I remember the first MMORPG (massive multiplayer online role playing page) I ever played. Lineage II. At the time I was just out of high school and still had a kind of crappy computer at home. My friends and I all used to go to local cyber cafes to play games like Counter-Strike and Battlefield. One of the guys that worked at a cyber cafe we frequented suggested we check out a game called Lineage. He said it was kind of like being able to play Final Fantasy online (which, in hindsight, it really was nothing like), which of course peaked most of our nerd interests. The game wasn't out yet, it was still in Beta-testing form, which we immediatly signed up for.
We spent a lot of hours playing that came at the cyber cafe. It was unlike anything we had ever played before. Up until that time we had really only played First Person shooters online. We really liked the idea of having a community and stuff like that. Needless to say, many of us bought that game when it came out officially, and played it for a while after that. It's been a long time and I don't remember the exact story of the game, or game play specifics, but the game does hold a special place in my heart as taking my MMORPG cherry.
I also remember the stigma with playing game like Lineage online. Playing video games was one thing, but to pay to play a game online was a whole other thing. You must be a real loser or nerd to play MMORPGs. I know that we never spoke of Lineage outside of our circle for friends or outside of the cyber cafe. Time came and went and I eventually rejoined my gaming roots on home consoles and pretty much left PC gaming, although still playing an occasional match of StarCraft every now and then.
The something happened a few years back. One of my friends, who played Lineage II with me, was telling me about this new MMORPG he was playing. It was this little game called World of Warcraft. I was intrgued by the notion of re-joining some soft of gaming community like that but really didn't have the time due to my work schedule. He wouldn't take no for an answer though, so I installed the game and got a trial key for it. I started a rogue and got to maybe level 10. I didn't like it. There was something missing from my first experience with WoW, a game that would later take over a good chunk of my life. I stopped playing that poor rogue long before my 10 day trial.
Some time time passed and another friend tried to get me into WoW. Again, I was hesitant to even bother, telling them I didn't like the game at all last time. They said that I must have started with the wrong class and should check it out again. At this time I still worked a lot of hours and had little time for the game, but figured, what the hell? So I again installed the game and started my free trial. This was right as Burning Crusade (the first Expansion pack) was about to come out. My friend, who had been playing for a little while now, sat down with me as I chose my class and race. He played an Alliance Human Paladin. I decided I would too play a Human, but wasn't sure I'd like playing a Pally. He explained me to the strengths and weaknesses of each class the best he could, so I could get a good feeling for what I'd enjoy playing. He recomended to me a Warlock. He told me about them, their love for the dark arts and use of demons. How could such a class be availble on the "good guys" side I wondered. Summoning demons to fight along side of me interested me greatly and this was the class I chose. From that point on, I pretty much never looked back. Though I have quit and taken breaks on and off a few times (all of them only in this current Expansion), something always brings me back.
There is something about this game that people who do not play can not explain. I use my experience with WoW as the focus for this story because it is the MMORPG that I play. Other than lineage I have never really strayed my loyalty from Blizzard. I love what they do with the game. I love the lore of the game, which sometimes even rivals my love for Star Wars lore. Anyone who plays MMORPGs probablly feels the same about the game that they're playing. If they didn't why would they put up with the monthly subscription fees. MMORPG players all play for various reasons. I play because I love video games. Well made video games are worth ever penny to me, because they take me someplace that only things like video games and books and movies can take us. I play because I like having a community when I log on. I have made some really great friends, many that I have never met and probably never will, while playing WoW. It sounds wierd to many who don't play games online.
I have turned a few close friends, who couldn't understand my enjoyment out of the game, into WoW players. My girl friend is one of them. She would complain that I was on too much, or that she was bored, as I would be on sometimes when she would get to my house. I talked her into trying it out. She started a Night Elf Druid, and has pretty much been playing ever since then. She plays because she enjoys the community as well. She isn't like me, she doesn't care about have the best gear or about raiding the newest dungeon. She plays for fun and to meet new people, which I think is awesome. She isn't a gamer to the core like I am. I would describe her as a more casual player, who simply enjoys the game and the lore. Something I think there is nothing wrong with.
Then there is my friend Joe. All he ever did was bad mouth this game, something I couldn't even begin to understand, as he used to play Lineage II with me. I offered to let him try and play the game and all he was interested in was trying to run around naked and spam people with rude or sexual driven comments. He took the game as a joke and wasn't interested. It didn't stay that way forever. For whatever reason, he decided to give it another try about 6-8 months later, though still not taking it super serious, as his Hunter's name is Vahjj. This time the enjoyment of the game stuck a bit more. He purchased the game and continued playing. Like me, Joe is a gamer at heart. He leveled to 80 (the current level cap) and began to run stuff with us, as we tried to gear him up. His playing time began to decrease long before he was any where near geared as life began to get in the way. It is hard to find time to play, when a lot of people around you don't play. I was lucky, my girl friend played WoW. Not all of us can be so lucky. But just like me, something brought him back into playing again (which, caused me to come back after a few months away).
What is all this getting at? Well, I think it's crazy how mainstream MMORPGS have become. Like I said before, when I played Lineage we dare not talk about in public. I didn't want my non-gaming friends to know that I was playing Lineage.
While there is still some stigma to playing MMORPGs, it is nearly gone. It is no longer a game that the dorkiest of dorks played, but is simply just another form of game play. There is no stigmatic differenance between those who playing WoW and those who play Modern War 2 on their PS3 and 360. Hell, most of the guys in my guild all play Modern War 2 as well.
Playing MMORPGs used to be something lame to do. No one popular or famous would have ever ascociated themselves with these types of games 10 years ago. But a lot of things change. I know you all have seen the WoW commercials starting Mr. T, William Shatner, Verne Troyer and other famous faces. While I have my doubts that these people actually play WoW, the fact is they are still putting their famous faces on the brand, which just goes to show how much times have changed. Society is beginning to accept people who spend a lot of time in cyber space. Though, it will be some time before binge gamers are accepted, the MMO playing nerd is earning their spot in a socially acceptable society.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Why I chose ps3
It can be difficult for many non fan boys out there to chose the right system for their personal tastes. Each of the big three, Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft, have something great to offer each person. For me it wasn't a tough choice, because when I bought my ps3 I did my research. I knew that Sony was the right system for me. And with that said, let me tell you that I am no Sony fan boy. I've owned nearly every mainstream video game system to come out since the NES. I owned both a PS1 and an N64. In the 128 bit wars I chose the Sega Dreamcast over the Xbox and PS2. I only jumped to the XBox after the Dreamcast lay dead in the water. I eventually even owned a ps2. I loved my Xbox more than I ever loved my ps2.
But in this generation of console wars, I pledged my allegiance to Sony and their flagship, the PS3. Not because I am some Sony Fan Boy who will buy anything sony puts out (yea, I'm talking to you apple fans), but because I believed it would be the best fit for me. I bought one back when they were still $499. I bought four games with it, each $59.99 and an extra controller, $54.99 and charging dock $19.99. So I dropped a nice chunk of change on my investment. Thats right, I called in an investment.
I invested my hard earned money into the PS3 because it was to be the corner stone of my entertainment center. The Ps2 and Xbox both took care of the need to have a DVD player AND a video game system hooked up to the same TV. The PS3 took it one step further, and eliminated the need to have nearly ANYTHING else hooked up to my TV. Not only can the PS3 play nearly all formats of video (except .flv and .mkv =/ ) but it also has a built in media server. This means I can stream music, pictures and video over my wireless system to my BUILT in wireless on the PS3. It does this very easily and very well, as long as you have a sufficient internet plan. I also do not need to purchase a Blu-ray player, since the PS3 is one. Not only is it one, it was, for a long time, the BEST one on the market. Though there are a few better ones now, the PS3 still is in the top handful of them and is the easiet to update. I'm sorry if you just bought a Blu-ray player and now want to get into the 3D home theater business. Better sell that new Blu-ray player and buy a brand new 3D Blu-ray player. Oh, that is, unless you own a PS3, thanks to a firm ware update, Sony has that covered.
I also liked the idea of the built in wireless, which to me is so common on devices now a days that this is necessary out of the box for me. I also don't like batteries. Wireless controllers used to always use batteries. The Wii uses them and the 360 uses them. The PS3 does not. I like that I can charge the controller, not have to purchase batteries or anything. A charging station isn't even needed, they come with a usb cord to charge the controller. The card slots on the older models, like mine are also useful, though not needed.
Why not a Wii?
I've always loved Nintendo's systems. I mean the NES was my first system. I owned an SNES and an N64. I've had nearly every Gameboy (up until the DS) and love their characters and game design. The Wii is no different. It's an awesome console, for the right people. The whole motion controller thing was so futuristic and awesome when it came out. Except, it just never really worked the way Nintendo promised. They advertised 1:1 ratio of movement, but delivered nothing close to that. The Wii Motion Plus add on seems to have helped that, from what I hear. Though we have 4 Wiimotes that we use, which would require 4 Motion Plus addons. So I have to spend more money on the controllers than I want to, just for it to do something Nintendo claimed it should do out of the box. I'm not happy with that, which is why I have not bought them. I also do not like how long it takes for actual good games to come out. Nearly every game released on the Wii is by some crappy third party developer that makes the same crappy party games over and over. That said, when Nintendo releases one of its own games, the quality of the game is amazing and is nearly always great. There is just too much crap in between for me to shovel through. Another thing that always bugged me was that it never really FELT like a next gen console. There is no great jump from what the Wii can do from what the Gamecube already did. I mean the graphics ARE better, but not truly next generation. The only next-gen thing about the Wii is the motion controllers.
The Pros
dude, its freaking Nintendo
Great First Party Games
Built it Wi-Fi
Motion Controllers (when they work right)
Backwards compatible with all Gamecube games
Great for casual gamers
The Cons
Lack of great 3rd party titles
Too much shovel ware
Lackluster internet play
Motion Controllers (since they don't work nearly well enough)
Have to buy Wii Motion Plus to get near 1:1
Have to buy charger set up so you don't run on batteries
Why not a 360?
Microsoft beat all the competition to the next-gen battle field by about a year. The 360 was the only available next-gen system to the public for a while. It was affordable, offering a few different versions with different hard drive sizes, and had a great gaming library set up. Microsoft also brought what they learned from helping to pioneer online console gaming with the original XBox. XBox Live, their online service, launched with the 360 and allowed players to play online games from their consoles better than any system before it ever had. This came at a price though. The basic XBox live year subscription is 49.99 I believe (too lazy to Google it to check), and they offer different levels of subscription with different benefits as well. The system was much cheaper than the PS3 when the PS3 launched, but it came with much less. The 360 was not HDMI ready out of the box, not the first few batches at least. It also did not have Wi-Fi built it, you had to buy one, which was $99.99. That put the xbox elite up there with the PS3 at that time. It also did not have a high-def movie player. Sony backed their Blu-ray of course, while Microsoft jumped on board with an addon drive for people that wanted to watch HD DVDs. These people, who I feel very sorry for with the quick death of HD DVD, paid somewhere between $120-$150 to buy these drives. That puts the 360 over the price of the PS3, something I always tried to explain to people, especially fan boys, usually to no avail. While these were major drawbacks for many people, who at that time, decided to go with a PS3, the real problem came down the road a little bit.
If you have ever owned a 360 or had close friends that do, you know about the dreded Red Ring of Death. In a quick explanation, this happens because of the lack of cooling inside the 360. Microsoft designed cooling system very poorly. A quick google of pictures of the mother board will show you this. Last time I read some numbers, I think somewhere around 55-65% of all 360s were effected by this failure. Microsoft did what they had to do, and covered this problem for any user that has it and will fix it for free. You will still be without a 360 for a while, since you have to mail it to them, and I believe you have to cover shipping, though I could be wrong. This is one of the main reasons I decided to roll with the PS3. I wanted a system that I could use day and night, and not worry about this issue. PS3s will over heat as well, though it is far more rare than a 360. Yellow Light of Death on a PS3 is no where near as common as having a Red Ringed 360. I have had two Red Ringed systems, which each got much less play time than my PS3 ever has. My PS3 is still running great though.
The 360 does have a very large game library, though not every game is very good. They, just like the PS3 have a lot of very good exclusive games (meaning, they only come to one console). Nearly every game EA or Ubisoft or Activision make come to both 360 and the PS3. The games will nearly always run better on the PS3 than the 360 since it is more powerful. The only downside is the PS3 is a bit harder for developers to use than a 360. The programming is more difficult, but this is not an issue like it used to me, now that developers have really learned the system well.
The Pros
Lots of Games
XBox Live
Was a bit cheaper (w/out adding in Wi-Fi and HD DVD)
Great First Party Games and exclusives
The Cons
No built in Wi-Fi
No high def movie support
Controllers need batteries
Not as reliable as they should be (aka Red Ring of Death)
Bulky and cheap feeling
Noisy Disc drive and fans
Having to pay to play online.
It's obvious that each system will have pros and cons. I just feel that the PS3 has many more pros, than cons. 360 guys will bash the free PlayStation Network (used to play games online), because it does not feel like more of a community. News flash guys, its free for us to play. We don't care. Sony, just in case we do care, just launched PlayStation Plus this week. A pay-to-play online service, modeled after XBox Live I'm sure, which will give users many of the features of Live. The upside to this is it is now available to users that want those features, while allowing those of us who don't, to continue to play online FOR FREE.
After owning each system I use my PS3 more than any of the others. The graphics are better, the interface feels better, and to me, the PS3 exclusive games are better (I don't really care for Halo's online multilayer anymore after playing so many hours of Modern War 1 and 2.
I can only give out the facts as I get them, and let everyone know my own taste. I love my PS3 and have since the day I bought it. Most of the time my 360 sat and collected dust, unless a new 360 exclusive, that was actually really good, came out. I would rather play any 3rd party game (call of Duty, Need for Speed, Fallout and so on) on my PS3. They simply look better and play better.
There are personal things I can't factor in to help people to make the right decision. You have to be comfortable playing it, so if you dont like a system's default controllers, dont buy it. I also can't help persuade fan boys. If you're a Microsoft Fan Boy, don't bother commenting on this, because chances are I won't be able to talk any sense into you, even using facts.
This is simply why I chose the PS3 and why I think you should too. You're welcome to buy whatever you like of course.
But in this generation of console wars, I pledged my allegiance to Sony and their flagship, the PS3. Not because I am some Sony Fan Boy who will buy anything sony puts out (yea, I'm talking to you apple fans), but because I believed it would be the best fit for me. I bought one back when they were still $499. I bought four games with it, each $59.99 and an extra controller, $54.99 and charging dock $19.99. So I dropped a nice chunk of change on my investment. Thats right, I called in an investment.
I invested my hard earned money into the PS3 because it was to be the corner stone of my entertainment center. The Ps2 and Xbox both took care of the need to have a DVD player AND a video game system hooked up to the same TV. The PS3 took it one step further, and eliminated the need to have nearly ANYTHING else hooked up to my TV. Not only can the PS3 play nearly all formats of video (except .flv and .mkv =/ ) but it also has a built in media server. This means I can stream music, pictures and video over my wireless system to my BUILT in wireless on the PS3. It does this very easily and very well, as long as you have a sufficient internet plan. I also do not need to purchase a Blu-ray player, since the PS3 is one. Not only is it one, it was, for a long time, the BEST one on the market. Though there are a few better ones now, the PS3 still is in the top handful of them and is the easiet to update. I'm sorry if you just bought a Blu-ray player and now want to get into the 3D home theater business. Better sell that new Blu-ray player and buy a brand new 3D Blu-ray player. Oh, that is, unless you own a PS3, thanks to a firm ware update, Sony has that covered.
I also liked the idea of the built in wireless, which to me is so common on devices now a days that this is necessary out of the box for me. I also don't like batteries. Wireless controllers used to always use batteries. The Wii uses them and the 360 uses them. The PS3 does not. I like that I can charge the controller, not have to purchase batteries or anything. A charging station isn't even needed, they come with a usb cord to charge the controller. The card slots on the older models, like mine are also useful, though not needed.
Why not a Wii?
I've always loved Nintendo's systems. I mean the NES was my first system. I owned an SNES and an N64. I've had nearly every Gameboy (up until the DS) and love their characters and game design. The Wii is no different. It's an awesome console, for the right people. The whole motion controller thing was so futuristic and awesome when it came out. Except, it just never really worked the way Nintendo promised. They advertised 1:1 ratio of movement, but delivered nothing close to that. The Wii Motion Plus add on seems to have helped that, from what I hear. Though we have 4 Wiimotes that we use, which would require 4 Motion Plus addons. So I have to spend more money on the controllers than I want to, just for it to do something Nintendo claimed it should do out of the box. I'm not happy with that, which is why I have not bought them. I also do not like how long it takes for actual good games to come out. Nearly every game released on the Wii is by some crappy third party developer that makes the same crappy party games over and over. That said, when Nintendo releases one of its own games, the quality of the game is amazing and is nearly always great. There is just too much crap in between for me to shovel through. Another thing that always bugged me was that it never really FELT like a next gen console. There is no great jump from what the Wii can do from what the Gamecube already did. I mean the graphics ARE better, but not truly next generation. The only next-gen thing about the Wii is the motion controllers.
The Pros
dude, its freaking Nintendo
Great First Party Games
Built it Wi-Fi
Motion Controllers (when they work right)
Backwards compatible with all Gamecube games
Great for casual gamers
The Cons
Lack of great 3rd party titles
Too much shovel ware
Lackluster internet play
Motion Controllers (since they don't work nearly well enough)
Have to buy Wii Motion Plus to get near 1:1
Have to buy charger set up so you don't run on batteries
Why not a 360?
Microsoft beat all the competition to the next-gen battle field by about a year. The 360 was the only available next-gen system to the public for a while. It was affordable, offering a few different versions with different hard drive sizes, and had a great gaming library set up. Microsoft also brought what they learned from helping to pioneer online console gaming with the original XBox. XBox Live, their online service, launched with the 360 and allowed players to play online games from their consoles better than any system before it ever had. This came at a price though. The basic XBox live year subscription is 49.99 I believe (too lazy to Google it to check), and they offer different levels of subscription with different benefits as well. The system was much cheaper than the PS3 when the PS3 launched, but it came with much less. The 360 was not HDMI ready out of the box, not the first few batches at least. It also did not have Wi-Fi built it, you had to buy one, which was $99.99. That put the xbox elite up there with the PS3 at that time. It also did not have a high-def movie player. Sony backed their Blu-ray of course, while Microsoft jumped on board with an addon drive for people that wanted to watch HD DVDs. These people, who I feel very sorry for with the quick death of HD DVD, paid somewhere between $120-$150 to buy these drives. That puts the 360 over the price of the PS3, something I always tried to explain to people, especially fan boys, usually to no avail. While these were major drawbacks for many people, who at that time, decided to go with a PS3, the real problem came down the road a little bit.
If you have ever owned a 360 or had close friends that do, you know about the dreded Red Ring of Death. In a quick explanation, this happens because of the lack of cooling inside the 360. Microsoft designed cooling system very poorly. A quick google of pictures of the mother board will show you this. Last time I read some numbers, I think somewhere around 55-65% of all 360s were effected by this failure. Microsoft did what they had to do, and covered this problem for any user that has it and will fix it for free. You will still be without a 360 for a while, since you have to mail it to them, and I believe you have to cover shipping, though I could be wrong. This is one of the main reasons I decided to roll with the PS3. I wanted a system that I could use day and night, and not worry about this issue. PS3s will over heat as well, though it is far more rare than a 360. Yellow Light of Death on a PS3 is no where near as common as having a Red Ringed 360. I have had two Red Ringed systems, which each got much less play time than my PS3 ever has. My PS3 is still running great though.
The 360 does have a very large game library, though not every game is very good. They, just like the PS3 have a lot of very good exclusive games (meaning, they only come to one console). Nearly every game EA or Ubisoft or Activision make come to both 360 and the PS3. The games will nearly always run better on the PS3 than the 360 since it is more powerful. The only downside is the PS3 is a bit harder for developers to use than a 360. The programming is more difficult, but this is not an issue like it used to me, now that developers have really learned the system well.
The Pros
Lots of Games
XBox Live
Was a bit cheaper (w/out adding in Wi-Fi and HD DVD)
Great First Party Games and exclusives
The Cons
No built in Wi-Fi
No high def movie support
Controllers need batteries
Not as reliable as they should be (aka Red Ring of Death)
Bulky and cheap feeling
Noisy Disc drive and fans
Having to pay to play online.
It's obvious that each system will have pros and cons. I just feel that the PS3 has many more pros, than cons. 360 guys will bash the free PlayStation Network (used to play games online), because it does not feel like more of a community. News flash guys, its free for us to play. We don't care. Sony, just in case we do care, just launched PlayStation Plus this week. A pay-to-play online service, modeled after XBox Live I'm sure, which will give users many of the features of Live. The upside to this is it is now available to users that want those features, while allowing those of us who don't, to continue to play online FOR FREE.
After owning each system I use my PS3 more than any of the others. The graphics are better, the interface feels better, and to me, the PS3 exclusive games are better (I don't really care for Halo's online multilayer anymore after playing so many hours of Modern War 1 and 2.
I can only give out the facts as I get them, and let everyone know my own taste. I love my PS3 and have since the day I bought it. Most of the time my 360 sat and collected dust, unless a new 360 exclusive, that was actually really good, came out. I would rather play any 3rd party game (call of Duty, Need for Speed, Fallout and so on) on my PS3. They simply look better and play better.
There are personal things I can't factor in to help people to make the right decision. You have to be comfortable playing it, so if you dont like a system's default controllers, dont buy it. I also can't help persuade fan boys. If you're a Microsoft Fan Boy, don't bother commenting on this, because chances are I won't be able to talk any sense into you, even using facts.
This is simply why I chose the PS3 and why I think you should too. You're welcome to buy whatever you like of course.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
3D Revolution?
3D is back with a vengeance, just like Bruce Willis in a Die Hard movie. Our parents can probably remember seeing some of those weird movies with red and blue lines and those funny cardboard glasses with the red and blue lenses. But this new revolution ain't your mom and dads 3D. This new revolution is all about a crisp digital picture and less goofy looking 3D glasses.
Over the past few years 3D has been slowing building steam (with Superman Returns and the Happy Potter movies using a few 3D scenes). Disney has helped popularize 3D again, but releasing (and re-releasing) many of their CG cartoons in 3D. All of this momentum built up until Avatar took 3D to a new level.
I have been called a 3D Nazi by a few friends that swear by 3D (*cough Arman cough*), but I really just don't see the point to it. I mean, my mind knows its just an optical illusion, and usually not a very good one (yes, I'm looking at you Clash of the Titans). I'm all for things that add to the art of story telling. I think special effects have helped add to the story telling in many new movies (though they can also take away from the story by being too over the top (of course someone should tell that to George Lucas), but I don't think 3D, at this stage, adds anything to the movie. I did not feel the avatar story anymore in 3D than I did in 2D.
I think that since it doesn't add anything to the story or feel of a movie, that it really isn't needed. I think that film companies simply are using this 3D fad as a gimmick to make easy money. They make more money because they charge a few bucks more for the ticket (more than a few bucks if you see it in IMax 3D).
Because companies have shown they can make a ton more money showing movies in 3D, more companies have decided to cash in on this cash cow. 3D is already coming into our homes in the forms of 3D TVs and Blu_ray players. It will also be invading video games within the next year with the release of Nintendo's 3DS hand held system and Sony via the PS3 (which got an update to be a legit 3D Blu-ray player). Cause that's what I want to do for hours on end, wear some glasses while I play Gran Turismo or Killzone 3 on my ps3
I'll buy into the idea of 3D when it is more like something out of a sci-fi movie. When we're watching holograms, projected out of something in the floor or roof, movie around in a full 3D environment, then I'll get on board. At that point the image will be actually 3D. This new movement is really more like 2.5D than 3D.
Sometimes I feel that I am the only one in the world who does not care for 3D. I'm not just being a cheap bastard either. If I felt 3D was worth it I would shell out the extra money for it. I hope 3D, in this form, is simply a fad until something better comes along.
let me know where you stand on the 3D war. Are you for it? Against it? Or do you simply not really care.
Over the past few years 3D has been slowing building steam (with Superman Returns and the Happy Potter movies using a few 3D scenes). Disney has helped popularize 3D again, but releasing (and re-releasing) many of their CG cartoons in 3D. All of this momentum built up until Avatar took 3D to a new level.
I have been called a 3D Nazi by a few friends that swear by 3D (*cough Arman cough*), but I really just don't see the point to it. I mean, my mind knows its just an optical illusion, and usually not a very good one (yes, I'm looking at you Clash of the Titans). I'm all for things that add to the art of story telling. I think special effects have helped add to the story telling in many new movies (though they can also take away from the story by being too over the top (of course someone should tell that to George Lucas), but I don't think 3D, at this stage, adds anything to the movie. I did not feel the avatar story anymore in 3D than I did in 2D.
I think that since it doesn't add anything to the story or feel of a movie, that it really isn't needed. I think that film companies simply are using this 3D fad as a gimmick to make easy money. They make more money because they charge a few bucks more for the ticket (more than a few bucks if you see it in IMax 3D).
Because companies have shown they can make a ton more money showing movies in 3D, more companies have decided to cash in on this cash cow. 3D is already coming into our homes in the forms of 3D TVs and Blu_ray players. It will also be invading video games within the next year with the release of Nintendo's 3DS hand held system and Sony via the PS3 (which got an update to be a legit 3D Blu-ray player). Cause that's what I want to do for hours on end, wear some glasses while I play Gran Turismo or Killzone 3 on my ps3
I'll buy into the idea of 3D when it is more like something out of a sci-fi movie. When we're watching holograms, projected out of something in the floor or roof, movie around in a full 3D environment, then I'll get on board. At that point the image will be actually 3D. This new movement is really more like 2.5D than 3D.
Sometimes I feel that I am the only one in the world who does not care for 3D. I'm not just being a cheap bastard either. If I felt 3D was worth it I would shell out the extra money for it. I hope 3D, in this form, is simply a fad until something better comes along.
let me know where you stand on the 3D war. Are you for it? Against it? Or do you simply not really care.
A Nerd's World: Get ready to Move
A Nerd's World: Get ready to Move: "Sony announced the PlayStation Move, a motion controller system that looks much like the Wii controller (except with a very cool LED glowing..."
Get ready to Move
Sony announced the PlayStation Move, a motion controller system that looks much like the Wii controller (except with a very cool LED glowing ball on the end), last year at the E3 convention. There wasn't much official news about it from then until last week, during the 2010 E3. Sony announced price ranges, as well as games and functionality.
While the Move is definitely trying to pull in some of the casual games that may be bored with the Wii's lack of good games (other than 1st party Nintendo games), Sony promises that the hardcore gamer will like it too. Sony promises 1:1 movement ratio with the Move controller, something Nintendo claimed when the Wii first released, though we later found out Nintendo's claim for 1:1 was off (which is why they release Wii Motion Plus as an add on to controllers). Instead of using an RF system like the Wii, the Move's controller is tracked by using the PlayStation Eye. The camera in the PlayStation Eye tracks the LEDs in the sphere on the end of the controller.
The demos I watched really did seem to be 1:1 ratio. The onscreen avatars seemed to move exactly the way the people holding the controller did. Sony announced a few games for the Move, which included a Harry Potter-ish wizard game call Sorcery. This game looks amazing to me. You can select different spells and cast them by flinging the wand at the screen. I think the demo really showed off the movement quality that Sony claims is possible with the Move. The person running the demo had no problem selecting spells quickly and easily, and was very accurate in casting them. The move also promises to add functionality to the First Person Shooter genre. Adding a wii-like nunchuk to the Move's main controller, you can control movement of your character better than you ever good with the Wii. The demos they ran playing games that would normally require a controller looked very good. The aiming seemed much more fluid than what we are used to with the Wii, which usually doesn't do exactly what you want it to do.
For me to be excited about the PlayStation Move is a surprise to me. I really don't care of the Wii. I think it's fun for party like games, Wii Sports and games like that, but doesn't translate well to more hardcore games (Super Mario Bros. Wii, Mario Cart, Metroid). Move looks like it may be out to change our perception of laggy, glitchy and frustrating motion control. If Sony can get movement ratio to 1:1 and bring out quality games that aren't just thrown together, or rip offs of popular wii games, then I will definitely be on board for this party.
While the Move is definitely trying to pull in some of the casual games that may be bored with the Wii's lack of good games (other than 1st party Nintendo games), Sony promises that the hardcore gamer will like it too. Sony promises 1:1 movement ratio with the Move controller, something Nintendo claimed when the Wii first released, though we later found out Nintendo's claim for 1:1 was off (which is why they release Wii Motion Plus as an add on to controllers). Instead of using an RF system like the Wii, the Move's controller is tracked by using the PlayStation Eye. The camera in the PlayStation Eye tracks the LEDs in the sphere on the end of the controller.
The demos I watched really did seem to be 1:1 ratio. The onscreen avatars seemed to move exactly the way the people holding the controller did. Sony announced a few games for the Move, which included a Harry Potter-ish wizard game call Sorcery. This game looks amazing to me. You can select different spells and cast them by flinging the wand at the screen. I think the demo really showed off the movement quality that Sony claims is possible with the Move. The person running the demo had no problem selecting spells quickly and easily, and was very accurate in casting them. The move also promises to add functionality to the First Person Shooter genre. Adding a wii-like nunchuk to the Move's main controller, you can control movement of your character better than you ever good with the Wii. The demos they ran playing games that would normally require a controller looked very good. The aiming seemed much more fluid than what we are used to with the Wii, which usually doesn't do exactly what you want it to do.
For me to be excited about the PlayStation Move is a surprise to me. I really don't care of the Wii. I think it's fun for party like games, Wii Sports and games like that, but doesn't translate well to more hardcore games (Super Mario Bros. Wii, Mario Cart, Metroid). Move looks like it may be out to change our perception of laggy, glitchy and frustrating motion control. If Sony can get movement ratio to 1:1 and bring out quality games that aren't just thrown together, or rip offs of popular wii games, then I will definitely be on board for this party.
To Infinity, and Beyond!
I watched Toy Story 3 over the weekend because I was bored at my house. You can ask anyone that knows me and they'll tell you, I was not looking forward to this movie at all. I love sequels as much as the next guy, but just felt this movie wasn't needed. I didn't really like Toy Story 2 nearly as much as I liked the original.
Enough lallygagging, you're here for a review.
With that said, I was simply blown away by this movie. I went into it expecting not to like it. Expecting to be sitting there, asking myself, "why did they feel the need to make another one?" Instead, I found myself glad they made another one, something I can not say about many sequels. Of course, its a Disney Pixar movie, what else should I have expected.
I felt that the movie was really made for the people that were kids when the original came out. The movie seemed directed towards a more adult audience than I was expecting. It had much darker overtones than any other Pixar movie I have ever seen, which really helped me get drawn into the movie.
Having many older characters return (nearly all of them, except the voice of Slinky Dog, Jim Varney, who passed away shortly after Toy Story 2), also helped me get pulled in. It was nice to hear everyone voiced by the original actors (even Andy was voiced by the same kid, now an adult, that voiced him in the first two movies). I can't stand when they make sequels and change the characters around, like we'll never notice.
I touched on the mature themes of this movie a bit earlier. The theme of being wanted/needed is very prominent in the movie. The toys are feeling abandoned by Andy, who is now to old to play with his toys. They do a great job making you feel what the toys are going through, allowing you to feel the angst and rejection they feel. It made me really feel bad about all those toys I simply threw away or donated when I was younger. Made me wonder how they felt, if they felt anything at all. The theme of mortality is also throughout the movie. As they show toys that simply want to survive and continue to be someone's special toy.
The movie made me care about characters I had forgotten I cared about. That is the key to great story telling. Without giving any spoilers, there are some heavy, emotional scenes, that will bring tears to many peoples eyes. I recommend this movie to everyone who ever loved the original movie as a kid, or even as an adult. This movie is a great movie to take your family to, or even just the girl friend. You will not feel ripped off after the credits roll at how much you spent, unless you see it in 3D...which I don't recommend, but that's an entirely different blog for a different time.
Enough lallygagging, you're here for a review.
With that said, I was simply blown away by this movie. I went into it expecting not to like it. Expecting to be sitting there, asking myself, "why did they feel the need to make another one?" Instead, I found myself glad they made another one, something I can not say about many sequels. Of course, its a Disney Pixar movie, what else should I have expected.
I felt that the movie was really made for the people that were kids when the original came out. The movie seemed directed towards a more adult audience than I was expecting. It had much darker overtones than any other Pixar movie I have ever seen, which really helped me get drawn into the movie.
Having many older characters return (nearly all of them, except the voice of Slinky Dog, Jim Varney, who passed away shortly after Toy Story 2), also helped me get pulled in. It was nice to hear everyone voiced by the original actors (even Andy was voiced by the same kid, now an adult, that voiced him in the first two movies). I can't stand when they make sequels and change the characters around, like we'll never notice.
I touched on the mature themes of this movie a bit earlier. The theme of being wanted/needed is very prominent in the movie. The toys are feeling abandoned by Andy, who is now to old to play with his toys. They do a great job making you feel what the toys are going through, allowing you to feel the angst and rejection they feel. It made me really feel bad about all those toys I simply threw away or donated when I was younger. Made me wonder how they felt, if they felt anything at all. The theme of mortality is also throughout the movie. As they show toys that simply want to survive and continue to be someone's special toy.
The movie made me care about characters I had forgotten I cared about. That is the key to great story telling. Without giving any spoilers, there are some heavy, emotional scenes, that will bring tears to many peoples eyes. I recommend this movie to everyone who ever loved the original movie as a kid, or even as an adult. This movie is a great movie to take your family to, or even just the girl friend. You will not feel ripped off after the credits roll at how much you spent, unless you see it in 3D...which I don't recommend, but that's an entirely different blog for a different time.
How Big do you think my room is?
Thanks to Nintendo, the gaming world was introduced to the first tangible form of motion control. The Wii has been widely successful and had sold more units than both the PS3 and the Xbox360. This has prompted both Sony and Microsoft to design their own motion controllers to be used with their video game consoles. This makes me ask the question, How big do you think my room is?
Motion controlled video games can be fun. The downside to me is the space they may require to actually play them. Playing a game by yourself may not be a very big problem on the Wii, but stuff four people trying to play Mario Party in the same area, and space become limited. Some games require much more movement than Mario Party, and it can be difficult. I have a good sized bedroom, bigger than many people I know, and even when its clean, getting two or more people standing there, swinging their controllers, is a challenge.
If you watch the commercials for these motion controllers you'll usually see wide open living rooms. My problem is that most people do not have large, wide opened living rooms. Many people have smaller rooms, with a lot of furniture, namely a large coffee table. The commercials make me think that these large companies think we have all the room we need to play these games, but its really quite the contrary. Most of us have cramped spaces to play in, which are more often our bed rooms (not the living room like every commercial seems to portray).
Motion controlled video games can be fun. The downside to me is the space they may require to actually play them. Playing a game by yourself may not be a very big problem on the Wii, but stuff four people trying to play Mario Party in the same area, and space become limited. Some games require much more movement than Mario Party, and it can be difficult. I have a good sized bedroom, bigger than many people I know, and even when its clean, getting two or more people standing there, swinging their controllers, is a challenge.
If you watch the commercials for these motion controllers you'll usually see wide open living rooms. My problem is that most people do not have large, wide opened living rooms. Many people have smaller rooms, with a lot of furniture, namely a large coffee table. The commercials make me think that these large companies think we have all the room we need to play these games, but its really quite the contrary. Most of us have cramped spaces to play in, which are more often our bed rooms (not the living room like every commercial seems to portray).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)