Graphics don't matter; Honesty does

picture source: CD Projekt Red

Now that I got the chance to play Witcher 3 on my cousins Playstation, I think it's time to talk about the whole controversy surrounding this game and the implications created by the whole thing.

Nowadays it's pretty common for Games to be presented as vertical slices first. This means that a specific part of the game is shown to the public. A part that is specially designed to be as exciting and jaw dropping as possible. Often this specific slice isn't even in the finale game, but that doesn't matter. It's only created to build up Hype and get Pre-Orders. This, however, also leads to some pretty unreal expectations, which can never be fulfilled. Watch Dogs suffered from this fate. It looked good when it released, but nowhere near the level of the 2012 presentation. Also it failed to deliver on the hacking aspect that was heavily advertised. And for that no one but the developers and publishers are to blame. If you build unrealistic expectations, then don't blame the customer for calling you out on your bullshit if you fail to deliver.

But now back to the Witcher 3. It is a great looking game, no matter what some may say. It's a lot of fun. But it's also far from what was promised.

Here is a good comparison by Digital Foundry:

Now like I said, the game still looks stunning. One of the Best that is currently available on gaming platforms, and any rational person would agree. But fans often don't act rational. And I don't blame them in this case.

As a publisher you can't just continuously lie and then expect your customers to forgive you. And no matter why this happened, I'd blame the developer. Either the showed something that never existed to sell the game, or they overestimated the power of the hardware they're working on. That in itself is nothing bad of course, but the handling of this is. Coming out and telling your customers the truth is always favorable. Or at least it should be. It would stop the Shitstorm before it could develop.

Sadly this won't happen for a while. In todays AAA market graphic is pretty much the only thing to stick out. To be honest it's generally the case. Flashy graphics or an unusual artstyle are a sure way to garner a first interest in the game. Gameplay, as important as it is, comes second, because it can't be presented very well without actual hands on time.

And so the industry is in a pinch. They maneuvered themselves into a position, where they can't create the attention they need with simple demos or trailers. They need this vertical slices to create the Hype needed to sustain their business. But by doing this they slowly erode the thrust of the customer in this industry.

After all it was the industry that made graphics and resolution matter. And now it comes back to bite them in the tail.

In the end graphics don't matter, but honesty does. Nobody likes to be ripped of and by creating this unachievable image in our minds, the developers not necessarily do that, but they make us feel like it's the case. Honestly the Witcher is worth 60 bucks. It looks great and plays great. But all the trailers and ''demos'' showed a product, which, in that form, didn't exist. And we only found this out on release day. Of course the customer would feel ripped of, no matter how good the game still was. It's like ordering a hamburger and in the end you get served a slightly smaller burger than advertised. It may still taste great. It may even still allay your hunger. But you'll feel cheated no matter what. And rightfully so.

In the End companies should stop just showing us visions of what they want to do, or vertical slices, but instead show what they actually can do. Maybe stop announcing games 2-3 years before their release. Just be honest with your customers and I'm sure they will repay you.

Instead of creating a flash Hype with vertical slices and CGI Trailers, that can never be sustained, do the opposite. Create a slowly building hype, where people know exactly what to expect. Show them actual gameplay from the actual game. Over the course of its development time the game will (hopefully) grow better. The graphics will evolve and so will the expectations of the customer. But they will never outgrow, what actually exists. And if you have to cut back on some things, then be honest about it. This way you won't create a rift between you and your community.

If this continuous we may reach a time, where no one will Pre-Order something any more and buy games on Day One, because they can't be sure that the game advertised is the product they'll actually receive. And with industry being so reliant on Pre-Orders and firs week sales... What then?

And as always

thanks for reading

Majoras Mask

First let me tell you a dark secret. Before the 3DS release I hadn't played Majoras Mask. And now after I completed my 100% run I can say that this was truly a shame. It's not only one of the best Zelda games I've played, but one of the best games overall.

This post will be a short talk about why. So if any of you haven't played this game then be warned, because Spoilers are ahead. And seriously, play it!

Now I don't think I have to recap the story, but just in case, I'll do it anyway. After the events of Ocarina of Time Link has been sent back into his childhood and he and Navi parted ways. He then grabbed Epona and rode into the forgotten woods to find his lost companion. There he is ambushed by a Horror Kid wearing a strange mask. The horror kid is accompanied by two fairies, and after surviving a long fall and being turned into a Deku Scrub Link teams up with one of them to find the Horror Kid. Link then arrives in Clocktown at the center of Termina. How he got there remains a mystery, but he is directly greeted by a familiar face. The Happy Mask Salesman from Hyrule has also traveled to this strange country. He tells Link that he has to return Majoras Mask, the Mask the Horror Kid was wearing, to him, or something horrible will happen. After some small adventures Link manages to meet the Horror Kid at the top of the Clocktower. It has used the power of the Mask to make the Moon fall. Unable to stop it, Link uses the Song of Time and travels back to the beginning of the three days cycle. The Happy Mask Salesman teaches you the procedure to turn back into a human, and sends you out on your quest. You then have to bring peace to the four regions of Termina, before you can face the Horror Kid. And because you can't avert the end of the world yet, you have to travel back in time when the Moon dares to fall.

This mechanic is, to this day, unique in the video game world. And it creates a unique atmosphere which is unlike any other game I have played so far.

People often call this game the darkest Zelda and I would certainly agree. While Twilight Princess deals with dark tones and has some pretty dark imaginary, it does this in a ''In your face'' kind of way, which devalues it a little bit for me. Majoras Mask on the other way does this more naturally. The sense of dread slowly creeping into the people, while the moon descends and they slowly start to realize their fate, and then their reactions at the end, are some of the most memorable moments in gaming I had in the last few years. Especially the day. Seeing Cremia talking to Romani in the ranch at the last evening, or the pure dread of the swordsmaster and the helplessness of the postman. This is some pretty strong stuff for a Zelda game, or any game in the matter. The atmosphere created shows this deep hopelessness, but that only makes the light shine so much brighter. I'll get to what I mean later on.

Also Majoras Mask has probably the Zelda World which felt most alive to me. During the three days every NPC has his own daily routines. Anju, for example, doesn't always wait behind the counter at the inn. You can find her bringing food to her grandmother, or taking a walk to the little pond in southern clocktown. There are countless small and big scenes during these three days that help filling the game with life. This is one of the reasons why the NPCs in the game, over the course of your playthrough, grow into more than just that. You actually get a short glimpse into their lives.

And what impressed me the most, was that this game truly shows the consequences of your acts or non-acts. What I mean with this, is that in a normal videogame you maybe get a short cutscene showing you fail, before the retry screen pops up. But because this game is built on the foundation of redoing, it doesn't have to do this. For example if you don't help Romani defending the cows in the first night, you'll find the once cheerful girl completely unresponsive afterward. Something you can't fix till the next time you reset the 3 days cycle. Seeing the direct result of the player failing at something creates an incredible feeling during play. After seeing Romani in that state, saving her felt even more rewarding. Seeing the consequences of me not helping this people, increased my desire to do so. In fact on the final three days cycle before I went to the Moon for the final showdown, I did all I could to help as many people as possible. I defeated all four bosses once more, saved the Romani ranch, helped the Deku Princess, found all Zora eggs, united Kafei and Anju, released the postman, ended the endless discussion and many more.

In games like Skyrim sidequests, and even the main quest, often seem irrelevant to me, because they wait for you. No matter how much the people tell me that Alduins return is at hand, it won't happen as long as I don't progress in the quest. Some farmer may tell me that his child is dying and needs medicine quickly, but after doing a couple of other missions and wasting hours upon hours, it still hangs in there. When I don't give Kafeis pendant to Anju in time, she won't wait for him and the sidequest is impossible.

The three days cycle is ingenious because it allows the player to fail, without failing. Majoras Mask allowed us to glimpse into the world of a video game for three days, while other games often seem frozen in time. Even in some of the biggest RPGs nothing happens without the Heros incentive, which always reminds me that this is just a videogame, no matter how alive the word is otherwise. I would love to see the Majoras Mask worlddesign return someday, because as it stands Majoras Mask 3D was one of the most memorable experiences I had in a long time.

And as always

thanks for reading

source of all images: Nintendo

Splatoon release model

picture source: Nintendo

Last Thursday we didn't only get the yearly numbers from Nintendo, but also a dedicated Spatoon direct. And after extensively playing the Demo this Saturday I'm allowing myself to draw an early conclusion on the planned release model of the game.

For all of you, who didn't watch the direct, let me recap quickly. Splatoon will release on May, 28^th for 40 bucks in retail. It will feature the full single player campaign, tons of weapons and gear for customization, the Amiibo-challenges, the local 2-player battle Dojo mode and the online mode turf wars. The Splat Zones online mode will be unlocked after a number of players reached level 10. However the game will also launch with only 5 online Maps. This is the basic package of Splatoon.

But they also announced their plans to support the game long time. Over the course of the summer we continually get new maps, weapons and apparel and in august a huge update, containing two new multiplayer modes, will launch. All of these updates will be completely free, which is an important factor, because otherwise I wouldn't defend this game.

Many of the people I spoke to, were satisfied with the direct and happy with Nintendos dedication to long time support of the game, but others criticized the game for being incomplete at launch. While no one can say for sure if this is the case (we don't know anything about the length of the campaign) only 5 maps seem a little bit low for a game with such a strong online focus. So let look at this issue from two sides.

First let me say that everything discussed is based on the additional content remaining free. If the new maps and such will be offered as only paid dlc then there is absolutely no way to look at this from a positive angle.

But now lets start with the positive outlook on the release plans. Long term support is secure. For a new IP we are looking at a massive wave of post-launch support. From the commercials to the presentations, everything shows that Nintendo intends to make Splatoon big. This is great news for anyone planning on buying the game. There will be always something new to try out an play. New maps to explore. New gear to combine. And in August two new modes. This secures a long lasting motivation and helps in building a strong community. It's not companies, which make a game big, but the community. Nintendo seems to have realized this and support the process of building a strong community with all their might. By staggering the release of new content across the whole summer they won't allow the game to disappear into the fabled summer hole. They create the motivation to always come back and try the new content. And from what I've seen of the game during the stress test, I'm pretty sure that many people will love to do that, because Splatoon is build on an addictive and fun foundation.

Now let's talk about the dangers of this release model. Yes they outlook of future content looks rather rosy, but what does it help if the initial content is lacking. Only 5 multiplayer maps doesn't sound like much and if you played the stress test, in fact, it isn't. Matches are action packed but short and even with the playable maps only rotating every 2 hours you'll soon have seen everything. If you play a new game extensively there won't be too much content at the beginning. At least in multiplayer. The maps are an important factor in Splatoon and the low number could severely limit the potential of the game.

In the end it all depends on the after releas schedule of Nintendo. If the manage to support the game with a stream of new content continuously over the summer I don't think this model will fail. If they take to long to provide additional maps, then it could definitively turn ugly pretty quickly. If the campaign is entertaining and not to short and the first new maps launch alongside the Splat Zones mode one or two weeks after launch, Splatoon is looking at a bright future.

What you think of this release model really boils down to the simple question of trust. Do you trust Nintendo or are you skeptic? I personally trust them, but if the screw this up, it has probably been the last time. So far I see no indicators for this, but it's not like Nintendo is immune to such things *cough* Xenoblade DLC *cough* Smahs Bros. Mii-Fighter Costumes *cough*

What are you thoughts about Splatoons release mode? Have you played the demo? Did you like it?

And as always

thanks for reading

The game the Wii-U deserved, but not the one it needed

Mario 3D World is a great game. It plays perfectly, has great leveldesign, looks awesome and is simply a blast from start to finish. Next to Wonderful 101 and A Link between worlds it was the best game I played int 2013. I just wanted to make this clear, before talking about how it was not the game the Wii-U needed.

It sold great. There is no denying that. And it received critical praise all over the globe. But it also felt quite safe. There is nothing wrong with that of course, but 3D World was not the game the Wii-U needed. I just think that most people expected more than a 3D Land sequel for Marios first HD adventure, no matter how good the final game actually was. From start to finish 3D World played it mostly safe. It was a more grounded adventure after the grandness of Mario Galaxy, but this isn't what brings the people to your console. It lacked the WOW factor to do that. While Super Mario Galaxy was a grand undertaking aimed to bring many people to the Wii, Mario 3D World felt more like an adventure to maintain. It would have been a better fit for a successful console, later in its lifecycle. Of course Nintendo couldn't know that when they launched the Wii-U. 3D World was probably well in development at that time, but, like so many things from the Wii-U, it can serve as a lesson for the future.

I think many expected more from Nintendos first HD console in it's first year and I can't blame them. While New Super Mario Bros. U was the best in the series it released to closely to New Super Mario Bros. 2 and didn't offer anything truly new. And 3D World is still a 3D Land sequel. Bigger and better in every aspect, but many people just shrugged it off because they can already play a similar game on their 3DS. Of course it sold well, but it was mostly the hardcore Nintendo Fans, who had already bought the Wii-U. To put it simply 3D World wasn't a game that sold Wii-Us but a game that sold to already existing Wii-U owners.

Then what kind of game should the next Mario be? I think they should go back to the style of Mario 64 and Sunshine. Galaxy is a great game, but I don't want a Super Mario Galaxy 3. I would prefer them to go back to the world design of the first two 3D Marios instead of the more obstacle course oriented approach in Galaxy. What I mean with that, is that Galaxy, if you look at it from a neutral standpoint, has very little exploration. Every Star is pretty much self confined and at the end of a specific obstacle course. While in Mario 64 or Sunshine you could find Stars other than the one you selected at the beginning. In Super Mario Galaxy the scenery was grand, but not the levels themselves. And I think Mario has great potential in that direction. They only need to use it.

Let's give an example of what I would love to see in a Mario Game. And for that I want you to take a look at a game that overflows with details, imagination and variety. Mario Kart 8

How awesome would this course be as a level in a 3D Mario. The power of the Wii-U (and following consoles) allows for such imaginative level design. This level could play with Mario starting at the base of the great tree and slowly advancing upwards till he reaches the Shy Guy village up top.(And then slides back down with the huge waterslide^^) With different tasks and branches on his way upwards. Also they should fully embrace the concept of adventure and wonder with the game. When entering a level there shouldn't be a specific star to select, but you should just get thrown into the world. Let the players awaken their inner adventurer. Let them explore the worlds at their own pace and find their own way. Of course the level design would need to be adjusted to such a new playstyle, but I trust Nintendo to pull this off. Also this would open up a lot of possibilities. For example one star in the hypothetical Wild Woods stage could involve the Toads trying to repair their elevator to the treetops. After you helped them you would have swift access to the Shy Guy village. Or you could find another way towards the treetops and maybe discover one or two Stars along that path. This way every player would find their own, unique way of approaching the worlds and completing them. Like I said this would be challenging to design, but it would definitely be worth the effort.

Also I hope they leave the boring, well-trod paths of the standard Mario Worlds. I said this once, and the DLC only strengthened this opinion, but I think that Mario Kart 8 shows what could be possible in 3D Marios. Wild Woods blows every standard wood themed level in past Mario Games out of the water with it's design and imagination. Mount Wario would make for a grand stage with lots of variety. Why not have a stage taking place in Mushroom City from Double Dash or in the Water Park? It would open up a lot of new possibilities to gain stars. 3D World did something like that with the Circus and Japanese Theme and it was great. I would love Nintendo to embrace this concept fully with their next Mario game. Mario Kart 8 shows that it is possible to have levels like Super Bell Subway or Sunshine Airport, which are ''Outside the Box'', but still retain the distinctive Mario feel.

So the cornerstones for the next Mario game should be:

• Exploration
• Big Levels to support this playstyle
• Imaginative Level design and themes outside the standard Mario palette

Just imagine that instead of the 3D World trailer E3 2013 showed Mario in Wild Woods. First he masters challenging platform

ing to climb to the top. Then a panning shot of the Shy Guy village inside the tree tops. We see him completing a task and gaining a Power Star... and the level continues directly because there still is much to explore. At the end of the trailer we can see Mario Jump down the tree in an awesome panorama shot.

This would certainly be a trailer to WOW people.

The Wii-U would have needed such a game. While the offering of titles on the console is great, many of them play it very safe. Nothing offered something completely new and exciting. To once more pull out the overused Batman quote from the title: Super Mario 3D World was the game the Wii-U deserved, but not the game it needed.

Oh and sorry for the constant Wild Woods talk, but I adore this track.

What are your thoughts on Super Mario 3D World, the future of 3D Mario and the offering of the Wii-U in general? Would you like Nintendo to show us something completely new for their franchises or are you happy the way it is?

And as always

thanks for reading

Source of all pictures: Nintendo

Xenoblade DLC

Well I wanted to write an opinion piece about Mario 3D World and how it was the Mario Game we deserved, but not the one the Wii-U needed, but with recent news about Xenoblade Chronicles I have to push this back to Thursday or Friday.

Because today the first information about Xenoblade Chronicles X DLC became public. We knew for a time now that the game would be supported through paid DLC.

For the record, I don't dislike DLC. I think they are a good way to support a game after launch and enhance the experience. But they have to be priced right and shouldn't feel like they have been cut out of the game before launch. In the past Addons fulfilled the same purpose. DLC even have the advantage that they can be smaller and bigger.

Now that we have that established, let me tell you why, in my opinion, the Xenoblade DLC is the wrong kind of DLC. Firstly it will be available when the game launches, which means that this DLC could have been on the disc. Day One and Pre-Order DLC are an epitome of anti-consumer behavior. Yes I know that a game is finished long before it releases and that the developers have idle time between launch and gold status to create new things. But I would rather have them working on a bigger DLC, which takes several months to complete, than small packs only created to earn a quick buck.

But what is the content of these DLCs? Well it doesn't get better. Firstly there will be four character packs, containing a new character for your group and three missions. This is one of the worst DLC that Nintendo could have integrated into the game. Now we don't know how many different party members can be recruited in the game already, but this creates just a bad aftertaste. Especially when it seems that the DLC characters have more attention to detail than the standard ones. Each character pack will cost 4 bucks, and I honestly can't say that this is worth it. It doesn't add anything new to the experience, because the missions most likely will take place in already existing areas of the game an the characters won't bring much to the table either.

But this DLC sounds awesome in comparison to the other package Monolith and Nintendo will offer. The so called Support DLC Quests allow you to accelerate the rate at which you'll gain money, experience or improve the relationship between your characters. Now this is total bullshit and close to EA levels. Such things should have no place in full price games.

It is baffling how Nintendo tends to jump between extremes with DLC. We have the great Mario Kart 8 and Pikmin offerings. We have the mediocre Smash. DLC and the pretty awful New Super Mario Bros. 2 packs and now this. It is pretty obvious that Nintendo is treading the waters. They want to find out what they can get away with. And now we need to tell them that this isn't ok.

I won't touch the Xenoblade DLC and I will tell Nintendo why. Because I would hate to see Nintendo become a company that I won't support anymore. As a fan you should always be the first one to point out wrongdoings or missteps of the company.

In the End this DLC sends all the wrong signals and the customer now has to answer. We have to show Nintendo that this kind of DLC won't be accepted.

Or what is your take on this dilemma? Are you still looking forward to Xenoblade Chronicles X? Will you buy the game, but ignore the DLC? Will you boycott the whole product?

and as always

thanks for readin

source: http://xenobladex.jp/

Women in Games: Bayonetta

Who wants to talk about women in games?

So Anita Sarkeesian released a new video some time ago. It's not part of her Tropes vs Women in Videogame series, which is two years overdue and still only halfway done, but instead it focuses on positive examples of females in video games. And her selection is... interesting. Sword and Sorcery is a retro styled indie game. I haven't played it so I can't say anything about it's quality, but I don't think it is a good example. To put it simple, a good female character can't have a character. Because that's what the main protagonist of the game is. It has no characterization. While this may be one way to approach a game, it isn't the one I prefer. Yes I'm a person who puts Gameplay above Story, but if I get a Story, I'd rather have a good and engaging one. Now this can also be achieved with a blank character, but it limits the possibilities. Men and Women can achieve the same things, but there are a lot of differences between the two genders. I simply would have preferred if a female protagonist with an actual character would have gotten the spotlight. Oh and to make things clear. I think this topic is interesting and worth a discussion. That's why I'm not a friend of Anitas way of approaching this topic and that's why I'm not a fan of every gaming outlet hanging on her every word. This topic deserves better.

But let's get to the main point of this post. Bayonetta. She's a great female character leading two great games. And I don't have the slightest problem with her sexual presentation. Because it's not sexist. But why don't I see this as sexist?

Because it fits Bayonetta. Everything about how she is portrayed and how we get to know her, tells us that she is a sexual person. Now if you think that her character is sexist then, I can't argue against that, but with that viewpoint you just say that sexuality is bad. Showing your sexuality and enjoying it is bad. And I don't agree with that. Bayonetta is portrayed as a strong, capable women, who just enjoys her sexuality. And I don't see a problem with that. It also doesn't matter, who designed her (it was a women by the way), but how her character interacts with the story and the gameplay. And in that regard there isn't any contradiction. Of course she could approach everything more toned back, but why should she?

Some people may argue that she was solely designed for males to enjoy, but I think that is the wrong way of approaching this. It certainly applies to many characters in videogames that they are designed to be eye pleasing, but whats wrong with that. Bayonetta was designed as a strong, capable women, who enjoys her sexuality and everything in the game is a consequence of this. And of course she is eye pleasing. Just like nearly every other protagonist in mass media. We like to see beautiful people and why should that be wrong?

Now if you think this is a problem, then I truly pity you, because you live in a society, which must make you puke every second. And Bayonetta should be your last worry.

I guess what I want to say with this post is that there is nothing wrong with fanservice and the portrayal of sexy women. If it fits with the story, game and characters. A girl, which is portrayed as rather shy and shut in, wouldn't work with skimpy clothing. Of course there is lots of that in media, but here I agree with critics. That is just dumb fanservice. Fanservice done right is, again, Bayonetta. Because it enhances her character, instead of degrade it. It doesn't seem out of character for her. And once again I can just say, that if you have a problem with this, then I guess you have a problem with sexuality in general. A strong confident women has many layers. She can kick ass and still be fashionable. She can be strong and still enjoy showing of her body and her sexuality. She can save the world, but still have flaws.

Everything in Bayonetta is over the top. The Action. The Scenery. And also the Sexuality.

I see nothing wrong with that. By making every women character a projection of all women, we severely limit the potential of a whole gender. The actions and portrayal of one women should never represent all. Especially when she is just a videogame character. Not all women are heroes. Some are villians. Some are cowards. Some enjoy their sexuality and some don't. They are straight, lesbian, transgender... They are diverse. But by trying to fit every character into the small window that some people deem to be acceptable, we don't do this industry any service.

And for that I hope that we continue to get awesome female characters like Kinzie Kensington (Saints Row), Bayonetta, Rosalina(Super Mario Galaxy), Samus(Metroid except Other M), Jade (Beyond Good and Evil), Seiren (The Last Story), Jill Valentine, (Resident Evil), Sylvia Kristel (No More Heroes), and many more.

So what's your thoughts on this topic? Let me know.

And as always

thanks for reading

Source of all pictures: Nintendo