A Vidiot Ranting

Granted, this isn't one of "us" ranting, but it certainly is a vidiot. To be precise, one Edmund McMillen, independent game developer.

Nintendo's "Friend" Codes!

'Nuff said.

Who needs gameplay when we have Achievements?

Forget 1080p. Ignore surround sound. Never mind motion control, online play, and in-game voice chat. Those features pale in comparison to the little feature Microsoft introduced when they launched the Xbox360: Achievements. They're the best things to happen to video games since the analog stick, and I hate them.

No other "feature" makes me want to play (and beat!) games that I would otherwise ignore or, more likely, belittle. It's because of Achievements that I played Undertow, Dash of Destruction, and a few other games I'm embarrassed to mention. These games -- forgettable at best -- become a worthy endeavor when you approach them as a Gamerscore ATM.

Achievements are an insidious device developed solely to get you to play more. On the surface, that's not such a bad thing. The evil, however, runs deep. Have you ever noticed that, because of Achievements (or, Trophies . . . but that's another rant), you're willing to spend time with an average Xbox360 game instead of playing a phenominal Wii game?

Admit it. You've sat in front of your entertainment center, thinking about playing Madworld or King Kong. Madworld is clearly the better game, but King Kong wins your valuable gaming time. You can't earn Achievements with Madworld. Madworld's quality took a back seat to Kong's easy Achievements.

It's heroin with a score.

Achievements are viewable online, which is where the system really becomes devious. At any time, I can check my friends list and see how my Gamerscore compares. Is Commander Video catching up? If so, I'd better forgo my planned evening of Final Fantasy XII and jump on Transformers: The Game for a quick GS boost! Do I feel dirty for doing it? Yes. But, like a junky, I do it anyway and I'll do it again.

By making gamers focus more on the individual components of a game, Achievements have completely changed the way video games are played. Our expectations have changed, leaving us blind to the whole game. We tolerate poor games because even those have some value (measured in GS). We dissect the quality games, making them less impressive because we percieve them through the lens of Achievements.

Damn you, Microsoft, for creating a system that adds value to undeserving games and shame on me for so willingly buying into it.

Rant 3 - Microsoft, WTF mate!?

I'm so glad that I went through the extra effort to support Microsoft on day-one of their 360 launch, bought the premium version of the console, and have now had to repair it twice, paying for shipping once.

My story goes somewhat like this (this is the abridged version):

• On launch day, I buy a premium 360 and am pleased as punch.
• Shortly after Dead Rising is released, but after beating the game, I get the red ring of death.
• It's past the period of time where Microsoft is paying for shipping, so I have to pack my 360 up and send it off via UPS, paying for the shipping of the 8lb brick myself.
• I wait about 4 weeks and get a new (refurbished) 360 back in the mail.
• I fire it up and it's a LOT louder than my first 360, but it plays games just fine, except...
• None of my XBLA games work unless I'm connected to the internet and signed into Xbox Live.
• I call Microsoft and tell them about the XBLA problem and after exchanging phone calls with them for literally 3+ months, I finally get new versions of my XBLA games that work on my new console.
• Meanwhile the replacement they sent me is getting louder and louder when I play disc-based games.
• 3 weeks ago, I call Microsoft and tell them that my console sounds like a helicopter (I had it on and in a perfect moment in life, the customer service rep asked me what the noise in the background was because it was hard to hear me. "That's my console", I replied. "Oh, that's not right", she said.) No, Microsoft. No it's not.
• They send me a box this time, and I pack my 2nd 360 into it and prepare to wait the 4 - 6 weeks (or 6 - 8 depending on which email I believe) until I'm gaming on my premium 360 which I bought on launch day, contributing to all those fantastic sales statistics that Microsoft has been using to add to their marketing might.
• Bioshock comes out tomorrow and I'm still waiting for my replacement.

Now, I appreciate them replacing my 360 each time, and extending the warranty like they've done, but seriously, Microsoft, what THE fuck were you thinking releasing this piece of shit product?

A quick disclaimer: when the 360 is working correctly, it is a fantastic piece of hardware.

The problems it has, though, are so gnarly that I cannot help but feel gypped by Microsoft.

To add insult to injury, they've dropped the price, released the "Elite" version of the console, replaced faulty hardware that was used in the first few runs of the console with actually good hardware, and now added an HDMI port to all standard "premium" versions of the console which cost $30 less than what I paid for my "premium" console on launch day.

Again, Microsoft, WTF mate!?

I have a TV that supports HDMI. I would LOVE to have an HDMI port on the back of my console which is branded exactly the same as the new "premium" version of the console. But I guess my premium isn't as premium as the new premiums. Makes sense, really. Wait. No. Actually it makes no effing sense at all.

I say, if you're going to fuck over your fan-base, do it the way that everyone else does; by releasing good products and revising them over and over and over. That's how you're going to get me to make multiple purchases.

Look at Apple and Nintendo for just two examples. You know how many freaking devices I've purchased that play GBA games!? Let's see:

1. GBA
2. GBA-SP
3. Game Boy Player
   
4. DS
5. Game Boy micro
6. DS lite

You know how they got me to purchase each of those? They did it by making each one a high-quality product, making me WANT to give my money to Nintendo.

The way you're going, Microsoft, you're only making me resentful and angry. And, this just in, angry and resentful consumers find brand-loyalty elsewhere.

-CV

Sex and the ESRB

A rant should be nonsensical, right? I mean, it should be raw, aimless, and opinionated without providing any supporting facts. It should be emotionally charged, hard-hitting and without deep intellectual stimulation. When you’re finished digesting it, in fact, you might wonder what it is you’ve just read. Was it something about video games or something about hair gel? In the end, you’ll probably move onto your favorite porn site and forget all about this “rant.” I don’t mind.

But, since your mind is on porn anyway, consider the ESRB (Entertainment Software Ratings Board) and the AO (Adults Only) rating. If you’re reading this, chances are you’ve played your share of E, E10+, T, and M-rated games. You’ve played an M-rated gore-fest full of gratuitous blood, dismemberment, guns, foul language, and racial slurs. It makes sense that this is given an M rating, right? But what’s the difference between M and AO? Why wasn’t your game assigned an AO for all that blood and violence?

It’s simple: sex. Until very recently, the only obvious distinguishing factor between an M and an AO is sexual content. While I don’t advocate sexual content for its own sake, I find it disturbing that our society (as interpreted by the ESRB) finds violence, blood, gore, etc., acceptable for 17 year olds, but naked breasts off limits. This is a fundamental problem with the ESRB’s system. If you’re a game designer and you wanted to make (for example) a violence-free game that told the story of the Kama Sutra in full 1080p detail, you’d earn an AO rating.

So what? Who cares what rating you get, right? Just make whatever game you want, as you want it, and let the ESRB tag it however they see fit. In the end, it doesn’t make a difference, right? Tell that to Rockstar. It’s a little known fact that Nintendo and Sony have a standing policy to reject AO rated games. This is the problem Manhunt 2 ran into. By earning an AO rating (for violence, not sex), the ESRB was essentially telling Rockstar that they couldn’t sell their game. Sony and Nintendo wouldn’t approve it.

Look closely at the ratings and you’ll see an M-rating is for anyone 17 and up. An AO rating is for Adults only. Of course, in America, you’re considered an adult at 18. This implies that 17 year olds aren’t mature enough to view the sexually explicit content that would earn an AO rating. I can’t speak for every man and woman in America, but when I turned 18, I didn’t know much more than I knew when I was 17. And, when I was 17, it wasn’t as though I hadn’t seen a naked girl before.

Of course, this isn’t the ESRB’s fault. They just assign the rating. And, honestly, I’m a huge fan of the ESRB system. I find it much more thorough and helpful than the comparable movie rating system. But the ESRB can improve. With only a year between the age limit for M rated games and AO rated games, is it really fair – or useful -- to have an AO rating? Given the recent political microscope video games are held under, should the ESRB once again refine their rating system? Should they do away with the AO rating, make the M rating apply to anyone 18 or older, and show no rating distinction between adult-oriented violence and sexual content?

I vote yes.

Rant 1 - The Fallen Hero

Why not start this whole blog thing off by throwing a POW block down in an attack on my favorite video game character: Mario.

Mario, my friend, what has happened to your games?

In my local GameStop, this is not an uncommon sight…

I see “Mario” on a box and as if under a spell I practically kill myself to shell out my hard-earned clams, no questions asked. Recently, however, I must admit in my darkest and most shameful moments, I’ve started to question the red-clad plumber’s love of, well, me.

With my declining enjoyment of the star’s most recent games, I fear my love is going unrequited. Or am I overreacting?

This is the problem with creating something truly brilliant. People, not unlike me, begin to expect brilliance at every turn and are no longer satisfied with what might be genuinely good. We expect to have our minds blown.

For instance, consider a number of legitimately good Mario games that don’t live up to their predecessors:

Mario Power Tennis (GC)
Mario Kart Double Dash (GC)
Mario Party 5 – 8 (GC & Wii)
Super Paper Mario (Wii)
Super Mario Sunshine (GC)

I know that these are good games. I have beaten all of them (except Mario Party 8) and enjoyed myself (sometimes more than others). But I haven’t come away from these games with the same feelings of awe and glee that I walked away from the following games with.

Mario Tennis (N64 & GBC)
Mario Kart 64 (N64)
Mario Party 1 – 4 (N64 & GC)
Paper Mario (N64)
Super Mario 64 (N64)

Even if we set the issue of declining qualities among sequels aside and disregard my point-of-view on the matter, chalking it up to Mario snobbery, I think more of us vidiots will find it harder to live with what I begrudgingly call “the selling-out of Mario”.

These are the games that insert Mario into genres or franchises that aren’t within the Mario universe, and on top of that, tend to be of slightly less quality than original Mario-themed games. These are games like the following:

Mario Hoops 3 on 3 (DS)
Mario Superstar Baseball (GC)
Super Mario Strikers (GC)
Dance Dance Revolution: Mario Mix (GC)
NBA Street V3 (GC)

Now, I don’t want to be misunderstood, I think that Mario should be able to branch out into different genres, and I also think he should be able to make cameos in other franchises. But what I don’t like is that when this occurs, the games either don’t seem to be held up to the standards I expect from my Mario games, or the particular part of the game featuring Mario is minimal or seems like an afterthought.

I’ve rambled on long enough about Mario and how I’m growing weary of the falling quality of his games. Hopefully Super Mario Galaxy and Super Smash Bros. Brawl will recapture my interest in the fallen hero.

And lastly, what about this…

Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games (Wii)

I am severely disappointed that the first time Mario and Sonic join forces, they are doing it in a licensed product rather than some fantastically creative adventure befitting of the two heroes. This, to me, is a sign that Mario has no intention of winning back my affections.

I’m sure that this blog stirs up a lot of opinions in people, and I want it to be made clear that I’m still struggling with how I feel about Mario and my lack of faith that he is going to move forward along the path of the righteous and save me from all the other mundane games like he used to.

Please Mario, come to my rescue.

-CV

Welcome to A Vidiot's Rant

A Vidiot's Rant is maintained by CommanderVideo, a video game developer and self-proclaimed vidiot who lives in the San Francisco Bay Area, and his good friend Kannon Foddr, a hardcore gamer with game sensibilities to rival the most intense followers of the medium.

We absolutely love video games and have a lot to say about them, good and bad.

This blog, however, focuses primarily on shortcomings within the medium that we feel must be discussed.

Our mission with A Vidiot's Rant is to call out our frustrations and present them for topics of discussion among other video game enthusiasts, hereafter lovingly referred to as "vidiots".

I believe that through the intelligent discussion and debate of all things which make up a game, video games will someday be widely accepted for what they are--art.

So, vidiots, we hope you're looking forward to the first few posts, coming soon.

-CV/F