a game. Movies are a medium that can achieve so much more with its visuals, CG or live-action, so games shouldn't try to emulate that, coming off as a poor substitute. Instead, the great strength and identifier for videogames is your ability to interact with them. That's what makes a videogame different from a movie or book, you can tangibly effect the world that the game inhabits. In a videogame, you have to go further than just showing and telling, you also have to let gamers interact.

There are various levels in which the interaction can be brought about. There's the simplest implementation, which is being able to control the camera during a cutscene, to having the story develop and unfold completely in-game (a la Half Life). How far the interactivity goes and when to implement them changes from genre to genre, and even with the narrative aim of a game. There is even the matter of how malleable the story itself should be, changing depending on what actions the player takes in the game.

Having such elements of interactivity adds that extra level of immersion and involvement from the player. It can add that extra emotional weight to what might've been an otherwise dispassionately viewed cutscene. A great example of this that comes to mind is the ending in Shadow of Colossus, in particular where Wander is slowly being dragged into a swirling vertex. It could've easily been simply a cutscene, where we watch a struggling Wander trying to escape and reach the altar, but by having control of Wander, and actually controlling how hard he fights to get away pulls in the gamer so much more, and instills a much more powerful meaning to the story. Even though it is impossible to get away from the vertex, no matter what you do, just the fact that you have control of the character adds some ambiguity as to the outcome of situation. Maybe you can get away, maybe there's an alternate ending, maybe everything can be alright, but only to feel heartwrenched as you realize it's futile, that you've condemned Wander in his attempt to save a loved one's life.

Character as a Projection of Self

There is another element of videogames that must be addressed in view of having increased interactivity, the character through which the gamer interacts with the world. As the game draws in the gamer, giving them control and active participation in the unfolding of the story, the in-game character becomes an avatar for the player, a gateway into which they may enter and experience the world. The character really acts as the virtual projection of the player themselves.

In order to facilitate this notion, the in-game character has to be constructed to be a proper receptacle. Most games often try to define their characters, giving them their own voice and emotional reactions. This can work for certain game types or genres, but to really pull the gamer into experience, and feel the emotion of the game, the character has to really be devoid of any explicit or overt emotional responses, so as to not get in the way or force along the gamer's natural response to game events. Obviously, this is much easier and natural to do in an FPS, and much more challenging in a game done in a third-person view, but it can be done, if Shadow of the Colossus can once again service as a suitable example of such.

This approach to storytelling puts videogames in a very unique position. They can really provide a personal and direct experience to the player. Unlike books or movies, where the audience really have to relate to material their seeing, games can relate their material to the gamer. Games can explore the player themselves, questioning their actions, guessing at their motivations. A game has the potential to make gamers realize something about themselves.

Thus, a new blog is born

Hey, my first post. I'm sure that this is a momentous and exciting moment for all zero of my current readers.

So, I guess this moment is akin to launching a brand new boat, and I'm smashing the proverbial wine bottle on the hull. However, it seems that the boat was built by unseen hands, and I'm the only person at the launch, egotistically patting myself on the back for the creation of something that took a little more than a couple minutes to make.

Hopefully this little boat of mine will garner a crew and some passengers that aren't terrified by our complete ineptitude of sailing said boat. I pray it won't be a Titanic of sorts, to be created in a huge flurry of pomp and circumstance only to be brutally smashed by a large chunk of ice before it could even get anywhere.

Anyway, so, I hope to get some friends of mine to help co-author this new and tiny blog so that one day it won't be so new and tiny.

The hard part will be making sure it's actually read by people other than myself, who will undoubtedly make most of the pageviews for a little while as I stare tremulously at my own blog, refreshing endlessly in hopes that a comment will appear, denoting the existence of an actual reader.