Speaking of lost millions, Sony is still trying to keep pirates at bay, pun intended as always.  This time seems to be fairly reasonable, assuming DRM is not involved.  Where they read how long the disk loading times are for a system and compare them to a benchmark.  Granted, I have no clue how this would even work, seeing as the difference between an illegal game’s loading and a legal’s game loading are topics never brought up.  So maybe it is a neat idea, or just a waste.  I’ll wait for the future to come to me.

But not all are as easy going with the future as I try to be, with Cliffy “the Sexromancer” Bleszinski talking about how Nintendo hardware will phase out in five years.  Something I’d love to see, because it would make millions go out and build computers, or eat sulfur!  Yes, a console free future is something I desire, despite barely being able to touch type.  And I see a company whose consoles have needed better third party support since 1997 to be the first to go.  Even though I very much enjoy their titles, I am greatly looking forward to a crash, or revolution, or whatever.

Speaking of new hardware, here’s an excuse to point and laugh.  Sony is claiming that the PS4 will have the strongest launch library ever.  A claim I hope to remember when they have another rushed launch, with only a few games worthwhile, namely Knack and Killzone 4, certainly the stuff of legends!  Unless they, say, have every PS3, N, 2, 1, and P game on the system right from day one.  Which is something that should be expected more than anything.  Even if importing them might be hard, because coding is tough.  It’s why it took someone less than an hour to make Dark Souls better on the PC, and the Dolphin Emulator can upscale Wii and Gamecube games.

Speaking of… Dolphins… that’s a stretch.  A leak revealed that the next Assassin’s Creed will be about pirates.  Marking the… third game in the series to be revealed via leak, if my memory is not filled with fish.  With the oddly introduced subtitle of “Black Flag” the game will probably be viewed negatively due to being the sixth mainstream title in seven years.  But at least we’ve got another tech comparison for the five consoles other than Watch Dogs.

Not that those are the only title I think will launch on all four, perhaps five, systems out in holiday 2013.  With another being Metal Gear Solid 6: Ground Zeroes, the naming system be damned!  You are introducing an engine, give the game a freaking number.  There’ll be tons of continuity anyways.  But that is assuming it’d see a release, which Kojima is uncertain of.  Claiming that some content might need to be censored, not unlike the removed destruction of the Statue of Liberty in Metal Gear Solid 2.  However, that was more or less good taste that breaking taboos.  As long as it does not have Beastiality or Pedophilia, I think you’re good Charlie.  Also, keep the N word under 78 usages.

Meanwhile, the only other stealth game series I ever played, Deus Ex, filed a new trademark.  Over the name, Deus Ex: Human Defiance.  Which is either a successor to the well received Human Revolution, even though I found it to be self contained enough.  Or that movie they’ve been talking about, the one that is more based on the game than an adaptation, a path that is probably better than the one taken by other video game movies.  Wait, it’s just a movie.

Remember that Sony fighting game that was kinda like Smash Bros?  Yeah, I barely do as well.  Regardless, the title is still being supported, and in a way that makes me tilt my head, due to how Isaac Clarke and Zeus are coming to the game.  That’s just an odd mix up.  A multiplatform character who I don’t recall giving so much as a bonus to the Sony audience. and a boss character?  Hate to bring this up, but your title implies the characters should be pretty well known, and have done something specific to the platform.  What’s next?  Commander Shepard?  Because it’d be cool if they had both genders.

I suppose that EA might consider that, but only after they launch their master plan of putting microtransactions in every game.  A move that will look really dumb if they ever decide to have another single player only title.  Now, I get microtransactions, and even sorta like the concept.  Pay some money to make a game easier?  Sure, just don’t abuse them, make me want to buy them, put effort in making them an integral part of the game.  And the last part should exemplify the problem enough so that I can drop this and talk about something less aggravating.  Also, way to limit games that you can make.

Like the new consoles, which continue to look like bollocks.  With claims of a 70 dollar price tag for games.  Publisher deciding whether or not they want their used games to be playable for both parties.  Oh, and they will be 8-10 times more powerful?  Meaning how many times is the budget multiplied?  Are we going from a 30-50 million dollar range to a 70-100 million dollar range?  How many people must be in a development team?  Are we really blocking out used titles?  How will that happen?  Must we be online to launch a disk?  Will we or won’t we have tiered pricing?  Short answer is looking like a no.  How many people are willing to spend $70 on a game?  Less people than a $60 title.  So your game will be inevitably be forgotten due to how schizophrenic the game industry’s focus on a particular title, because they wanted a price drop.  So you’ll be like El Shaddai, only of interest when you’re $3.  A new generation is suppose to get us pumped for the next big things, but it’s like anticipating a chunk of poop launched via sling.  Just take these pictures of our user interface and piss off!  How is the Wii U looking like it is going to win this console battle, when it’s most rad games often look like this!  You’re console has become a kickstarter dream, and is winning due to that, and that alone.  Keep this up, and I’ll learn how to build a PC!

Sorry, now I need some happy.  Willem Dafoe is in Beyond: Two Souls… AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!  YES!  So much fun!  Damn you Davey Cage!  Don’t make another Heavy Rain, a game I don’t remember after watching two commentaries!  Just have Dafoe do whatever.  He can literally take poos all game.  Wait, Heavy Rain was about the lady who lost her good arm as he son’s head was crushed by a truck tire.  The depressed fat detective whose daughter lost her eight year old virginity to a murderer.  And the time travelling quadriplegic girl’s brain that possessed the FBI/Serial Killer so she can fulfill a life, but nobody did the right research and- Nope, that’s what I would have done with Heavy Rain, my bad.

Now- What’s this?  Crytek wants every game linked online?  …Sorry, I think you spat out some stupid, care to say that again?  The notion of single player needs to go away… I should have known that you were a racist, as well as being stupid.  I honestly feel like telling individuals in this modern day that Chinegro is not a subspecies.  Maybe I’m the moron, but explain how Super Metroid and Amnesia would be far better with integrated online elements into single player!  Multiplayer is fine, as well as using online elements, even though I will call the developers dumbasses as they tearfully close the servers.

Would come up with a witty way to end this, but i’m preparing this post late once more, and need to march through a backlog, while whittling a chapter of Nari’s Log out after two weeks of screwing around.  Even as I’m thinking of altering it once more, and punching myself in the brain for not keeping enough focus about 80 pages in.  That’s the problem with not planning out a storyline, it gets confusing in terms of what exactly your goal is.  Same thing with this weekly segment, if you threw in something involving a stress ball.  Hang on, let me get some happy… gee willickers, drugs must be wonderful if this makes me feel intoxicated.

Some news with me

Firstly, as I’ve might have mentioned, I’m a half-time student right now due to financial and transportation problems. I’m taking a systems level programming course and a tech writing course (Another? This is my third!), and I feel well-prepared for most of what I’m doing right now. Sadly, I’m almost 30 years old and this whole process of going to school to be evaluated is a complete drag. I haven’t had a programming course in a year or so, and while it’s nice to be in the swing of working on small projects which get the creative programming juices going, I really hate the idea I’m going deep into debt for this and I still can’t afford anything I really need. (I need a new car. Public transit is *not* working.) At least I finished my Minor in Technological Systems Management (or so they tell me, they said I’m done!)

I’ve been really creative recently, though. It’s sad that I feel myself pulling away from programming because of technical issues I don’t have the knowledge to solve.

Kickstarter and Crowdsourcing – I told you so!

With that out of the way: I’d like to begin the gaming part of this post by tooting my own horn by saying I was right – The financial crisis has changed the landscape of how projects need to be financed and funded, and with that kickstarter and crowdsourcing has picked up the job. Skullgirls had amazing success with this, as well as many other projects. Kickstarter’s honor system is a large concern, but the reality of it is that more games will have the opportunity to grow and publishers will feel more comfortable taking risks in order to compete  by funding new titles or reinvesting in ones they already feel comfortable with.

I’m sure we’ve only seen the beginning of this powerful new structure for “getting things done”. What happens next is going to depend on what publishers do to adapt their business to better models and the new financial reality.

One thing is for sure – Publishers can not afford to not change.

Playstation 4

The Playstation 4 was announced, and with a release date of late 2013 I am both concerned and excited. As a professional I’d be excited to see what Sony plans to do for developers at all levels. I think the minimum would involve copying a lot of what Microsoft has done with XNA development – providing free APIs, tutorials, great documentation and building maintaining a strong development community. Without these things – I don’t think Sony will truly succeed. In order to make people buy into the PS4 you have to show them that “We have games.”, and more importantly, that their 5-year equipment purchase (that’s what it is…) is going to be a worthy investment considering gaming is pretty sweet and cheap right now on PS3 and PC.

As a gamer – I don’t look forward to it. I think the PS3 has years of life in it. My PS3 would only be two years old come time, and to see my PSN downloads go to waste is a disappointment, as well as having to buy and hook up a third system that will be in its infancy. Sony will have to be aware that the buy-in for the PS4 is going to really hurt most gamers’ wallets.

New Deus Ex?

Square has filed a trademark for a new Deus Ex game, although this may not mean much as Square is in no real position to be funding a lot of new games. If I remember correctly, Square is currently sitting on a lot of trademarks  (A Mana title is one of them) and if you think about how damaged Square is as a company right now, I don’t think we’ll see a new Deus Ex for 3-5 years. I’m hype, though. I love Deus Ex. I love tactical games. I hope this one really blows Human Revolution away in size and depth.

Battlefield 4 – Probably same as Battlefield 2 and 3 but with good lighting!

I played both Battlefield 2 and 2142. I liked both and I think Battlefield is a good competitive FPS, but Battlefield 3 wasn’t worthy of my time or money for the same reasons no FPS is worth my time or money now – it’s all schlock. I am really tired of every other game being a military or survival FPS. Battlefield 2 gets a pass from me because it was my first. 2142 had a lot of interesting future stuff and deployable gadgets ( I LOVE FARMING!) that only added to the tactical and team elements of the series. Why Dice didn’t run with that – I have no idea. Call me when 2148 gets announced.

If you want to make a FPS, please stop and ask yourself: “Why would anyone want to play my game and not the 1000 others that are like mine?” If the answer isn’t damned good, please don’t make your game.

In all likelyhood, it’ll be Battlefield 3 but with better lighting and particles.

The gaming industry’s state of turmoil and the PC Renaissance

Prognosticators gonna prognosticate, but I have to agree with this guy. Just because we still have lots of shiny things does not mean that the industry is facing serious crises and problems. Since 2007 I’ve been talking about the effects that the Great Recession would have on the industry considering their current problems and I’ve been pretty much right at the blowups, collapses, and occasional surprises that have come since.

The industry will and is changing – for the better, too. If more games on the independent level acted like Minecraft (buy once and it’s yours – free updates and eventually it’ll become open source) or if companies looking to start up got good feedback through Project Greenlight or KickStarter and starting letting people use bugtrackers, we could see amazing things happen in software. Game software lifespans would expand. Games would be better. Gaming would be affordable and more open. That’s where we’re headed, and I like that.

Steam doing this would tap into a market of millions of gamers and thousands of possible developers. They’ve already allowed tools to be put on steam - why not make it into a complete API so people can publish?

I’m still waiting on a reason to upgrade my PC, though. No, Crysis 3 isn’t a reason. The PC Renaissance is only a democratic revolution, not necessarily a technological one. We have many tools we could use right now to keep it going (and some things that we really need still uninvented), but that’s really up to companies and developers.

Where the action is

Gamasutra is a site I don’t nearly browse enough – backing up the idea that Things Should Be Easy, it seems Nintendo is starved for development.  Not surprising – I once looked at what it takes to develop a real Nintendo game. It’s not easy, and if you were to ask me today, I would tell you I have no clue how you make a Nintendo game. I don’t know the platform, but I DO know they aren’t helping you one bit – in fact, they want you to go away unless they like you. Nintendo is probably the most closed of any platform.

Unfortunately, I’ve grown to think that many people in Computer Science disciplines prefer things to be hard for everyone.

This is why PS4 and Steam are a big deal. Right now, people are going nuts over mobile platforms because they are getting more affordable and more powerful. What gamers don’t have from these systems are more “traditional” sessions of gaming, because playing some games on a touchscreen is a frustrating joke and the rate of failure of projects is probably abyssal in a crowded and crazy market. Mobile gaming is huge for good reason, but the outside world isn’t made for the kind of gaming that inside sit-down-and-game gaming provides. I like to keep that in mind, even though it’d be nice if I had 400 dollars or so to get a tablet to distract myself from the real world, even though the real world will do everything it can to prevent that.

That’s all for now -I’ve covered a lot of ground and next time I’ll try to talk more about systems and get this blog back on track!

A video, from a very smart man who always has great things to say, about the potential of video games to gain the recognition they deserve while finally overcoming the crippling stigmas surrounding them. This particular discussion focuses on sex and sexuality as one approach to the issue, both as a negative and a potential positive.

For one, I don’t think Nintendo will only become a software company because of their failure with the Wii U sales. Honestly, you could do the same thing the Wii U did with a DS and a GameCube. I believe Nintendo would do a lot better going back to handheld games. On the other hand, yes, digital downloads are on the rise and we will only see more and more, but this doesn’t mean that there will be less and less console games. Console games are still good and there are some games that just can’t be played without them. 

Jon and Cody discuss Sony’s highly anticipated press conference revealing the Playstation 4, the first video game system of the next generation of console gaming. What does it mean for the future of video games? Only Jon and Cody can tell you. Yes, ONLY Jon and Cody.

Click here to download this episode of Unqualified: A Video Game Podcast

The PlayStation 4 just got announced about a week ago! Since I’m getting into the game industry and will most likely be exposed to this system on a professional level before too long, it seems like a good idea to talk about it and analyze the pros and cons.

First of all, I’m really excited about what they already showed. Killzone: Shadow Fall shows off a giant futuristic cityscape that demonstrates just how much the system can handle on screen at a time, absolutely beautiful vistas that will really push the boundaries of assets and level design. I was hoping that the system would have at least eight gigabytes of memory, which it does.

Funny enough, I actually believe that the PlayStation 4 might encourage game costs to go DOWN rather than up. The reason for this is simple: less optimization will be required to make a great game that’s ready to ship. With a more familiar processor for the programmers to run code off of and so much more multitasking thanks to the RAM, assets will no longer need to be shrunken down as much to look good in a game. More raw polygon pushing power means less need for complex texture mapping across the board, which may reduce the amount of time required to build and optimize assets. Thusly, developers can create the game they want to make with less time wasted on compromising and getting everything to fit, therefore more time is spent on the actual creation and less on  trying to make it run on subpar hardware.

I worry that the game industry will still try to find any reason it can to charge $70 or more for games next generation, however. This combined with lots more DLC will improve profits for everyone. However, if the PlayStation 4 and next Xbox systems block or otherwise discourage used games, customers will have less options for getting more money for future game purchases, which could of course reduce overall new game sales. I believe the tricky balance will lie in treating customers with respect rather than suspicion, and giving them plenty of value in the new game experiences as well as the occasional big sale.

His side comment that some games should not be made (with Lollipop Chainsaw on screen) was the source for headlines, debate, and criticism. However, we’ve been here before.  In 2005, Warren was misunderstood about his criticism regarding Rockstar’s GTA.  His comments were not to stifle creativity, but to expand it into meaningful ways that haven’t been done before in terms of themes. He clarified in an interview with Gamespot in 2005:

Wouldn’t it be nice if game developers–especially developers as talented at the folks who created GTA–would devote their energies to simulating a wider variety of fictional worlds?

He would have preferred the investment made on Lollipop Chainsaw and GTA not just expand the detail of existing genres as many have already done, but to venture into something that people of diverse demographics could appreciate and benefit from. He is convinced this demographic exists. After all, he is one of them. If the rise of the accessibility of gameplay on multiple devices is of any indication, the population and diversity of gamers is going to multiply as never before. If the successes of Heavy Rain, The Walking Dead, and Journey are of any indication, there are many people waiting for a new variety of content, and when it is made, they will devour it.

Reality is Broken author and game designer, Jane McGonigal, called out the genres and game mechanics that dominate the industry as discouraging to potential female developers, “because there’s not enough investment in AAA games about something other than war, cowboys, football, cars. sorry, but it’s true.”

Voicing her frustration due to the assumption of what is accepted practice within the industry, Game Designer, Caryn Vainio, tweeted “I got blank stares when I asked why a female soldier in a game I worked on looked like a porn star.”

Thousands of game developers, journalists, critics, and fans across the industry jumped on board, adding to the growing topic on Twitter. Though I’m sure well intentioned, this energy didn’t extend past attention-grabbing tweets during the following two weeks.

Twitter follower counts increased. The industry remains unchanged.

Gabrielle Toledano, executive vice president and chief talent officer of Electronic Arts, noted her frustration with the movement in her Forbes piece in January. She noted that while sexism does continue to be a part of our industry, as it does in other industries, it isn’t the central cause of gender inequality.

“When it comes to sexism in video game studios, there’s a big disconnect between perception and reality,” she continues to explain, “As an insider, I find this argument is misguided.  It’s easy to blame men for not creating an attractive work environment – but I think that’s a cop-out.  If we want more women to work in games, we have to recognize that the problem isn’t sexism.”

The video game industry isn’t alone in its gender inequality. A recent study noted “Female participation in biological, medical and life sciences is very high — above 50 percent in some countries. However, in physics, computer sciences and engineering, the participation rate of women is less than 30 percent in most countries.”

Trying to understand why can lead to a focus on the symptoms of inequality, rather than the root cause. Whether or not the video game industry will trend upwards in female participation across computer science fields, or if we will stay rooted in the past, depends on the next few years of action taken on the part of gender equality within the video game industry. Essentially, it is up to you and I.

Among the conversation surrounding #1ReasonWhy,  Toledano’s response to the controversy is the first article that begins to try and identify what is at the cause of this issue.

To do that, we need to look outside the industry to other computer science fields where women are being successfully educated and recruited.

Maria Klawe, president of Harvey Mudd, saw the percentage of female graduates with computer science degrees jump from 10% to 40% from 2005 to 2012. She accomplished this by first understanding why women don’t enter computer science.

She summarized by saying, “No. 1, they think they won’t like it, No. 2 they think they won’t be good at it, and No. 3 they think the people who major in computer science are geeks who have no life, and they don’t want to be seen as that.”

Regarding the perception of capability, Klawe continues, ““the whole culture is swaying young women to say this is not for me, I won’t be good at it.”

I personally have a daughter and a son. When my son was born, I received questions about whether he would follow in my footsteps, creating games for living. My daughter never solicited the same questions. Why would I not encourage both of them equally to consider my career field?

Interestingly, two of the reasons included in Klawe’s list are elements of fun and work culture. We know that makes sense, but our industry is known for churning through its employees.

Could our reliance on crunch as an industry also be costing us diversity? Are these two things related as the perception of a sweatshop industry becomes the common interpretation of what it means to be a game developer? Are we managing and selecting projects that reinforce the idea that we are a bunch of “geeks who have no life”? The previously mentioned OWSD and WIGSAT study may hint as to what happens after women enter our industry.

“Even when women enroll in science and technology programs, as many as 30 percent drop out due to lack of flexible work hours and child care,” indicating that our industry’s work cycle may be inherently skewed towards retaining more men than women.

It doesn’t help when a mainstream analyst, such a Michael Pachter, shows no sympathy for the crunch culture, “If you’re getting into the industry, you are going to work plenty of hours”.

An Oxfam-produced resource on gender equality gives further insight. “Certain abuses of working conditions therefore – such as long working hours and obligatory, unannounced overtime – are not only wrong in themselves, but also disproportionately affect and disadvantage women, and conflict far more with their greater domestic burdens.” This pertains to the developing world, which makes it all the more shocking how closely it relates to our industry’s working conditions.

If extra work hours cost us diversity, then you have to wonder what we get in return for crunch culture. According to decades of research, we see absolutely no gains from all of the excessive overtime, particularly for “knowledge-based” professions. It costs us people, and I would argue diversity. If diversity is a key to our future as an industry, then the price of our crunch culture may be far greater than we think.

“It’s a heresy now (good luck convincing your boss of what I’m about to say), but every hour you work over 40 hours a week is making you less effective and productive over both the short and the long haul. And it may sound weird, but it’s true: the single easiest, fastest thing your company can do to boost its output and profits — starting right now, today — is to get everybody off the 55-hour-a-week treadmill, and back onto a 40-hour footing,” says Sara Robinson in her exhaustive and comprehensive breakdown of overtime policy in the workplace over the last several decades.

Aside from our industry maturing into a sustainable workplace, what hope do we have for more gender equality in the workplace?

If our industry wants more diversity and equality, we need to encourage young women to consider careers in computer science at an early stage. Encouragement and exposure need to happen at an equal amount as young men, and we need to make it fun. Women within our industry have an advantageous position in presenting and encouraging other women as role models. Let’s invite them into schools and organizations to speak about what they do.

We can’t stop there.

Klawe argues that the first semester of college is key for attracting women to computer science. Efforts need to be made to improve computer science and video game curriculum to focus on fun during the first year. By working with local educational institutions to ensure that women have fun in their first computer science courses, female graduates with computer science degrees increases.

Companies could make great PR wins by sponsoring scholarships for women to enter video game education programs. What would happen if Valve provided scholarships to three women a year to attend Digipen? Surely, a company that is more profitable per employee than Apple or Google could afford this investment in our industry. Profitable companies in the games industry, together, could easily support one hundred women per year, paying their way through game education programs, calling attention to the seriousness of this issue, and our intent to fix it.

Perhaps, “#1ReasonsWhy” could then become “#100ReasonsWhy”. It’s an investment those of us who find success should make back into the industry we love and wish to sustain.

Of the many forms of competitive gaming that exist today, I am most fascinated and admiring of the Fighting Game Community (hereafter known as the FGC). Originally conceived in underground arcade communities through titles like Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter II, the FGC has a long and storied history. Now, recently coming out of a dark age with the rebirth of the Street Fighter franchise (Street Fighter IV) in 2008, the FGC has grown in the past few years to be greater than ever before. Yet it still carries characteristics of both the underground culture that birthed it and the very individualistic nature consistent with the type of competition particular to fighting games: two players pitted in quick and intense one-on-one battles of wits, dexterity, reflexes, and strategy that are just as skill-based as Starcraft or Call of Duty, but distinctively carry the added emphasis of brutally crushing your opponent into submission.

Humans are by their very nature competitive creatures. Sports, debates, children’s games, even our own capitalist society all revolve around the fact that we thrive on opposition and competition. Due to that very fact, understanding the forms of competition that come to dominate any type of society and/or culture can be incredibly significant for understanding the history and trajectory of that society and how it functions. In addition, fighting games are of particular interest for the fact that they are still so closely linked to the underground gaming culture they thrive in. The FGC has a tendency to do what suits itself rather than cater to business or sponsors like the other competitive game communities (MOBAs, FPSs, and RTSs), and is characterized by an unwillingness to cater or bow to forces or people outside of the community itself.

With this in mind, my own experiences in watching the gaming community have impressed upon me the fact that the FGC and fighting games are meaningful and representative portraits of racial and gender trends in general gaming culture and the general gaming industry, respectively. The best and worst aspects of both of these collectives are taken to extremes within their fighting counterparts, which not only helps us to better understand them, but to get a better picture of where the two are going.

As a preface, I should say that none of what I write here is meant to be insulting or condescending towards the FGC or fighting games in any way. As a particularly avid (albeit still rather green) fan of fighting games and the incredible community that surrounds them, I have a deep respect for everyone involved in that aspect of gaming and gamer culture. While I admit there are certain negative aspects to both collectives, my pointing them out is not meant to criticize or demean, but instead to show the difficulties and challenges that beset them each and the ways that those will need to be addressed, and are already being addressed, as the two move forward. I also intend to give the best view I can to people otherwise ignorant of the FGC and the important aspect of the gaming industry it represents, as I feel it to be a community that deserves much more recognition and attention.

To start with, let’s look at the games themselves.

Fighting games have always been an oddity in their own seeming embrace and flaunting of racial and cultural stereotypes that other genres will often avoid like the plague. As Matt “The Sw1tcher” and Woolie stated in their Fighterpedia series on youtube, “Fighting game characters are arguably some of the most memorable, classic, beloved character designs in all of video games. They are also arguably some of the most offensively offensive. You cannot get away with [these depictions] in any other genre today (2).” One glance at the some of the Street Fighter (SF) character roster and you’ll see what he means – Zangief, the massive Russian wrestler (originally meant to carry the groan-inducing name ‘Vodka Gorbalsky’). Dhalsim the Indian yoga master. El Fuerte the wacky Mexican Luchador obsessed with cooking. T. Hawk the stern Native American. All of them, as well as several others in SF and other fighting games, represent cultural and racial stereotypes taken to ridiculous extremes in attempt to create characters as distinct and memorable as possible.

Three guesses who this guy is.

Not only is this an obvious issue, but fighting games also have a history of sexualizing female characters in ways that are practically on par with comic books, if not worse. Cammy from SF, whose green, one-piece combat outfit literally ends at the waste in a thong. Mai from King of Fighters (KoF), notorious for her massive, dangling, half-exposed breasts, emphasized by her fighting stance and almost nonexistent outfit. Chun-Li, also from SF(affectionately nicknamed ‘Thunder-Thighs’ by fans), with her nylon stockings that only further emphasize her massively muscular legs and, again, white thong. The list goes on and on, with some fighting game franchises even holding all-female casts (ex: Arcana Hearts, Skullgirls).

Cammy. What does the outfit have to do with her being British Special Forces again?

The problem is, as absurdly over-the-top as these sexual and racial depictions are, they serve to highlight viewpoints that are incredibly common within videogames. Although there’s been a major shift to see more complex and non-traditional, non-caucasian characters in gaming within the past few years, there’s still a major uphill battle being fought to increase racial diversity among videogame characters, one which has had some major setbacks in the years prior to that (Resident Evil 5 comes to mind); as with movies, it’s still very rare to find a non-caucasian-american (or non-japanese) leading character in a videogame these days.

Women have it even worse off. In fighting a similar battle, women characters that aren’t sex symbols are even less common as leading roles. As I stated earlier, while these may be taken to ridiculous extremes in fighting games, the views of racial and gender roles are just as twisted in general gaming as in any other medium.

The converse to this is that, while still a major issue as of the time of my writing this, things have been quickly changing for the better, tending towards much more respectful views of women and ethnicities.

Though this shift has been slow in gaining momentum, and evidence is thus hard to find in any genre, shifting of gender views is seen most prominently within fighting games. Whereas older fighting game characters tended towards stereotypes and sexuality to easily create very unique and memorable fighters, the past decade has seen much more of a trend to create characters that stand out for other reasons. In the past two major iterations of SF, three female characters have come to the fore for reasons other than sexuality: Makoto, the tomboyish karate master, Crimson Viper the very modestly dressed (albeit ample-bosomed) CIA operative, and Juri, the dark and sadistic Korean assassin. The KoF series has taken this concept even further towards gender equality, in that their standard roster includes just as many non-sexualized and modestly-dressed (if not outright masculine) women as it does characters like the infamous Mai (Elisabeth, Mature, etc.). Their roster is also rounded out by a number of surprisingly feminine male characters (Ash, Duo Lon, K’ to name a few).

Elisabeth from KOF XIII. See? Appropriately dressed, still wacky and memorable, everybody’s happy.

The shift in racial roles has also changed most prominently in the past decade within the SF franchise, above others. In the past few iterations of the series, fans clamoring to see fighters from their own countries and cultures has prompted the creation of three distinct characters that almost avoid stereotypes altogether: Sean, a boisterous Brazilian of mixed Japanese-Brazilian descent, practicing jiu-jitsu; Elena, a lanky young white-haired woman from an African Savannah tribe, specializing in flashy capoiera; and the most recent, Juri, mentioned previously.

Juri is particularly progressive in the fact that her personality serves to turn the former sexualization of female characters on its head. Almost overwhelming in her use of strongly sexual language, including double-entendres and suggestiveness, the coupling of this trait with the rest of her personality genuinely serves to make her more intimidating and frightening, rather than sexy.

Got a death wish? Try to hit on her, I dare you.

The fighting genres’ push towards progressivity in recent years has reverberated in all other genres of gaming in ways that are only being strongly felt today. Last year, Telltale Games’ video game version of The Walking Dead, which has won multiple game of the year awards across several gaming publications, was particularly groundbreaking in its’ choice for lead role – Lee Everett, an intelligent, resourceful, level headed, and deeply empathetic former university professor, who also happens to be African-American. Similarly, the Assassin’s Creed series was groundbreaking last year for its’ choice of Connor Kenway (Ratonhnhaké:ton) as the protagonist for it’s third iteration – a brash, half-Mohawk young man who aggressively supports and defends his own tribe in the midst of the American Revolution, fighting against whichever side threatens his people. Lee and Connor’s inclusion as protagonists is the result of several years of undercurrents pushing towards racial equality within videogames, first seen (and likely first possible) in fighting games, which naturally tend towards multiculturalism, stereotypical as they have been in the past. Indeed, being the leads in such massively-popular titles is historically and culturally significant in the shift it will no doubt come to represent in the future of gaming.

Progress has been much more difficult for strong and/or non-sexualized female characters in games. It seems as if for every major step forward, they take two backwards… For every Samus Aran (Metroid) or Alyx Vance (Half-Life 2), there is an Ashley Graham (Resident Evil 4) or Bayonetta (Bayonetta). However, recent trends have at least shown some promise with the new Tomb Raider game due out soon, as well as the continued surge of realistic female supporting characters in the past few years; Elena Fisher of Uncharted and Bonnie MacFarlane of Red Dead Redemption come to mind. Time will tell if this will be a continuous trend on par with their male, non-caucasian counterparts.

Continuing forward, we’ve just spent a considerable amount of time talking about the typical characters that make up these games, but what about the people playing them? Analysis of the FGC, and the cultural characteristics of game communities that it represents, is even more telling, and in my opinion, even more interesting.

Watch any stream of a major fighting game competition and one thing will be overwhelmingly clear at the outset: no one ethnicity or skin color is dominant in the multitudinous melting pot of characters who make the bouts so exciting to watch. There is Justin “Wongba” Wong, the Asian-American powerhouse with a generally cheerful and fun-loving disposition; Kevin “Dieminion” Landon, the dapper-dressed and glasses-adorned African-American, quiet and humble outside of the game (and almost unrivaled in his reflexes and deadliness within it; also my personal favorite); Ryan “Gootecks” Gutierrez, the charming and gregarious Latino-American with a penchant for supporting the community and its growth in any way possible; and innumerable others, all varying in character, ethnic background, and game they play.

This intercultural representation is very likely an indicator of the ethnic breakdown of who is actually playing videogames in general, and in the end, this kind of blending shouldn’t really be surprising. When it comes to videogames, it doesn’t matter what your race, gender, or age may be when you’re behind the screen, even when it comes to online play with or against others; all that really matters is how good you play. Starcraft II and League and Legends necessitate quality PCs and all the financial quandaries in keeping it up to date, thus selecting for more upper-class players (which, obviously, are more often than not whites). Fighting games on the contrary are arcade and console particular, and thus are much less expensive, allowing for a much broader range of cultural circles to partake. Unfortunately, the incredibly frustrating truth is that no study of the game industry has attempted to get solid numbers of what ethnicities are gaming, and so all we have to go on is what we see at these competitions.

However, the surprisingly multicultural nature of the FGC is also slightly mitigated by the fact that women are almost entirely absent within its ranks. Of the competitions I’ve seen so far, females are a very small majority within the the populace, and are often nonexistent within the highest elites of competition. The problem itself has been noted multiple times by various individuals within the community, and is often a point of contention with the greater gaming media that pays attention (3). Women players are gradually becoming more and more present, and there has been a major push in the past year to address sexism issues in the community and bring more female competitors out of the shadows and into the fray, but the changes are gradual and represent a long road ahead for women in the FGC.

While the FGC is naturally more selective towards males for the cramped, sweaty, trash-talking and macho characteristics of the arcade-competition underground that birthed it, this nonetheless identifies an issue present within the gaming community at large. As of 2012, female gamers made up 47% of all videogame purchasers and players (4), a figure that you would likely never assume based on the public image of the gaming community. Female gamers themselves have made great strides in recent years towards being a cultural norm, slowly moving out of the living room and into the public image, but there is still a very real struggle taking place in the industry and community to welcome them there.

The logic behind all this is that gaming has primarily been seen as a male-centric entertainment medium since its’ creation, and even today the undertone lingers; a common internet stereotype posits that as soon as someone specifically identifies themselves as a ‘girl gamer,’ they are immediately going to say something about videogames that is incredibly ignorant and false (obviously not true, but with enough examples of it for it to have gone viral in recent years). Just as women have a long road in becoming more accepted and present within the FGC, it will take some time before they are commonly accepted within the community at large.

The FGC and industry are unique beasts in the racial and gender functions of both, even within the gaming world. Where they can be seen as strongly progressive and forward-thinking in some ways, the layman would consider them unusually backwards in others. The undercurrents and background that color its personality and characteristics are present in every other gaming genre and every other part of the industry, and simply await someone perceptive enough to parse the veins which are most obvious within the fighting game industry and the community it relies upon. Yet with all their flaws, strengths, and outright peculiarities, they remain a significant pulse for the gaming world at large, boldly expressing the cultural and ethnic norms that will come to shape the future… Whether those are battlefields for equality or bastions of social maturation.

WORKS CITED

1. UltraDavid (Graham, David Philip). “Momentum Matters: A Historical Perspective on the FGC and Esports Communities.” Shoryuken.com, Shoryuken. 12 December 2011. Retrieved 11 February 2013.

2. Machinima. “Fighterpedia, Episode 1: Rejected Street Fighters.” Online video series. Youtube.com, Youtube. 30 October 2011. Retrieved 11 February 2013.

3. Orland, Kyle.”Is pervasive sexism holding the professional fighting game community back?.” arstechnica.com, Ars Technica. 29 February 2012. Retrieved 11 February 2013.

4. “Essential Facts About the Computer and Video Game Industry (2012).” theesa.org, Entertainment Software Association. April 2012. Retrieved 11 February 2013.

The famed Ron Gilbert, purveyor of Adventure and Grog, was involved in a great many of those. And by involved, I mean that he’s responsible for them. To blame, some might even say.

Whatever his crimes against free time might be, one can’t deny that if it wasn’t for him, the early ones wouldn’t exist. Unless one is just being obtuse, in which case, I’m moving on anyway because Ron is back. Well, still here. La la la, other superfluous tangent, The Cave! (No, that wasn’t to fill in later).

Mmmm, caverny.

The premise is that there’s a cave. It’s sentient, and talks to you, the player. More specifically, it narrates. What it narrates, is the exploration of itself by three of the seven available characters, who seem to be facing the worst of themselves – their most despicable pasts. There are parts of the cave where all three of the characters you choose need to work together, and others where they have their own story told. Sometimes they still need to work together in those, too. The Cave can also prevent death, and do stuff with time travel when relevant. I don’t think it’s after your Artron Energy, though I haven’t yet finished it, and you can never be too careful with sentient geology.

My first (and current) playthrough has The Scientist, The Time Traveller, and The Twins. Each has their own special power – the Scientist can hack computers and machines, the Time Traveller can phase through walls, and the Twins can creep you the fuck out. The other characters are The Monk, The Hillbilly, The Adventurer and the Knight. One interesting note to these characters is that there’s exactly 3 male characters, 3 female characters, and then the creepy twins. Each of the characters are caricatures, without being hypersexualised.

The majority of the game is puzzles. Running around, picking stuff up, and then using it on different objects to get other more-different objects. It’s a definite throwback to the old adventure games, though the single-object approach to inventory leads to a lot of running back and forth. The puzzles are definitely on the same level as the old monkey-wrench-waterfall in MI2, but this is what you expect when you play something involving Ron Gilbert.

New Grog? More like NEAR Grog!

I hate to say it, but there’s a lot not to like about the cave, and it comes back to the puzzles. I don’t know if it’s the years that’ve passed since I could spend weeks on an adventure game, or just the finicky nature of the inventory. Because it came up more than once, I carried the fuse box from early in the game (if you’ve played the demo, you’ll know where) for a lengthy amount of time, along with a spare hotdog. Through two areas, I figured that alright, I probably didn’t need it. Twins enter their house, and hark, there’s a fuse box required. Sure, there was one in the area, but it was an unnecessary frustration with general bad timing. The other bit that got me, was sometimes not seeing the way forward. The Twins area had me stuck for a while, because I didn’t see one of the objects I needed to use, much along the lines of the hunt-for-the-pixel puzzles from the actual old Lucasarts games. The Time Traveller’s area had something different, because I’d incorrectly assumed that like The Twins’ area, the TT had to do it all by herself. Nope!

That doesn’t sound like the ‘a lot’ I mentioned, but the game is probably 30% puzzles, and 150% walking around. It’s a large component. You get satisfaction when you start wandering around, solving puzzles and learning how things work – plus while I might sound like I’m decrying that ominous 150% worth of the game, the environments you walk around in are pretty damn gorgeous. They’re styled in an homagey way that’s reminiscent of DoTT or MI2, but crisp in graphics too. The first splash in the water at the start looks great, and in fact, the whole sensory nature of The Cave is great. Voices, music, graphics. None of that’s in doubt.

All the characters can die as much as they want, not just The Monk.

As much as I want The Cave to grab me by the hand, and pull me back into my childhood, it doesn’t. If anything, while the tone of the game is definitely like Lucasarts, the game itself reminds me more of Out of this World, or Coktel Visions’ Gobliiins (or Ween: The Prophecy) game. It’s not overly complicated, and there’s something special in its simplicity. If I had to pick one of the Lucasarts games that it feels most like, I’d actually have to go with Loom. I’d say that it also owes a lot to the many wonderful indie platformers that exist, and in that regard it feels like it’s stuck halfway between classic adventure, and indie platformer. I think this might be a good thing, and could potentially lead to a new paradigm for platformers – or an old one – I don’t even know.

The peculiar thing is that comparisons to Out of this World and Loom lead me back to the last game, I compared to both of those, and their company aside, if I can speak about the Cave having the same cues or notes as the fabulousJourney, then I’m pretty damn sure it’s got more going for it than against. That’s why I’m happy with my jaunt into The Cave, because I think it’s a step in the write direction for platformers, closer to adventure games of yore.

So, I just wanted to say… Jebediah Springfield The Cave was… great.

Famed adventurer… Diana Jones?

In my opinion, it’s not such a bad problem that it is no longer exclusive. I understand why Ubisoft would want to capitalize on an anticipated game and bring it to more systems to give it a wider audience and hopefully create more sales. What I don’t understand is why they felt it was necessary to delay a completed game from its original platform mere weeks before it was due to launch.

Even worse, the current launch window for Rayman Legends is now September 2013. I felt that the game was launching in a perfect position for this February, with very little competition within and even outside of Wii U. Now that it is releasing in September, much of the hype will have faded by then, and many other highly anticipated titles (such as the extremely ambitious Grand Theft Auto V) will be releasing. Sadly, I expect the product to actually sell less across three systems than it would have sold just on the Wii U if it had been released this month.

There is only one explanation I’ve heard: Microsoft won’t allow multiplatform releases to release on competing systems before its own Xbox 360. Is following Microsoft’s wishes that much more important and profitable than putting out a completed product during a slow period that could potentially generate a lot of hype and sales? I’m not sure, but it does make me worry about the idea of “crunch periods” that drain people’s energies without a clear end goal in sight, or only for the goal posts to be shifted.

There has been a lot of buzz in the gaming community lately. Buzz involved with a certain survival horror game. Of course I am talking about Dead Space 3.

Dead Space has been one of the greatest franchises of all time, but since the release of the third game it has received a lot of flak. I have read a lot of reviews and comments that attempt to dump on the final game in the series and I am here to say that the gaming community is officially filled with morons. I read one review over at PlayStation Universe in which the writer stated that most of the game takes place in space and us fans were duped into believing the game took place on the new icy planet. The reviewer went on to say that you did not reach the icy planet until “chapter 12″ out of  ”18 chapters.” This was day one of the games release and after picking up my copy of the game, which after reading the review I was hesitant, I became dumbfounded. Dumbfounded at the fact that the writer was a moron. You reach the the new planet at chapter 8 out of 19 chapters. I mean he was a single chapter off but why would you get something wrong like that?

I later saw comments online on social media attempting to bash the game. Comments like “Gears of War rip off” or “cheap scares” and of course my favorite “this game is horrible.” How can you say a game is horrible with no actual explanation as to why? I jumped in some parts of Dead Space 3, I enjoyed the gameplay and newly added weapon crafting system and furthermore I got what WE all originally wanted… An explanation and an ending.

Visceral didn’t sell out, the industry as a whole sold out by becoming cash cows who are afraid of Apple and their “all mighty products.” Furthermore, the game industries new fan base a re a bunch of idiots. How do you compare games like Dead Space and Gears of War? If you want to go there then Gears of War is just a rip off of the Parasite Eve for PSX. Or even that God of War is a complete and entire rip off of Devil May Cry and other games like Soul Reaver. The days are long gone when we rated games simply based on story line.

Another giant issue I see is: People are so quick to attack Dead Space and yet what of Call of Duty? What do I mean? Ever since World at War nothing has changed. It’s been the same graphics, different story line and weapons and modes like Zombie mode that should of just been DLC and yet these are entirely new games with a fan base who thinks there are huge improvements. It’s much like being an intense Apple fan. A new iPhone is release with very little improvements and everyone thinks it’s Gods gift to the earth when there are other phones with more advanced tech.

Had to get this off my chest. Dead Space 3 is a great game and I’m glad I got the closure I wanted. All arguments are welcome because I love to argue.

Here are a few things I’ve noticed that may be signs that it is time:

1.       The new thing will be confronted by the old thing “that’s not the way we do it”

When your most passionate ideas are met with the cold truth of the situation. It won’t make money. People won’t like it. People aren’t used to gameplay like that. That idea is too far ahead of its time. Etc etc. The bottom line is that you can’t keep doing work that your heart is not in.  Its passion’s slow death.  When you can’t liberate your creative ideas, or there is no place for them to run, it may be time to get to a place where you can have more latitude.  Vander Caballero of Minority felt this and branched out to make the exceptionally creative game Papo & Yo.  He said, ” I decided I couldn’t do it anymore. It felt totally wrong for me to keep working on the type of entertainment where there was no moral behind what you were teaching to people.”

2.       You will fight the new thing yourself for good “reason”

Sometimes we find that the best reasons we had for staying in a place are the very reasons that limit our ability to think about the future. Resistance is futile for dreams of the heart. When an idea is strong enough you can’t get rid of it. You can push it off, sleep it off, and drink it off, but, alas, it comes knocking once again.

There are plenty of reasons why branching out from your safe job doesn’t make sense, and many people should stay where they are.  However, if you find that  the reasons to leave outnumber and overpower the reasons it doesn’t, it may be time.  After all, do you want to leave this life saying, “I lived a safe life,” or “I made a difference”?

3.       Your “reason” will be superseded by another greater reason

New information comes available such as a new SDK, new platform, niche market, genre, invitation etc. Tomorrow has a way of holding secrets that yesterday doesn’t know. Your reason may come tomorrow, or it may already be here today.

4.       Opportunity will present itself like never before

You go to a convention or game jam and meet someone that has a strength where you are weak.  A friend of a friend starts “talking the same language” and when you talk about your game ideas you are finishing each others sentences. You find out from a vet that it is easier than you think.

5.       As you step into the opportunity things will work out like never before

Of course you have to step out first. Dedication and consistency will yield some fruit. Now its time to put the fruit out for testing, and when you do, the results pleasantly surprise you.  The game you make teaching yourself unity, or the kickstarter campaign you run to “test the waters” turns out exceptionally favorable and you can’t but go forward.  Probably the greatest indicator comes from consulting knowledgeable friends that have been there.

After this we can only assume more things will continue to fall into place that you had no control over.  After all living your dream, and loving what you do is a great motivation for overcoming any challenges that may come.

In case you live under a rock, don’t own any major console, or don’t like video games you probably know that Visceral Game’s newest installment in their Survival(ish) Horror(kinda) franchise Dead Space has been released on store shelves today.  It’s currently averaging a 79 score on Metacritic right now which is a fine score to say the least.  I’ve played and thoroughly enjoyed multiple games that have gotten far less than that.  Most of the criticisms levied against the game include a relatively weak plot that retreads DS1 a lot, a lot of fetch questing, and some of the survival elements of the first two games being stripped away in favor of a co-op experience.  These are all legitimate complaints, these are design choices in the game that the developer made that actually changes the overall experience of the game.

But then I look at the user comments…I should know better than to look at user reviews at this point…ughh…

The average low user review on the game goes something along the lines of *ahem*

xXeahat3rXx says: I HATE YOU EA, YOUR MICROTRANSACTIONS AND DAY 1 DLC RUINED THIS GAME.  EA RUINED THIS FRANCHISE AND I HATE THEM FOREVER, I’M BOYCOTTING THIS GAME AND REFUSE TO BUY IT, GO DIE IN A FIRE

Ok, I can’t even begin to say how many of these user comments I’ve seen that go something along the lines of “EA has ruined this franchise.  It was so good.”

I want you to look closely at the two boxes above.  Down there in the lower right of the box, what is it that you see there?  Is that…is that EA’s logo?  Well gosh darn it, that’s what it looks like! EA was one of the reasons this franchise existed in the first place, what with Visceral Games being a part of EA and all.  That’s not even the point though, what people are saying ruined this game was the addition of microtransactions and day 1 DLC.

This is where I start to get foggy on people’s complaints here.  Dead Space 3 is a single player game, or a co-op game.  What problem is it if they give the option to buy some extra gun parts?  Is it going to make them too over powered in their single player experience?  Who cares?!?  Is the fact that someone else wants to spend their hard-earned money on something to use in their own experience ACTUALLY hurting your own gaming experience in any conceivable way?  I can almost promise you with 100% certainty that it is not.

Again, the same thing applies with Day 1 DLC.  They finished the game, and they decided to add some guns to the game for a couple bucks a set, big whoop.  It’s not changing the playability of the game at all not having these guns is it?  As a player, you are completely capable of building your own weapons in-game without having these DLC guns, so why is it your problem if some other schmuck decides to blow 2 bucks on some virtual guns?

Take heed though: I’m in no way supporting these microtransactions and day 1 DLC.  Because while I think it’s inclusion in Dead Space 3 is pretty inconsequential, sometimes it does kinda sting.  If, for example, a whole story arc was released as day 1 DLC, that would be a problem.  That is a part of the game that could have very well been put in instead of sold alongside it.  THAT is when it becomes a problem, not when it’s a couple of extra guns for a couple bucks, that’s not fundamentally changing the game!

Something similar goes with microtransactions.  If it’s a multiplayer game where that microtransaction would end up giving the edge over an opponent, THAT would be a problem.  It’s at that point that it comes down to whoever has the most money wins the game.  But in a single player or co-operative experience why does it matter?  Is the fact that someone else is spending money to make himself feel better hurting you in any way?  If it is, well I suggest you go see a therapist.

So to all of those people throwing down “1″ user ratings on metacritic right now, I say this: Just chill out and try to enjoy the game for what it is.  Who cares if there’s some guns out there that you don’t have, just don’t use those guns!  So what if someones spending the money on microtransactions, is it making you any less powerful?  Games are meant to be enjoyed, on their own merits, regardless of things Visceral and EA might put out besides the game.  Gamers these days need to stop looking at games as products of publishers instead of, well, games. It’s sad, it’s bad, and it’s sapping the enjoyment out of something that’s supposed to be an enjoyable experience.

The survey takes approximately 6-7 minutes to complete, and will run until Friday, February 22nd. The results will be published on April 2013.

So if you are a programmer, a game designer, a tester, an animator (or you just clean the toilets at Ubisoft) you can fill out the survey here. Obviously it is anonymous, and none of the information presented will be associated with any individually identifiable information.

But what are the results from the last year? Here we go! (bad news for you testers)

Programming: Already some of the highest paid talent in the game industry, programmers made even more in 2011 as their average salary jumped up to nearly $92,962 from $85,733. Salaries increased across the experience spectrum, with newer workers (under three years of experience) reporting a whopping $10,700 average increase over last year.

Art and Animation: Artists and animators’ average salaries increased to $75,780 over the previous year’s average of $71,354. The largest gains went to art directors and lead/technical artists, which bodes well for the industry veterans and less so for the younger artists and animators.

Game Design: Game designers, writers, and creative directors were paid $73,386 on average in 2011, up from $70,223. Game designers with less than three years of experience received the biggest boost over last year ($3,500).

Production: Though producers saw a huge increase in 2010 for their average salaries to $88,544, that dropped last year to $85,687. Most of these cuts were felt by producers with 3-6 years of experience, whose average salaries fell about $4,900 from 2010, and by producers with over six years of experience, whose salaries were cut by $3,300. Women continue to be comparatively well-represented in the production department (16 percent) — men absorbed most of the salary drop, while female producers’ salaries actually rose.

Audio: The average audio professional’s reported salary in 2011 was significantly higher, $83,182 compared to 2010′s $68,088. While it is difficult to draw meaningful conclusions from the data due to there being fewer respondents for this category compared to other disciplines, we received 30 percent more responses from audio professionals than we did in 2010, so the job market might just be on the uptick.

Quality Assurance: Quality assurance professionals (testers and QA leads) are the lowest-paid workers in the games industry for yet another year — and in 2011, their average salary decreased to $47,910 from $49,009 in 2010. The salary hit was mostly felt by QA leads with over six years of experience, while those with less experience in the field actually earned more.

Business: Business and legal employees are still the highest paid in the industry, but their salaries dropped from $106,452 in 2010 to $102,160 last year. Those with more than six years of experience were negatively impacted the most, making nearly $8,000 less. Newcomers, however, saw their average salaries increase by $14,000.

Plus the manufacturing of discs is expensive and clunky for most developers. I remember working on Pix Maze at Budcat Creations and one of the barring factors from being published on the DSi and being published on iPhone was the concept that our game may have to be created as a DS cartridge, as DSi downloads hadn’t really caught on by then. The price and red tape around creating our game on a cartridge ended up slowing us down and costing us not to release for DSi until we released months after our game hit the apple store. Further more we finished development on the DSi version a month before finishing the iPhone “port.” In short, I could imagine discs have a similar over head. Network/Cloud gaming is where it’s at for consoles.

XBOX 360 and PS3 were on to something when they made their devices capable of handling other forms of media. Mobile hasn’t killed TV and so it isn’t going to kill the console. Watching a show at home with friends or family is far more enjoyable on a large screen TV than on an iPad or Android tablet; in the same vein there are games better played at home, on a large screen in the secluded environment, alone or with friends than they would be played on a mobile device.

But Consoles are changing; I’ve had friends now lose multiple jobs in the game industry while working on console and PC games. The trend is: crunch non-stop for a year, make a large game, release to disc, layoff the team. Game developers can’t live like this anymore. Why aren’t these games making the amount of money back that goes into them? Do we need cheaper tools? Or do we need to engage our audience differently? I’m excited to be apart of it and see where the industry goes in both consoles and mobile markets, but boy am I sick of moving.

If you want to pay the lowest price on the planet, you can.  If you want to get the most for your money, you can.  If you want to give more to the developer and less to the middle man, you can.  If you hate the corruption of money in the world and just want to throw your money to those least likely to be corrupted by it, you sure can!

Humble Bundles clean up all the Luke fence walkers.  If any of the above were hangups that prevented you from buying a game—bazinga!  You now have no excuse.  It turns out that when you remove consumers major hangup, they are actually motivated to buy things that they don’t even need.  (Such as the “other” games in the Bundle that they will probably never play)

Ok, we know it works, but how would a company stay profitable if it let consumers pay them potentially nothing?  I would propose to you that whenever retailers seek to choke every last penny from consumers they are forming their own tombstone, but retailers that seek to give consumers a fair shake will ultimately have a great reputation and will deliver a purchase satisfaction which will cause consumers to return.  Humble Bundle is like neither of the aforementioned retailers.  They seek to help developers move their games, offer customers a good price, and seek to help charities they care about.  What is wrong with this business model!?  I dare you to pitch that to a second grader with ADD; even he would say that’s crazy.  Its crazy, but they have tapped into a universal principle.  If you seek to make others happy, you will end up being happier than if you sought your own happiness.

It goes beyond you scratch my back and I scratch yours.  Humble Bundle gives a way the farm and they always benefit.  And the way they are going they always will.  Keep up the great work folks!

The gaming industry rarely ever has fun and easy jobs like that. The people that really back the games you love, and spend hard time and effort to make that game come true, are people with great work ethics and commitment. A typical game industry employee works from 9AM to late at night, such as 8 or 9PM, for two or three days straight, and then is off for three or four days. Also, the “game tester” job among gods is nearly impossible to get. These people are generally going to do these jobs till they die or get too old to play the new games coming out. However, these jobs also pay very poorly, and work horrid hours (sometimes twice a month.) Game testers people almost always do something else as a full time job (meaning they have another job where they clock in at least 40 hours a week). The gaming industry can also be a little cutthroat. People will fight to get the steady jobs that pay decent and get to be in the studio they want. However, don’t be discouraged if this is truly what you think you want to do. This industry is blessed in the sense that a vast majority of the people in it are there because they are doing what they love, and not people in there just to have a job. The industry is also pretty low on the chances an employee will get laid off, but, should you get laid off, other studios would gladly accept a veteran in game design versus a new person fresh out of college. The gaming industry can become your new home away from home, or it can chew you up and spit you out. It all comes down to how you preform.

Now, obviously I have not worked in this industry, but I’ve done extensive research, and emailed people currently in it to ask different questions about this industry. Here are a few tips and other bits of advice:

• People should be able to openly talk to others and remember faces to names well. As a big way to get a job is to have connections, and to do that, you have to meet as many people as you can.
• If you have ideas for new games, unfortunately, that doesn’t count for a lot. Most game designers can have tons of ideas they want to create, but probably will never see come to life. However, if you want to see this even possibly reviewed, the best way to pitch a new game idea is to create a working prototype. Make a working idea to show to people.
• This industry also rewards those who can work well with others. Obviously you won’t be working alone on pretty much anything, so you have to be able to work well with others.
• Being able to think quickly on your feet and not get stressed if things don’t work. You will constantly run into problems and all sorts of computer glitches, and you as a dedicated employee would have to be able to manage this hurdle and overcome it.
• Try to play as many games as you can so you can see how every game comes together. Knowing what is being made can help you see your goals. Also, it doesn’t hurt to play more than your few favorite games.
• Never limit yourself to just one type of game. Try multiple types of games, and try multiple games in different areas.
• Support the studios that make good quality games.

These tips cannot guarantee a job making games, but can surely help you in your “quest” to get a job in this industry. If you want any further information, please don’t hesitate to email or contact me for help.

As much as possible I really want to avoid discussing political issues on this blog. I would ideally like to keep this site focused on games and music. However, recent events have thrown games into the world of politics again and it’s something that I feel needs to be discussed. Normally when some figurehead or media pundit suggests that violent media is the cause of violent behavior in human beings, I tend to just roll my eyes and continue with my daily routine. To me it’s just another repeat of the same scapegoat routine with a different culprit. It’s either rock music, comics, movies, television, or D&D that is somehow going to cause young people to become mentally unbalanced and send our society back into the dark ages. Most of these claims of course tend to have no proof to back them up, but they still somehow find a way to be taken seriously by members of the population. Unfortunately it seems that several of our leaders in congress and the white house are now taking these suggestions seriously in the wake of the Sandy Hook shootings. Primarily the idea that violent video games could be causing individuals, particularly young people, to engage in acts of violence and that something drastic should be done about it. It is at this point where the alarm bells start going off in my head. There’s now real potential that some damage could be done to games.

While I will discuss some of the ideas being proposed by political leaders, that will not be the only focus of this article/rant. It’s easy to just shoot down bad ideas that politicians from both parties are proposing. I believe that there need to be other solutions discussed to address the concerns that people have about games. Just mindlessly bashing ideas we don’t like doesn’t get us anywhere. Primarily, I want to talk about some of the reasons that I think video games and the gaming community are perceived in such a poor light and how we can help fix that. So while I feel that many of the proposed ideas to deal with violent video games are misguided and ill-informed, I think that we need to make an effort as gamers and an industry to improve our visibility as the community that we really are and debunk the negative stereotypes of video games that some people have.

Are Violent Video Games Dangerous?

One of the concerns that people voice about games is that they are different from other media because they are interactive. When you watch a violent movie or television show you are just an observer. However, with a game you are a participant and you commit the acts of violence. The worry seems to be that if a young person engages in playing these violent games for an extended period of time, they will be desensitized to the point that they become a danger to themselves and others around them. Specifically, they seem to be concerned that younger minds are at a greater risk to be effected by this form of media.

While these seem like legitimate concerns, there has yet to be any evidence that backs these assumptions. In fact, most research and evidence shows the exact opposite is true. According to the Entertainment Software Association (ESA), violent crime among young people has decreased dramatically since the 90′s while the number of games being played have increased.

Based on US software sales and FBI crime statistics. (Chart from ESA’s web site)

The Washington Post recently did a comparison of the countries that consume the most video games and the gun related deaths in those countries.

Chart used in the Washington Post on games and gun related crime.

Not only is there no positive correlation to violent games and real gun violence, the data suggests that the exact opposite might be true. So whatever is causing the high amount of violence in the United States, video games seem to have little or no influence. There have also been studies that were reviewed by the Supreme Court when the State of California tried to ban the selling of violent video games to minors (Brown vs EMA). After considering all of the evidence Justice Scalia concluded that,”Psychological studies purporting to show a connection between exposure to violent video games and harmful effects on children do not prove that such exposure causes minors to act aggressively. Any demonstrated effects are both small and indistinguishable from effects produced by other media”. There have also been a number of similar conclusions in other cases and in studies on the effects of game violence.

President Obama and Vice President Biden have proposed that more research be done on the effects of gaming on young players in addition to several other plans to help address gun violence. Obama stated in his speech that, “We don’t benefit from ignorance. We don’t benefit from not knowing the science.” I honestly have conflicting feelings about this move. On the one hand, I have no problem with us doing more research and gathering more information. I don’t expect the results to be any different from what has already been discovered, so by all means fund the research. It can only strengthen the argument that games DON’T cause real world violence. On the other hand, it concerns me that this is sending a message to people that their IS a connection that we need to look into. While the Obama administration certainly isn’t singling out games as the magic bullet issue, it does come across to me as political posturing on an issue that shouldn’t even have to be discussed. I do suspect that this research is just the administration and other politicians trying to acknowledge the public’s baseless concerns. My primary worry with this proposal is that the research won’t be done in an objective way that will accurately monitor the effects of the games and thus produce unreliable results.

Political Spin

So even with all of this evidence that has come out debunking the link between violent games and real world violence, why is this issue still being pursued? I can think of a few reasons. The first being that it’s another case of the news media, particularly the 24 hour news channels, hyping up a problem that doesn’t actually exist. This of course gets the public concerned that it IS a real problem and the politicians feel that they have to react to it in some way. This in turn causes the politicians to do one of two things. They either feign interest in doing something about violent games, or they feed into the same media hype and actually believe that video games are dangerous and propose harmful pieces of legislation. In my opinion they are doing this to 1) Pretend that they are actually doing something productive for their voters, especially during a time when congress has a low approval rating and/or 2) They are misguided and ignorant enough to think that these laws will actually accomplish anything.

Some Bad Ideas

While the Obama administration has taken a relatively passive approach to the issue, other politicians are proposing their own magic bullet solutions for the “threat” from violent video games. I’ve really given up trying to keep track of some of the nonsense and legislation that people have been coming up with, so for what it’s worth, here is a sample of some of the more unique flavors of stupidity, starting with…..

Missouri state representative Diane Franklin, whose brilliant idea is to put a special tax those terrible violent video games. The revenue raised from the tax would fund a program to treat mental health problems that result from people’s exposure to these games. Because clearly every person who has played Mortal Combat and Kirby’s Dreamland has become mentally damaged. The odd thing with this tax proposal is that it is applied to games that are rated T for Teen up through the Adult Only on the ESRB ratings regardless of whether there’s violence in them or not. So theoretically this tax would be applied to Teen games like, Guitar Hero, The Sims, and Dance Central.

Apparently this game is dangerous to young minds.

Aside from the amusing unintentional taxing of non violent games, I don’t really understand what this is going to accomplish. If it does anything it will just cause people to buy games through Amazon or other online stores rather than buying them in state at the local stores. This won’t stop people from buying games they like, it will just hurt local business owners, if anything. Then of course there’s the ridiculous assumption that video games cause mental health issues. Mental health is a serious issue in this country and I find it embarrassing that we have an elected official like Franklin making up mental conditions for the sake of a witch hunt.

Another bill called the “Video Game Ratings Enforcement Act” has been proposed by Utah congressman Jim Matheson. The bill would basically require that the ESRB ratings be applied to all games and make it illegal for any retailer to sell games to individuals who do not meet the rating’s age requirement. The way it’s written a store could theoretically be fined up to $5000 for selling a game to a minor. The first issue with this law is that it’s completely unnecessary. The industry already regulates itself very well when it comes to M rated content. Every major retail chain including Wal-Mart, Target, and GameStop have a strict company policy against selling an M rated game to anyone under the age of 18. Even if you where to pass this law, it wouldn’t make it any less likely for kids to get their hands on a copy of an M rated game. All it would do is add more bureaucracy to the entire process of purchasing and selling games. The even bigger issue with this law is that it’s unconstitutional. The government is not allowed to censor or limit free speech, a right that games share with movies, books, music, and other artistic mediums. The Supreme Court case, Brown vs EMA, that I brought up earlier in this article was dealing with a law similar to this one. Not only did the Supreme Court find that there was insufficient evidence to link games to violent behavior, they also concluded that video games are protected by the First Amendment as free speech. The government has no right to restrict the selling or distribution of these games. This bill seems unlikely to make if far, but you never know what nasty surprises can come out of Washington. Keep your eyes on this one.

Solutions for Improving Gaming’s Image

Part of the reason that gaming is such an easy target is that most people who are not involved in the gaming community have a misinformed view of what the gaming community actually is and what its actual demographics are. The average person I talk to has this perception of gamers as the basic nerd stereotype. Immature young males who enjoy playing violent shooters like Call of Duty and Halo or bizarre fantasy games like World of Warcraft and Skyrim. We as gamers know this isn’t true, but many people still have a mental image of gamers that is outdated and probably wasn’t even that accurate to 10 or 15 years ago. Granted, there are some people who fit into that category of gamer, but our community is much more diverse than that. This has become especially true with the explosion of the casual game market and the newer audiences brought into the gaming world by devices like the Nintendo Wii, the Playstation Move, and Xbox’s Kinnect. That more casual group of gamers might not be the same type of people who will attend conventions or participate in online tournaments, but they are still part of what makes up the video game community.

Yes, the casual Wii Sports players are gamers. Get over it.

Part of what we need to do as a community is promote the positive things we do. This includes charities like Child’s Play, a charity organization that helps improve the lives or sick children in hospitals, or the Take This Project, which focuses on helping people suffering from anxiety and depression. There’s also the great festivals and conventions like MAGFest and PAX that we are a part of. These are all positive experiences and efforts that are created by people who play games and by those who work in the industry. If we want to help tear down this inaccurate and negative image of gamers that the average person has, we need to be showing them what we are really like.

There are going to be some people that we will never be able to convince. They are narrow-minded people who will refuse to see any other viewpoint but the one that they have created for themselves. The best we can do is offer the evidence we have on violent video games and present ourselves as decent human beings. In my opinion, it’s better to focus our efforts on the fence sitters. The people who don’t know what to think of the gaming community or who are concerned but uninformed about what video games are all about. If we can show them the great things we celebrate and do as a group, we can turn the attention we are getting into an opportunity to improve our image. We may never be rid of the stereotypes that some parts of the population have of us, but we should still make an effort to change their perception of us for the better.

The Industry’s PR Problem

One of the biggest obstacles that is facing the image of gaming in society is the misguided PR that is coming from the AAA gaming industry. Many of these big publishers like Electronic Arts, Square Enix, Ubisoft, and Deep Silver have been marketing their games in ways that reflect very negatively on the video game community. Probably one of the more horrific examples was EA’s Dead Space 2 marketing campaign, showcasing the ways their game can horrify and gross-out adults.

I really have to wonder what the hell is wrong with EA’s marketing department. Are they out of their goddamn minds!!? They are intentionally trying to turn people off from games and give them the worst possible impression of the industry to everyday people. If that wasn’t enough, they are using the horrified and concerned reactions from these adults to market an M RATED GAME to teenagers. Did they feel it was worth throwing the reputation of video game industry and gamers under the bus, just so they could make their game appealing to a group of people who can’t even buy the game without their parent’s approval? This is just the tip of the iceberg of the horrible marketing strategies that EA has come up with. The people from Extra Credits even did an entire episode on EA’s horrible PR because it’s been such a problem. It must have been awkward for the CEO of EA, John Riccitiello, to meet with Biden in that meeting to discuss video game violence. Perhaps if he had actually cared about how his company marketed it’s image, he wouldn’t have to be in front of the leaders of our country, defending the game industry.

John Riccitielo, CEO of EA, at a press conference with Vice President Joe Biden.

There have been other incidents including Square Enix’s Hitman Facebook app fiasco and more recently Deep Silver’s bikini bust disaster. This is a serious problem for the gaming community if we ever want to be taken seriously by the rest of society. These companies wield immense power in the industry and this nonsense needs to stop.

This is something we really need to get on their case about. Luckily there has been a lot of progress in this department. Those Square Enix and Deep Silver incidents I mentioned were very quickly denounced by many members of the gaming community. The Hitman App that Square Enix made was taken down within hours of its launch after receiving negative feedback and Deep Silver quickly pulled its promotional bust after a similar response. Both companies apologized for the offense they caused. There have been some great steps taken to improve things in competitive online games as well. Just this year two professional League of Legends players were banned from competing because of their bad behavior. These are all good steps but we need to keep it up. We need to let these game companies know that we’re not going to tolerate their nonsense. If the take back Mass Effect movement has shown us anything, it’s that publisher’s will have to listen when enough fans get pissed off.

The last thing I would add is that we need to make sure that our voices are being heard by the politicians as well. Not just the gaming industry. Gamers have been good about giving feedback to the industry but we need to be just as vigilant when it comes to our political leaders. If bills like the ones being proposed by Jim Matheson and Diane Franklin appear, we need to write our representatives and senators telling them to fight these types of bills. I know a lot of people have an apathetic stance when it comes to the political process, but believe me they do listen and respond. We need to be writing letters to them, and not just those online petitions that have the pre-written messages that everyone likes to spam on Facebook. WRITE AN ACTUAL EMAIL TO YOUR POLITICAL LEADERS! It makes a much bigger impression when it’s something you’ve written yourself. One letter might not mean that much, but hundreds of letters from people in their district will make them think about what they are doing. Remember, their main goal is to stay in office and those letters are telling them what matters to you as an active voter.

Final Thoughts

Like other forms of art before them, video games have become another bogeyman used to take the blame for the problems facing our country. This has happened because a portion of our population refuses to acknowledge them as anything other than crude, immature, and deranged fantasies. Further boosted by the media hype and the misguided marketing by the AAA gaming industry, a negative stereotype has been promoted about video games and the people who play them. It’s happened with comics, it’s happened with music, and it’s happened with films and literature. Our politicians, while they may have good intentions, are continuing to target games either out of ignorance or out of a desire to appease their voting base. There’s evidence that already shows that video games are NOT a threat to our culture or our children’s mental health and more research will likely show the same trends. The gaming community needs to strive to promote a positive image of ourselves to others, including non-gamers, politicians, interest groups, and the media. The industry also needs to get its marketing image under control, even if it takes an angry fan base to get them to change. Video games are an art form that deserve to be respected and enjoyed by anyone who wants to experience their content.

The industry’s precarious future can cause industry folks to clam up, and make decisions focused on self-preservation.  Recent news of layoff threats at Disney’s game studios, Gameloft, Superbot, Funcom, and Gas Powerd Games indicates that the industry model as we know it is on fire, and much of how games were made, funded, and consumed is being destroyed and rebuilt.  Many fear the fire, and some are running for their lives, but at least one person I’ve noticed is running to the fire in order salvage as much treasure as possible.  Jason Rubin.

THQ has been a sinking ship for at least a year now, but in May Jason Rubin came aboard the sinking ship and started bailing water.  When the ship sank, he claimed no responsibility for the teams’ successes but took responsibility for not doing more.  In an interview with Game Informer he said:

And for the record, I am only claiming that I cleaned up the process, not responsibility for the design or content. For that, the teams deserve all of the credit…

To be clear, I am not claiming that everything I did was successful or that my time at THQ was without failings. I failed to find Vigil a home.

What?  Who does that?  He could have taken one of hundreds of other projects, but decided to join THQ.  Most wouldn’t have touched the offer with a 10 foot pole.  And then to act in such an unselfish way.  Wow.

You could say, he just wanted another bullet point on his resume “president”, but the way Jason has handled this challenging time at THQ has been anything but selfish.  He has selflessly made every effort to comfort the teams, find them new publishers and defend them at every turn.  Today we commend Jason for his unselfish actions, and noble deeds as we enter THQ’s postmortem.  In an old blog Jason wrote:

Failures, even if they were brilliant game designers, often fail in leadership.

Perhaps true, but with the way Jason came along THQ in their darkest hour and fought with them until the end, he is a leader that is easy for anyone to follow.