For those of us who absolutely can’t wait till October for Bioshock Infinite. Irrational Games brings us another taste of what to expect from the new enemies in the flying city of Columbia.
&index=1&feature=plcp
Just to make sure you understand what I just say. People turned into gorilla like robots use other enemies as a projectile weapon while charging at you with deadly intent, oh, and you’re in still in a city flying in the air
October please come sooner
A dead server, a slight increase in information, and the collective exhalation of a million nerds. (more…)
Well folks it’s here, it’s been pushed forward, pushed back, juggled, danced on, speculated and rumored, but now it is here. May 15, 2012 Diablo III will hit shelves and digital distribution. Blizzard also began their digital pre-orders to coincide with the announcement. Now you can take your money out of savings and pre-pay for that copy. Remember PvP Support cames later, but we can begin grinding away in two months.
The End of Days approaches…. Diablo III is set to launch on May 15, 2012, and you can be ready to play the minute the servers go live by pre-purchasing the game digitally on Battle.net today. Simply complete the digital pre-sale process, and your account will be flagged for automatic access to Diablo III when it launches at 12:01 a.m. PDT on May 15.
You always did want to be a Jedi. Or a Sith. Or maybe just a simple, honest, galactic bounty hunter? (more…)
Baldur’s Gate fans are freaking right the fuck out at the moment, and for good reason. Following on the heels of an unexpected site update a couple weeks ago, a mysterious 24-hour countdown clock appeared on BaldursGate.com this afternoon. No one really knows why. (more…)
The Amazing Spider-Man Iguana reveal trailer went live today. Thus far villains revealed have been Rhino and Iguana (I’m assuming that’s the lizard and they’re calling it the Iguana as a joke?) He definitely looks like an Iguana, not the normal Lizard that I’m used to. Lizard confusion aside the web slinging looks absolutely phenomenal. The studio developing the game Beenox is responsible for the last few Spider-Man games. They developed: Edge of Time, Shattered Dimensions, Friend or Foe, and Spider-Man 3: The Game. While watching the trailer I couldn’t help but notice that his fighting style is the same as every other game. I don’t know if there’s a running gag in the Spidey universe but the double-fisted upper cut and the straight punches looked exactly like the Super Nintendo moves (Maximum Carnage anyone?). If you’re going to do a hat tip I suppose that’s the way to do it.
This trailer looks a lot better than the Rhino reveal that the studio dropped not even 2 weeks ago. It could be the way that the music blended with the Rhino reveal, and my overall distaste for techno, but I didn’t find myself excited at all. I was actually kinda concerned if the game would even be playable. Some of the collision points with Rhino and Spidey looked a bit dodgy and the web connecting to the pieces looked a bit N64. However, the reveal of “the iguana” I’m not joking, they call it that on their site. Made me much more confident, I think we’ve got a solid Spider-Man game on the way this summer. In case you don’t believe me, here’s the Rhino reveal trailer for your viewing pleasure.
https://youtu.be/OSEy9kWUXiI
With the
Last week Mass Effect 3 hit the scene with great sales numbers, and perfect scores from a lot of sites. However, there has been quite the backlash on what so many deemed perfect just last week. If you check out the Bioware forums you’ll notice a growing trend in the mass effect zone, a high amount of disdain to the ending of this famous trilogy. What should have been a slam dunk for Bioware now has gamers screaming at the top of their lungs, and not only with complaints and their own fanfiction ending ideas, but demands even to fix the unsatisfying series of possible endings through downloadable content. Without giving any spoilers its hard to be specific, but with over a dozen endings Bioware still managed to enrage quite a large portion of their fanbase. At the time of writing this posting, metacritic held a user score for Mass Effect 3 of 4.9 out of 10. Bioware has dismissed these complaints as an intentional attempt to make the ending to the Mass Effect trilogy memorable, mysterious, and open to interpretation. Now, as one who has seen and experienced three of the possible eighteen endings (ignoring the female duplicate), I think I can safely say that I found them as jarring as Bioware claims to have intended. And as someone who doesn’t want to be unduly harsh on the artistic creation of others, I’ll withhold too much direct criticism of those endings and say that I see room for arguments on both sides. In defense of Bioware the endings are most definitely something memorable. Fans of the series however, have rightfully pointed out that Fable II and even three have “memorable” endings, memorably unsatisfying. As for the future of the Mass Effect series itself, I’m certain (and so is Bioware) that even the most angry loud-mouthed nerd will still come back for more exploits of the legendary Commander Shepard, but it is curious that Bioware would so nonchalantly throw this series under the bus of fan hatred after two undeniably incredible games. This series was already memorable, with deep characters woven into a tapestry of expert interactive storytelling it hardly needed the boost of the controversial ending it now has. I loved Mass Effect, and I still do. I want more, I would’ve wanted more no matter what the ending. But now I find myself wanting more for reasons other than my love of great combat, characters, and storytelling. I want more mainly just to wash the sour taste out of my mouth, so good job Bioware. You’ve proven your capacity to get away with almost anything. Now go, take lavish and expensive vacations with your families and friends as a reward to yourselves, then get back in your cubicles and bring all of us more Mass Effect in the form of amazing (not memorable please) DLC the inevitable next entry in the franchise as fast as humanly possible. What are your thoughts? [comment below] The Controversial Ending to Mass Effect 3
By Thomas Winkley on March 14, 2012
in
News
Video Games
I shouldn’t be surprised that gaming legend Tim Schafer pulled this one off. I probably shouldn’t be shocked that they raised 3.3 million dollars either. I’m filled with pride and excitement that the gaming community helped fund what could be the start of a revolution. Beginning with the humble idea to make a classic adventure game, Double Fine Adventure’s budget has erupted into a solidly funded title. The additional money will go towards additional languages, an orchestrated sound track, improved rewards for backers, and I’m sure more items we haven’t seen yet. The next step is to follow the process on Double Fine’s blog and discuss your thoughts on different elements of the game. The question I’d like answered is are you $100.00+ pledgers going to watch the 12,000 or so name long credit reel to see your special thanks?
If you haven’t played the first Darksiders, do it, I finally broke down and spent the $17.99 to revisit this classic. Watching the development videos for Death Lives has me pretty excited. By pretty excited I mean really, really, really excited. The feral movements of death and his use of the scythe looks to add a new dimension. The world’s they can create because they’re leaving earth behind look incredible. I can sit here and rant more, but these videos are great insight into their development process and what they’re aiming for. Check them out and comment below!
Video 1:
Video 2:
An interesting infographic made its way across the news desk here at Big Shiny Robot! An organization known as OnlineUniversities.com sent the information that apparently comes from their study of the effects of video games on the human brain. This organization clearly felt the audience of BSR! would be interested in these effects, but they apparently don’t know that audience very well. Our readership generally tends to be reasonably intelligent and discerning. This means most of you will recognize the information they provided as bullshit.
Question 1: Who is OnlineUniversities.com? Most, if not all, of the reputable universities in the United States offer online classes. But this group certainly doesn’t seem to be affiliated with any known research institute.
Question 2: If you’re looking to publish your scientific findings about the neurological effects of video games, would you use a graphic that looks like it belongs in Highlights magazine? [You’ll need to click the picture a few times to make it big enough to read.]
Question 3: What is the agenda of this infographic? There are some salient points that can certainly be backed up by other data (basically the top half that includes the boy). But the focus is obviously on violent video games. Why this specific sub-genre?
Question 4: What is OnlineUniversities.com’s definition of violent? The cliched example of paying a prostitute, shooting her in the head, and reclaiming your money is likely part of this definition. But what about a hammer-throwing dragon in a game which sees the protagonist killing turtles by jumping on their heads? The graphic references activity in the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex immediately after firing an in-game weapon. For example? It doesn’t seem like they mean Duck Hunt.
Frankly, the whole thing seems biased and unclear at best. At worst, it’s downright irresponsible. At no point does this simplistic chart address any factors of causality and correlation. The fine folks at OnlineUniversities.com may need an explanation of that one. “Those who play high-aggression games are significantly more anxious than those who don’t.” This statement is incomplete. Is one thing caused by the other, or are they just correlating facts? Are anxious people are drawn to violent video games, or do violent games make people anxious?
Further, where is the comparison of games to other activities? If playing violent video games “increases aggressive responses” and “active suppression of of emotional responses” what would would be the result of other “violent” activities? Specifically, do football, wrestling, karate, or other kid-friendly sports do anything different? The contention is clearly that gaming is bad for your child’s mental stability, but have any other options been suggested instead?
“Long-term playing can lead to obesity, poor attention span, and poor school performance.” What’s missing from this statement? Perhaps that reading and watching television can also lead to obesity? Is there any research to show whether Kinect, Move, or Wii motion controls affect a gamer’s BMI? That adults who can’t focus on a simple conversation because they’re distracted by a Facebook status update on their smartphone also have poor attention spans? Or that poor school performance isn’t a concern for the average gamer? According to last year’s ESA statistics, the median age of gamers is 37. Does that fact put a damper on a study that clearly looks to hype the negative effects of gaming on children? Obviously. If it didn’t, OnlineUniversities.com would have included the simple note that women over 18 make up a larger portion of the U.S. gaming audience than boys under 17 (37% versus 13%).
Regardless of how much of this chart is based on scientific study, it’s clearly been created with an agenda. In our modern “journalism” it will probably accomplish its goal. This handy little chart is the perfect tool for parental outrage based on “science.” Look for it on all of your national cable news shows soon. Some family values congressperson from California will certainly be citing it as evidence in the next law they create to ban the sale of interactive entertainment.
And yet, the actual neurological effects of gaming are important, and there is a good reason to study it. Those studies should be handled by scientists with no agenda other than finding answers. Those same scientists will certainly have pedigrees from more responsbile organizations, like an accredited university with some regulation for curriculum.
Actually, a fairly comprehensive study has already been done by Drs. Olson and Kutner, Center for Mental Health and Media (Massachusetts General Hospital / Harvard Medical School). While their book’s title,Grand Theft Childhood: The Surprising Truth About Violent Video Games and, is also sensationalist, the actual content is balanced and informative. It also acknowledges the obstacles to a true, long-term study of the effects of video games on children and adults.
Unfortunately, a book requires some commitment to read and understand. OnlineUniversities.com’s infographic also has the added benefit of being simple to wave around hysterically in a PTA meeting. How many parents are going to turn off their iPhone long enough to read a book when they can get the information they want to get from the internet in five seconds?
Take this infographic for what it is: sensationalism designed to get noticed. Even if OnlineUniversities.com isn’t trying to demonize vdeo games, they know what people want to see about them. This is a quick way to get someone to look at their site, and maybe even join one of their degree programs. With that goal in mind, it’s not a bad tactic. Potential students can see how little effort it will take to publish a study with them.
