↓ Archives ↓

Putting the “Great” in Britain

Read this.

And see if you can count to ten before you form an opinion!

Wad of Gore

Wow, it feels like old times. :)

What can I say? Although there’s no genuine gameplay, it looks totally badass and it also looks like the sheer scale of the environments the gameplay will take part in should be as awesome as the earlier games.

If you don’t know by now..

..you’ll never know.

Enjoy!

Star Wars: Battlefront 3 leaked footage

There’s a lot I could say about this but I won’t. Personally I can imagine the spot a lot of Free Radical’s staff must feel put in given that many were made redundant just before Christmas 2008.

However, NDAs are there for a reason. If work is produced by a human for a company and it’s clearly been stated that the company owns the work then that’s that. If I was an employer looking at a portfolio of work you’d purposefully publicised without permission and in direct conflict with the owning company’s wishes then I’d have to consider just what sort of discipline and professional outlook you have and whether you’d treat me the same way as your last employer.

For those that don’t have to (or choose not to) consider that side of things, enjoy the blurry footage and stirring music.

Update 22/01/09: Looks like LucasArts have got shirty on sites hosting the leaked footage and it’s been pulled.

Going for gold

Woo! Six (or is it seven?) months of inactivity.

I think that’s a new koffdrop.com record!

Balenolad

No, I’ve no idea what the word means either.

It’s the self-appointed name of an old school-buddy of mine who has just started to tip his toes into the fascinating and incredibly exciting world of blogging. He’s off to a good start and I think you’ll find his writing and attitude far more easy going than my typically angsty and confrontational style.

Check him out.

Oh, and you earn brownie points for identifying the origin of the phrase that adorns the top of his site. :)

Indiana Jones and the Curse of the Mobile Phone

After games, movies are probably my greatest passion. I’m lucky that my town has a multiplex and it offers a sort of ‘all you can eat’ service. I pay a fixed amount each month and all ticket costs are covered. The attraction for the cinema is that I’ll be there more often to buy overpriced popcorn and drinks. The attraction for me is that I can easily budget and see heaps of films. Furthermore, any film I’m a bit unsure of might as well be seen as it’s not costing me anything extra to see it.

A glance at my timeline widget will show you I get through a lot of movies and, as far as the movies are concerned, I enjoy them a great deal. I find the experience of going to a cinema, the screen, trailers and all that stuff to be very enjoyable.

However – is it just me or are audiences the worst thing about cinemas?

When I go to see a movie, I go to see a movie. I don’t go to send texts continuously on my phone. Nor do I continue conversations on my phone. I don’t go with a dozen mates who are too immature to handle a passionate scene without falling into a fit of giggles or who, every 10 minutes rush out of the screen en masse, clambering over seats or calling each other only to return moments later with more giggles or waving their mobile phones around. Constantly kicking chairs, making noise or doing anything they can to provoke a reaction seems to be some people’s goal.

Poor behaviour isn’t restricted to the youngsters either. Adults on their phones or, amazingly, listening to music through one earpiece or simply chatting to one another or at the movies.

The behaviour is rude and inconsiderate and it degrades the experience of every other patron who wants to see the film. Often, it seems, this is the explicit reason for such behaviour in the first place. Yes, I can go out, miss some more of my movie, and call an usher in to observe people being well behaved until they go away again a few minutes later.

Unlike many of the people who set out to ruin a movie-going experience, I work for a living. I can’t just choose to see a film on a quiet Tuesday afternoon. I’m also aware that, from a business perspective, I’m one person. If one person is complaining about a group of five people then, purely on numbers, why should the cinema care? I’m only worth a fifth of the revenue.

In fact, cinemas don’t seem to care at all. After taking your ticket and popcorn money it’s unlikely they’ll get more cash out of you – yet they’re obliged to house you for a couple of hours. There’s little worth, from their point of view, making those two hours better or worse because they’re not going to earn extra income from it. Sometimes I wonder if they’d rather not show the film at all.

So, in spite my 30 or so years being a good cinema patron and in spite of my repeated comments to staff and managers who assure me they’re doing lots to make my experience hassle free (no evidence of this is forthcoming) I’m considering not going to the cinema any more. I can quite easily get the latest releases in good quality and watch them on a 42″ TV at home. I can get my own popcorn and ice-cream (at better prices), I can pause things if I need to answer the phone. Hell, I can even grab trailers if I want.

This is a shame, but on increasing instances I’m leaving a cinema feeling that my time has been wasted as I could not enjoy the film or the film-going experience due to the selfishness and poor behaviour of the audience.

Is there a solution? I don’t know. Cinema trade seems very healthy and each summer sees more blockbusters than the last. Why should they invest more money or effort into keeping patrons happy when they’re queueing up to see movies anyway?

I don’t manage cinemas. I don’t know what their cash-flow is or what their overheads are. What I’d like to see is some positive steps taken to inhibit the functionality of mobile phones in cinema screens. Something that goes a little further than an animated panda telling you not to use your phone. I don’t care if it’s lead lining in the cinema. Or some ultra-high frequency signal that blocks phones from getting to their networks. There’s simply no need to use a phone in a cinema. People seem so concerned that they simply can’t bear to be out of touch with their phone-buddies for two hours that they have to text or natter in a place where communication is expected and intended to be a one-way thing – between screen and viewer. I never have my phone switched on in a cinema. There is simply no reason to have it switched on.

Knowing that I can’t expect people to behave with civility or consideration an alternative/additional pipe-dream comes to mind. At the end of the day, I want to hear the film, not other people. If I could plug headphones into my chair and tune into the movie and drown out the popcorn-munching prats around me then I think we’d all be happy. I get my movie experience, selfish idiots can keep texting their equally selfish mates in the adjacent seat. Many cinemas actually have an audio service for the benefit of the hard of hearing or the blind. This would simply be an extension of that service.

I’m not sure how workable either idea is, and it’s a shame such a ‘solution’ needs to be sought simply because people are too rude and selfish to abide by some simple considerate rules for a couple of hours. Something I’ve enjoyed doing most of my life is being ruined because the people providing the service don’t care for their customers. So if nothing changes, I’ll simply stop using the cinema as my means of viewing movies. All in all, I don’t think I’m asking for very much – either from the cinema or from the audience.

Never let the truth get in the way of a good story

Ah, sensationalism and tabloid journalism. Is there a more perfectly matched symbiotic mix of wrongness? Probably not.

I read a neat story entitled “Matt Damon, you big fat jerk!” which does a superb job in demonstrating how, with a little research (erm.. clicking on web links and reading things in full) the truth of a story can be quite at odds with the eye-catching distilled version that most of the public read.

Thanks to Game Set Watch for the heads up – and for the trackbacks to a certain other post.

Speaking of journlism, Bruce posted a link to a rather bold article in The Guardian that may make those of us tired with the way the mass media mistreats videogames feel a whole lot better.

Happy reading.

Metal Gear Solid – Mission Complete

As some may have noticed, I’ve been playing through my Metal Gear Solid: The Essential Collection and enjoying it quite a lot. I’m a big fan of the Metal Gear Solid games and am overly familiar with all their foibles and features. Playing them back-to-back certainly helps make MGS2 make a little more sense. The parallels with MGS1 are clearer.

My favourite is MGS3. It’s technically stunning and succeeds in feeling more advanced than its prequels even though its story is set a generation or so before either of them. This is reflected in the available technology in the game. No soliton radar for Snake this time! There are, as always, some self-deprecating nods to bits of plot and terms.

I’d planned on playing through Bully and then having something fill the time between that and the next major sandbox game on my playlist. Likewise, I’ve had my fill of Metal Gear for a bit but will probably be as keen as ever to get my teeth into Metal Gear Solid 4 when it ships in mid-June.

I think the Metal Gear Solid games come under a bit of flak because of their high profile and also because of the apparent linear or shallow nature of their gameplay. Another point of criticism is their indulgent and lengthy cut-scenes that deliver character development and plot exposition (and convolution).

Whilst it’s unlikely critics will be converted by this information, I’d like to present you with links to a couple of Metal Gear oriented articles.

The first, Driving Off the Map – A Formal Analysis of Metal Gear Solid 2, deals with the story and characters of Metal Gear Solid 2. A lot of players felt rather cheated by the game due to the change of lead characters. The article is lengthy and quite a challenging read but offers some interesting (though not necessarily authoritative) views on the various subtexts in the game’s narrative and interpretations of what messages it is delivering the player. When I first read the article it opened my eyes to a broader view of the events in the game and turned my disappointment to appreciation.

The second article is actually a collection of pages covering the gameplay features and quirks of the entire Metal Gear series. It’s an unfussy collection of tips, tricks and details that feature in all the games and shows just how much care and thoughtfulness was put into the gameplay of each game. There are details of literally hundreds of events and circumstances in the games that you can try out. It’s astonishing to see so much hidden content in games that feel so complete and rich in their ‘vanilla’ gameplay.

Fan or not, a look at some of the information available on those sites will give a broader appreciation of a game legacy that rightfully has fans across the globe and has resulted in one of the most watchable and compelling characters to ever grace our videogame screens. It certainly makes you wonder what will be hidden in the depths of Metal Gear Solid 4, doesn’t it?

This is not a crusade

Truly it’s not. But the needle on my irony meter went into the red this morning when I collected my newsfeeds from the lovely google reader and noticed a certain popular gaming news site/blog bleating about how the geek section of TIME no longer wants to be friends with them.

I’m not going to pretend that my earlier comments have radically changed anyone’s views about anything or have raised levels of awareness that TIME are now furthering. I guess I just appreciate the timing of the sentiment.

Most people will learn of the post from TIME via Kotaku. Or, more specifically a Kotaku post with an “Evil Empire” sensationalist heading and a childish view of a reasoned statement. No prizes for guessing the tone of comments that such a post generates.

The best bit, in my opinion, is the first comment on the TIME article’s page. It’s written by a Kotaku employee and, rather than addressing any of the points raised in the original article, resorts to playing tit-for-tat. The comments that follow are what you’d expect. This predictable nature of them is particularly evident in those who disagree with the TIME article. One even goes as far to suggest that the article was only written in order to garner some sort of sensationalist internet publicity.

Damn. My irony meter just broke!