Fallout 76, a bad experience.

So I went into Fallout 76 knowing how bad everyone said it was and to be honest I didn't have that experience. i played it for a couple of hours with my uncle and we had a good time. It wasn't a full fallout game by any means, but I hadn't paid full price and looking at it as just a sandbox to have fun with someone it was a fun thing to do. Run around murder things and maybe build up my settlement, but today, only my second time on the game things started going down hill.
I was level 4, just out of the gate, hadn't even finished tutorial quests they give you to learn about the game and these 2 guys about 10 levels higher than me started attacking me. At first it was just annoying, they were hitting me but it was doing nothing because I was below the level where I could engage in PVP. but then I levelled up, still not out of the tutorials and they started being able to hurt me, sure it wasn't a lot, but they just wouldn't stop. they followed us around for the entire rest of the game attacking and then killing us.
there's a system they have in the game that is supposed to prevent this sort of griefing and that is that if people attack you and don't respond they kill you and they get a bounty on your head. but there are 2 things this doesn't take into account; until you respond this takes a long time to do so you're basically stuck not playing the game because you have a bunch of ass holes griefing you slowly to death, thus destroying your fun
and 2, there has to be players on the server that want to go after criminal players. on this server world clearly there was not because We got killed a couple of times and they just kept finding us on the map and keep on coming for us.

This really feels like a flaw in the game to me. maybe because I don't come from a DayZ background, maybe cos I never really picked up on Ark survival, but I went into this game to play with my friend and that experience ended up not happening because these two guys wouldn't let us. not only that but when they killed me they stole resources off me, so it actively reversed my game progression up to that point, and that's a really bad feeling when you've barely started the game.
It didn't even give us the option of changing server worlds, We could have quit and come back, but by that point we're basically done playing.

For me this is a very poorly designed system, it relies too much of the assumption that other people will want to stop the griefers, and doesn't take into account the idea that people might buy the game 2 months after release.

We will likely pick it up again, because we like playing co-op enough to give it a second shot, but if I'd been playing this single player I would be uninstalling the game now.

- James
Fallout Tube

Top 15

So I saw on my facebook that I had a note titled 'top 15 games of all time' and I wanted to have a look, It was an interesting list but I wondered if I did it today if I'd give the same result. I mean, there are a lot of games that have come out since and I'm a very different person.
So here's my new list:

1. Elder Scrolls Oblivion
2. Kingdom Hearts 1 + 2
3. Pokemon Yellow
4. Bioshock
5. Batman Arkham City
6. Star Wars: Knights of the old Republic 1
7. Call of Duty Modern Warfare 1
8. Mass Effects 1 + 2 (only excluding 3 because of how little your choices meant at the end)
9. Day of the Tentacle
10. Ultimate Spiderman
11. Final Fantasy VIII
12. Dragon Age Origins and Dragon Age 2
13. The Secret World
14. Star Wars The Old Republic
15. Borderlands 2

This was my old list:

1. Goldeneye
2. Ocarina of Time
3. Day of the tentacle
4. FFVIII
5. Kingdom Hearts 1+2
6. Devil May Cry 1
7. Star Wars Galaxies (Pre-Combat 'upgrade')
8. Oblivion Elder Scrolls
9. Fallout 3
10. Command and Conquor Red Alert
11. Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic 1+2
12. Mass Effect 1+2
13. Star Wars Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy
14. Pokemon yellow
15. Dungeon Keeper

So I wrote the new list before posting the old list so I couldn't remember what was there, just incase I cheated off it.
It's interesting that some of them remained (Day of the Tentacle, FFVIII, Oblivion, KOTOR, Mass Effect, and Pokemon Yellow) while the rest vanished, yet looking at the list I still agree with it, they are all amazing games that definitely moulded me into the person I am now.
Goldeneye was one of the best early FPSs, it was great, I spent ridiculous amounts of time on it, but things have moved on since then. I think Modern Warfare 1 is a worthey successor, in my opinion its the pinnacle of FPS games of our time.
Ocarina of Time was great, the first real action adventure game I ever played and every time theres a new console with it I invariably buy it. But The secret World is a massively Multiplayer online game with an amazing level of depth and I it looks incredible.
Devil May Cry 1 was one of the most difficult games I ever played, but I beat it. It had a great story, it had amazing gameplay, Batman Arkham City just happened to be both better and nerdier.
Star Wars Galaxies had one of my favorite set ups, it had the potential to allow the player to have a completely unique character. they didn't need to be a cookie cutter character, but then they changed it, and what they changed it to made no sense. TOR does make sense and it's stories, its worlds, they're all amazing. I feel like my character is alive in TOR and I love it.
Fallout 3 was a great post apocalyptic world, it was huge and felt like you were truly on your own, but Borderlands 2 did the same thing but better. They made me laugh.
Command and Conquer was a great Real Time Strategy game, red alert was probably the pinacle of it's type, but Dragon age made it so that you didn't have to look down at un-named, un-attachable people for real time strategy. it concentrated it into a few and it worked amazingly, making me care and letting me build true relationships.
Jedi Academy was great and it was geeky, but it's gameplay and its story fell behind Ultimate Spiderman, not to mention the humour. Hell, even Ultimate's geek factor out stripped Academy.
Finally Dungeon Keeper. It doesn't really have any corrolation to Bioshock, I just liked Bioshock more. Doesn't mean I wouldn't buy Dungeon keeper again if I saw it.

So yeah, all great games, but its interesting how I've changed since September 2010.
Do you have a 15 favourite games?

Tubage
-james

Too many games!

So this month is a bit of a high point for games this year, (at least for me) and it's hurting my wallet, a lot. Not to mention the fact that its my sisters birthday and I have to get her stuff but I also have to save for the company trip to Comicon next year, I have rent and stuff, and lets be honest; I don't get paid that much in the first place.
On top of all that this month I have three pre-orders and a game purchase. So lets take a look at them:

First purchase;
Saints Row IV
For a lot of people this is just a game to keep them going until Grand Theft Auto comes out, but I've been looking forward to this a lot more than I have GTA-V, and so far it doesn't fail to disappoint. As quirky and out of the gate hilarious as SR3, SR4 is as much a grand theft auto clone asBlue Harvest is a Star Wars clone. Yes its a similar setting and the same medium, but one is clearly different from the other.
A long time ago GTA was funny and quirky like Saints row is now - though not so ridiculous I admit - but now GTA is all about gritty realism, which is fine, don't get me wrong, the GTA games are still good, my point is more that Saints Row took the place that they once had, they are not trying to be them now.
Saints row basically opens up and asks 'what is the funniest, funnest things we can do here' and then ignores everyone who says that it doesn't sound realistic. It's fun, its energetic, and who doesn't like the idea of climbing a nuclear missile in flight (aimed at Washington) while Aerosmith blares?!

Rome II Total War
I'm not really sure why I pre-ordered this game, I've owned the last 3 of them but I've never really got heavily into them. I've never completed any of them, so why did I guy this one? I really don't know. I always enjoy them for a few days, but... maybe it'll tide me over until the next game turns up. While I really like Saints row, and that should be able to tide me over I like it as a multiplayer experience and the people I play with aren't always online.
This game is released tomorrow (3rd of September) and I expect it will be pretty intense. by all accounts its an awesome game, well worth playing, I'm just not sure it's going to hold my attention. (that said, I do like the roman empire)

Kingdom Hearts 1.5
I've been anticipating this for years. I have already played and completed this game once a long time ago on the PS2, btu it's seriously such a good game that when my copy was stolen 3 years ago I was devastated. I considered re-buying it several times, but I always figured 'they brought out the final fantasy games on the PSN store, surely Kingdom Hearts is RIGHT around the corner? But it wasn't, not until now. 3 Years later.
If I'm honest I could probably do without a day one purchase here, but I managed to get it limited edition for half price when they made a mistake on the store, so I can't complain too much. I'm really looking forward to this HD re-make/re-deploy, seriously; cannot wait!

Grand Theft Auto V
I really didn't care about GTA V for a long time. I only started caring, for the first time, about a week and a half ago. The multiplayer trailer came out, I had a look at It and I was blown away. I couldn't not buy it. I pre-ordered it pretty much then and there.
Up until then I really couldn't care less, everything I saw I didn't care, it all looked samey, but now, all that same stuff is exciting and I still have 15 days left until it arrives! (17th Sept). Ugh!

So that's me this month, £39.99 for Saints row, £29.99 for Rome 2, £24.19 for Kingdom Hearts and £34.99 for Grand Theft Auto V.
An expensive month.
Shit.

Tubage
- James

The Good and Evil of Player Generated Content.

Personally I have a love hate relationship with Player Generated Content (PGC). I think I love the idea more than I love it in reality. For those who are unaware; PGC is content for computer games that have been made by players. Some people call it modding, some people call it developing, regardless of what you want to call it the outcome is the same; content for a game that has been created by another player, like yourself, or even your annoying little brother who can't use MS paint properly yet.
It's not a new thing, not really. People have been creating their own maps for shooting games for years. What is a new thing is companies making games specifically around the idea of user generated content. There have been good examples, the Bethesda games (Fallout games and Elder scrolls games) are a prime example of this. they created full games with lots of content, a huge world and enough to do that you could never need user generated content while simultaniously releasing a creation kit for the game so that its easy to do and readily available. (admittedly 'easy to do' is subjective, but it's much easier than having to hack into the game's code or something to make it run). However there are some games that do it poorly, or even don't do it and say they did. APB: All Points Bulletin is one of them. APB worked on the concept that the game play was going to be created by the user. the developers didn't need to do much if anything to give the players something to do because once the players were in the world they'd figure something out. This is perfectly fine and a reasonable strategy, except then they asked the players to pay them for it.
Don't get me wrong I have no problem with paying for a game subscription. In the past I have paid for Aion, Champions online, City of Heroes, City of Villains,  DC Universe online, Dungeons and Dragons online, Final Fantasy XI, The Matrix Online, Ragnarok Online, RF Online, The Secret World, Star Trek online, Star Wars galaxies, Star Wars: The Old Republic, Warhammer online, World of Warcraft, and probably a load more - just in case you were looking for my nerd creds, I alphabetised that list.
My problem isn't with paying for a subscription, my problem is paying for it and then not being given anything in return. It's like paying for a house and being given bricks and cement.

The reason I bring it up is because more and more games are releasing editors and I am not sure if its a good thing or a bad thing. It could be great. we could be ushering in a new era of gaming. People could become praised for their level design skills as much as, if not more than, their shooting skills. Equally, however, we could be ushering in an era of lazy game development. With a lack of need for developers to hire level designers and narative designers players will find themselves without easily available high quality story modes. They will still be out there buried in the PGC but much harder to access through searching through the crap.
I recently purchased a game called Shadowrun Returns. I havent looked at the PGC yet but it doesn't look like the main story is going to be particularly long. It only cost £15 and it seems to be made for PGC but if it had been more expensive and made PGC difficult to access I'd be complaining. My point is that if games are going to base themselves around their player driven content I dont think they should be able to charge for it as well. Building an environment for people to create is all well and good, but you don't charge the price of a masterpiece for a piece of canvas and an easel.

Plants-Tubage-Zombies
- James

Computer Games are the Problem?

So, thanks to California Senator Leland Yee, that age old question has come around again; are computer games the reason that people go out and kill each other?

First of all; no, people have been going out and killing each other long before computer games.
Secondly; the questions wrong. Computer games as a whole aren't being considered, the people pointing fingers are pointing at a specific type of game and lumping them all in, however I'm yet to see a mass murder with Tetris-style blocks so I don't think we can blame everything. What the finger pointers mean is 'violent computer games.' The question they mean is 'Do violent computer games create violence?'

However even the answer to that more accurate question is an easy 'No'. I don't go out killing people, I don't think about going out and killing people. I don't harbour secret needs to cause pain (though I guess you couldn't trust my word as it'd be a 'secret' need).

People don't play games to think up new things to do outside. They don't play Mario and decide to be a plumber, they don't play mortal combat and have fights to the death. People play games to avoid the outdoors and to work out frustration. Trust me, if you take away all the shooting games the number of school and office shootings would rise. All those people who get furious all day then go home and work out their pent up frustration on the Computer Generated enemy graphics without causing any real harm to people wouldn't just stop being frustrated and angry.

I will accept that people under eighteen are angrier since they've started playing call of duty and manhunt, but that isn't the fault of the computer game or the developers of the publishers, that's the fault of the parents for buying them a game clearly marked as inappropriate to under 18s, or the retailer for selling them a game for over 18s or in the case of the US, the Supreme court for (as I learned recently and I may have been misinformed) ruling that stores can't be fined for selling under 18 year olds 18 certificate games.
The first two are problems we have in England but the third is not. If a store in England sells an 18 cert game to a minor they can be heavily fined and shut down, which is how it should be. The certificates are there for a reason, of course an under 18 is going to want it, but they shouldn't be given the choice of whether or not to abide by the ruling. They have a biased opinion.

Regardless of all of that the fact remains; computer games, like any form of business driven art is subject to people's demand. If people didn't want hard-core shooters with blood and death and killing then there wouldn't be any.
The fact is that the entertainment industry sees a culture that raises guns up to be praised and to be proud of and they work with that. A lot of the time the people who are complaining about the violent games are the same people propping up the gun culture, causing the violent games to be created.

It is also worth noting that according to Wikipedia, of the top ten bestselling computer game franchises of all time seven are non-violent (including the top five) and of the three violent franchises one is fantasy and non-graphically violent.

It seems to me that if people want violent games to stop then they should stop asking for violent games. If they want gun games to stop they should stop loving guns so much.
If they want someone to blame for shootings then maybe they should look at the killers, their mental disorders and their lack of proper mental care because someone with a mental disorder doesn't need a violent computer game to commit atrocities, they will get the idea from anywhere; music, TV, film, the Bible...

But that's just my opinion.

Exactly-my-reaction-to-Game-Of-Thrones
- James