One of my most anticipated games of the year was released yesterday: Fallout 3. I started my playthrough this morning before work, so I’ve only got an hour or so invested in it right now. Already I’m worried about the length of time it’s going to take me to play through this game, and there are other similarly epic games on my must-play list, such as LittleBigPlanet and Far Cry 2. I’m by no means the first to pontificate about the huge glut of top-shelf games this holiday, but I had a thought the other day that I never thought I’d have.

I hope most of the games I play this year are short.

Last holiday, I got my copy of Call of Duty 4 and played through the campaign that night, stopping only for a couple bathroom breaks. Many people tell me I’m crazy for doing so. But I’m glad I was able to experience the game that way. Like watching a movie, experiencing a game in one chunk is a completely different experience than playing it in bits. I’d love to do the same thing for Call of Duty: World at War. And I hope that Gears of War 2 doesn’t add padding to the original’s concise adventure. I’m fine paying $60 for a brief game if it’s good enough to play through multiple times. If there weren’t so many games on the way, I’d be playing through Dead Space again right now.

In a time of a huge game glut, here’s to short games.

This is by no means a return to a regular posting schedule, but I simply had to comment on some news that’s surfaced recently. In my most-viewed post ever, I commented on Halo 4 being developed by Gearbox, as well as another project. To quote myself:

There was also a Halo RPG in development by a well-known Western RPG house, but I don’t know the current status of that project.

The Halo 4 info was quoted far and wide, but for some reason the news of the second Halo project was widely dismissed and occasionally mocked. That project, as I can now confirm, was the Halo MMO by Ensemble Studios. Gamasutra has the story on this cancelled project by the dead developer. It’s nice to be right!

Well, it’s finally happened. I’ve reached the point where I’m forced to admit that I can no longer maintain this site on a regular basis. I will still be posting here from time to time, but only when I have something very pressing to say. Even I don’t know how often that will be. If you’ve enjoyed my essays in the past, I suggest adding this site to your RSS feed so you can catch what will likely be very sporadic updates. Thanks to those of you who have visited.

Until next time,

Oddity Out.

The other day this comment was posted on my Braid story by reader Zombinate:

So I finished the game (Braid), the main story anyway, I haven’t gone to get the stars yet, or whatever the hell they are. I’ve decided that this game is the movie “Brazil”; It really doesn’t make any sense, but is just compelling enough to be enjoyable. That said, like Brazil, I feel it would have made a good rental. I really enjoyed my time playing the game, but wonder if the $15 was really worth it. Honestly, if I could, I would sell this at (insert favorite second-hand game store). It is kinda like Bioshock, once you are done with that game are you really gonna do it again and again?

On a bigger level, this is the problem I see with the live arcade. It isn’t a true market, as no price deductions take place as interest in the property wanes. For example Geometry wars 2 was just released, any change in the cost of the first? Nope. This is fine for classic arcade like games, where the point is a high score. For story based games though, which have limited replay value, I am disappointed that they are treated the same way.

With regard to Braid, the topic of value in story based games have been discussed before. With this game, it was fantastic, but i don’t think was a good value.

The price of Braid has bemoaned over and over again, and typically the reaction is that people should be willing to pay $15 for Braid because it’s so good. Well, here is the reaction of a gamer who paid $15 for the game and did not feel that he received a decent value for his money.

One of the problems with mainstream games journalism (which I used to be a part of, so I feel qualified to comment on the subject) is that staff game critics do not play or purchase games the same way that average gamers do. I do not think there is anything morally or ethically wrong with critics receiving free games – no one bemoans movie or music critics for doing the same, and most publishers don’t try to use freebies as leverage on the press, despite the occasional bad story that crops up. No, I think the bigger issue is that game critics play everything, buying the games they didnt’ get for free to fill in the games in their collection. The smarter ones then write off those games as a business expense, because you really do need to keep up on what’s out there to stay informed. Again, there’s nothing wrong with that. But that’s not the way the average consumer plays or buys games.

To a game critic, $15 is a steal, even if they only play a game once. After all, they routinely pay $60 for a game they only play once – or sometimes play not at all. But your average game buys far fewer titles per year, and thus expects a certain amount of value out of their purchases. Once I left the games journalism field, I gained a whole new appreciation for the cost of games that I will admit to lacking while I was a critic. Games that would have happily accepted a free copy of and played became games that I would only pick up used, or not at all. This is something that games journalists need to keep in mind during their reviews. Not everyone out there can or will purchase every title, and the average gamer also doesn’t slog through the great swaths of shovelware as critics do (which makes them more apprciative of innovative games like Braid). Clearly, not everyone agrees that $15 is a fair price for Braid. On the other hand, at $170 bucks, Rock Band was a great deal in my mind because I (and so many others, including my wife and friends) have gotten so much entertainment out of it. Perceived value is key for purchasing decisions in these rocky economic times.

This week’s entry in the Summer of Xbox Live Arcade promotion was the long-awaited revamp of the classic NES game Bionic Commando. Bionic Commando Rearmed takes the original game and jazzes it up with updated graphics and music and adds new features like a couple new moves, challenge rooms and two-player co-op. Unlike the previous games in the Summer of XBLA promotion, I bought Bionic Commando: Rearmed and didn’t receive a free download code, because I was a huge fan of the original game. Nostalgia alone is rarely enough for me to drive a purchase, but in the case of Bionic Commando Rearmed there was another compelling reason for me to check out the game: It is a perfect example of the phenomenon of selling marketing material to the audience in the guise of a stand-alone product. Bionic Commando Rearmed is, at its core, an advertisement.

Most gamers are aware of Capcom’s high profile relaunch of the Bionic Commando with the Xbox 360/PlayStation 3 game, also simply called Bionic Commando. Bionic Commando Rearmed is a marketing tool to raise awareness of the console game, pure and simple. Much like the Gears of War reissue I discussed in a previous post, the downloadable BC remake is intended to inform gamers who never played the original why they should care about the new game, and at the same time “activate” the existing fan base. It is definitely no coincidence that both games were created by the same developer, Grin, and that there are strong links between the two. Heck, Bionic Commando Rearmed features new moves that you’ll be able to do in the console game, and even includes a code that unlocks the classic BC costume in that title.

But I digress. Let’s discuss the existing fan base first. With any brand (video games or otherwise), there is a small core of devoted users who really, really love your product. They happily talk about their love of the product to anyone willing to listen. In marketing terms, these consumers are known as “evangelists.” Apple is a great example of a company with many evangelists. In the case of a revived video game franchise, your evangelists are the gamers who played and loved your game when they were young. How do you revive their enthusiasm? Give them that old game back, which is exactly what Capcom did with Bionic Commando Rearmed. Their excitement over the franchise returns, they go out and talk about it with other gamers, and as a result there are more people doing internet searches for Bionic Commando, more people talking about Bionic Commando, more people thinking about Bionic Commando. Marketing is all about awareness. Think about that the next time you see an ad for the current presidential campaign. Just as both parties are using YouTube, Google, FaceBook, texting and other modern technologies to spread awareness of their candidates, Capcom is using Xbox Live Arcade and PlayStation Network to spread awareness of an upcoming product.

Product evangelist ideally influence the second group targeted by the release of Bionic Commando Rearmed: new players. This is a pretty simple formula. The idea is that all the excitement around the XBLA/PSN release will get players to take a chance on the game, download it, and become new fans of the series. Will the tactic of releasing a revamped Bionic Commando help the sales of the new console game? TIme will tell, but I think so. Capcom, perhaps more than any other company out there, has figured out how to maximize the profits of its games. It has reissued games like the Devil May Cry series, Viewtiful Joe, Okami, Lost Planet, Onimusha and of course Resident Evil 4 multiple times over now – clearly this is a strategy the company feels works. As the release of the new Bionic Commando console game draws near, expect to see a healthy marketing campaign for the game and many, many evangelists talking about how excited they are.

Microsoft’s Summer of Xbox Live continued this week with Braid, the highly anticipated game from indie developer Jonathan Blow. Microsoft’s PR firm was kind enough to provide me with a download of the game, and while I’m far from finished with it, I did get a chance to play through the opening stages. It’s a game that brings up many questions, like “how do I get that puzzle piece?” or “how does this story end?” While I’m certainly interested in finding those answers, there’s a much larger question about the game in my mind: How will the first art game on the platform that Halo built be received by the audience?

If you read one of the countless Braid threads on the video game message boards out there, you will find one near-universal reaction to the game: glowing praise. The game is currently sitting at a whopping 92% on Metacritic, with reviewers declaring it an innovative piece of art that shouldn’t be missed. And yet, I suspect there may be a Braid backlash on the way. While playing the game, I asked myself if this is the type of game that Xbox 360 players want. It would be reductive and lazy to claim that the people who made Halo 3, Call of Duty 4, Gears of War and Grand Theft Auto IV the top-selling games on the platform can’t or won’t have any interest in an introspective and thoughtful puzzle/action game, but it is hard to deny that the Xbox 360 is a platform largely built on action games. Even amongst the titles in the Summer of Xbox Live Arcade promotion, Braid is the oddity, sandwiched between the blistering shooter Geometry Wars: Retro Evolved 2 and the nostalgia-fueled action of Bionic Commando Rearmed. It is the only title of the five high-profile arcade games that doesn’t involve some kind of shooting. Microsoft knows what type of games fuels purchasing decisions on its console, and it is action.

Time will answer my question for me about whether or not Braid is a hit on Xbox Live Arcade (although what defines a “hit” is different for the audience, the developer, and Microsoft), but I have a feeling about how it will go. Critical acclaim for artistic games has yet to translate into huge sales numbers (if anyone has data to contradict me, I’d love to hear those examples). Despite the glowing reviews, I don’t think Braid has what it takes to be the first indie game to become a crossover success. Yes, it’s beautiful and clever. It’s also slow, frustrating, and hard to summarize into an easy to digest selling point. I’ve yet to see anything suggesting that the core Xbox 360 gamer is looking for such a title, and the $15 price point is a check against it, despite the excellent point made by the Penny Arcade comic above.

I applaud Jonathan Blow and his team for what they’ve accomplished with this game. Any release that stimulates the discussion about the validity of artistic games in the market is a something to be proud of. Perhaps the audience isn’t yet ready for Braid. But perhaps it inspire some up-and-coming game designer to create his or her own art game, one that will go on to be the first true smash hit in the genre. Braid may or may not be a sales success, but either way it will be an important stepping stone in the maturation of gaming.

The nice thing about the summer game lull is that it allows players to clear up the backlog or try some games that may have been overlooked in a more crowded environment. Microsoft is currently pushing its “Summer of Arcade” promotion in an effort to highlight some top-tier downloadable games that are being released over the next month. It’s an interesting tactic – Microsoft won’t move any significant number of of consoles because of the promotion, but should be fairly successful in generating revenue from existing users. If the company was trying to push just any old Xbox Live Arcade games right now, the promotion would fall flat on its face. Fortunately, the Summer of Arcade is built on some of the best downloadable games around, starting with the excellent Geometry Wars: Retro Evolved 2.

As the built-in leaderboards showed, I was far from the only player obsessing over Geometry Wars 2 last night, but the actual gameplay is only part of why this title is so fascinating. The release of this game has a lot to stay about the state of the games industry as a whole. Read on for more:

The original Geometry Wars, as most gamers know, was included as a bonus game in Bizarre Creations’ Project Gotham Racing 2. It apparently began its life as a little independent project by a single Bizarre employee. It was followed up with Geometry Wars: Retro Evolved when the Xbox 360 launched. The “killer app” of Xbox 360 Live Arcade (The XBLA Halo, if you will), Retro Evolved is still one of the best-selling games on the service. Although it launched for 400 Microsoft Points ($5), Bizarre Creations made some statements indicating that they wanted it to be free.

After Retro Evolved, the next game in the series was Geometry Wars Galaxies for Wii and Nintendo DS. What’s interesting about these titles is that they were published by Sierra (later part of Activision), while previous Geometry Wars games were published by Microsoft. While Microsoft does occasionally license its properties to other publishers (see THQ publishing Viva Pinata: Pocket Paradise, for example), it’s more likely that Bizarre Creations retained the license to their creation. Of course, Bizarre was later purchased by Activision, so it became the new owner and publisher of Geometry Wars Retro Evolved 2.

So, in the story of one XBLA game, you’ve got indie development, a developer-owned property, a studio purchase, and even a publisher merger. If that doesn’t encompass the current reality of the video game industry, I don’t know what does.

As an entirely separate point, take note of pricing. The original Geometry Wars was a rare $5 title. The sequel is $10. Granted, there is much, much more content in the sequel and it’s completely worth the price. But if there was ever going to be another XBLA game released at $5, it would have been Retro Evolved 2 – the Halo 2 of XBLA. The $5 price point is dead, never to return (save for old arcade ports). Fortunately, you won’t be upset paying $10 for the new Geometry Wars. It’s that good.

*Full disclosure: I was provided with a free download of Geometry Wars Retro Evolved 2 by Activision.

Game fans across the internet are in a tizzy at the news that Activision has dropped several Vivendi/Sierra titles from its publishing catalogue. Most notably affected by Activision’s “strategic realignment” are Tim Schafer’s Brutal Legend, the Ghostbusters Game, and Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena. Other titles cut from the lineup are Wet, World at Conflict: Soviet Assault, 50 Cent Blood on the Sand, Zombie Wranglers, Leisure Suit Larry: Box Office Bust, and some XBLA games.

It’s been pointed out elsewhere, but I think it’s important to reiterate: these games have not been cancelled. I’d bet you a million OddityBucks that Brutal Legend, Ghostbusters and Riddick are all ultimately released, as are most of the other games. These three simply have too much buzz and interest behind them, are too far along, and have too many big names attached to be cancelled.

Careful reading of the statement by Activision only reveals that these games won’t be published under the Activision brand. They could still be published under the Blizzard Label or even Activision Value – or they could be headed to new publishers entirely. Game Informer recently ran a rumor that Tim Schafer was thinking about bringing the game to another publisher already. My prediction: Brutal Legend is ultimately published by GameCock, a company far more comfortable with more esoteric titles.

Speaking of Game Informer, one final aside: This will be the second time Chronicles of Riddick has run into potential cancellation issues. The orginal version was actually cancelled by Vivendi right before it was unveiled. Then the Game Informer cover story hit, interest in the game skyrocketed, and it was un-cancelled. Every once in a while, community interest in a game does keep it alive.

There is a minor online controversy brewing over the recently-announced PSN Game “Fat Princess.” The game is a team-based multiplayer affair in which each side is charged with rescuing their captured princess from the other team. However, each team can fatten up their captive by feeding her cake and making her so heavy that she’s difficult to move. Charges of anti-female and anti-obesity sentiments quickly followed the unveiling.

The uproar began on the website Feminist Gamers and was further perpetuated by the site Shakesville. It was then picked up by the usual suspects: NeoGAF, Destructoid, Kotaku, Joystiq, etc. The general reaction amongst the gaming community to the accusations that Fat Princess is offensive has been, to put it mildly, unkind. See below for examples.

“What an attention seeking cunt.” – Princess Skittles, NeoGAF

“I’d say that maybe fat chicks like her need to grow some thicker skin but…..” – The Young Scot, Destructoid

“if they don’t like being made fun of for being fat why don’t they stop eating” – Beximus, Kotaku

“Women will cry about anything.” – Dead Texan, Joystiq.

Who knows if NeoGAF poster “Princess Skittles” is male or female, but the board consensus across all threads on the subject was that the woman at Feminist Gamers and Shakesville are over-sensitve, crazy, or worse. No one – anywhere in the gaming world – seems to be discussing the fact that these women are in fact, right. Fat Princess is indeed an offensive game. The titular character is nothing but an object, a goal to be obtained, and the larger she becomes the harder she is to retake. If the princess was thin and sexy, and the goal was to make her more difficult to capture by loading her down with chains, there would be no debate that the game was offensive. But since she’s “merely” being fattened up, it okay.

Personally, I feel that Fat Princess is more demeaning to women in general than the overweight, as it reduces them to nothing more than goals to be obtained by male characters. Then again, countless games dating back to Super Mario Bros. are guilty of the same. But Fat Princess adds an additional layer on: the larger the Princess becomes, the more helpless she is, and the more aid she needs from others. What if it was “Crippled Princess,” where you made the character gradually more disabled? That certainly would not be considered acceptable. I’m not going to debate the merits of the “fat acceptance” movement here, but it’s clear that the overweight remain a group that is a target for ridicule.

Why is the gaming community always so quick to defend its own? Is it because we’re sick of being attacked (usually falsely) by claims that games warp players, make them violent, or turn them into sexual deviants? Do we as a community still share a communal “us against them” mentality? Or does a cartoonish art style explain away any issues? Of course, the “it’s just a game” argument can be trotted out at any time as a catch-all defense of any game.

I want to make one point clear: although I agree that anyone who is offended by Fat Princess has a legitimate point, I do not think that developer Titan Studio has any obligation to change the content of its game. Games have the right be offensive, just as any form of art can be. But I do think both the developer and we the community have to recognize that anyone who has a problem with a game isn’t necessarily an anti-game nutcase. Sometimes they’re just correct.

This year’s E3 was universally declared pretty uninspiring by all corners of the video game world, and despite some debate on which company came out the best overall, there’s widespread agreement that Microsoft and Square Enix’s announcement of Final Fantasy XIII on the Xbox 360 was the biggest announcement of the show. Clearly, this is a big coup for Microsoft and a substantial blow for Sony. However, the victory and defeat are both more psychological than substantial Naming the FFXIII 360 announcement the biggest news of the show is more indicative of how bad this year’s E3 was than anything. Read on to learn why FFXIII on Xbox 360 isn’t as a big of a deal as people are making it out to be.

Before I continue onto why FFXIII’s 360 port is overblown, let’s first cover why it is in fact a big deal. First of all, it shows that Microsoft is in fact making further inroads into the Japanese software development world, even if the Japanese gaming public isn’t coming along with it. With the expanded cooperation of Square Enix, Microsoft is now working with the lion’s share of third-party Japanese developers. Capcom, Tecmo, Namco Bandai, Sega – they are all bringing content to a Microsoft platform, with far better regularity than the previous generation. The only real hold out left is Konami, and even they have brought some games to the platform. Metal Gear Solid 4 is obviously the last big exclusive for Konami and Sony, although the new Castlevania fighting game for Wii shows Konami still prioritizes development for Japanese platforms. Konami too will come around at some point. As I stated in my Microsoft E3 predictions post, there is an Xbox 360-exclusive Kojima productions game in the works, and I still think a MGS4 port is likely, given the monumental cost of that project, as well as the very-good-but-not-quite-great sales of the game thus far.

The 360 port of FFXIII is also big news because it shows growth within Square Enix. Some die-hard PlayStation fans see this move as a betrayal, but it’s not the first time S-E has shifted loyalties. After all, the FF series began its life as a Nintendo franchise. But S-E is a very Eastern-focused company, treating even its American branch with disdain. The nightmare stories I’ve heard about working there could fill a whole post, so I won’t rehash them here. In short, Square Enix is finally beginning to realize that working with all platform holders, Japanese and American, is necessary for success in the modern video game world, and that’s a good thing.

But here’s what neither Microsoft or Square Enix isn’t owning up to. Bringing FFXIII to the Xbox 360 isn’t gong to sell a significant amount of systems, and that’s why this news is overblown. Here’s why.

Final Fantasy is what I like to call an “insular franchise.” If you’re not already interested in the franchise, you are unlikely to become so. Japanese role-playing games have a tradition of slow evolution (or no evolution at all) and have thus become an increasingly niche category. Final Fantasy VII, the highwater mark for the series and the genre, sold nearly 10 million copies world wide. Final Fantasy XII sold about half that -still great sales, but other games in the genre that lack the powerhouse Final Fantasy name don’t do anywhere near that well. The Persona series has one of the most devoted and vocal fanbases around, and those games selling a couple hundred thousand copies each. Again, not bad sales, but these games are selling to the same audience each time. New audiences aren’t coming into the JRPG category, not in any significant numbers, anyway.

So, if the JRPG category isn’t attracting new players, then who is going to buy Final Fantasy XIII? Existing fans. JPRG fans tend to be hardcore gamers. Hardcore gamers tend to be early adopters. They already have current-gen systems. Ask yourself: how many gamers do you know who were waiting for Final Fantasy XIII to buy a PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360? Chances are if they care about a series like Final Fantasy, they purchased their system long ago.

Realistically, here’s what I think will happen when Final Fantasy XIII releases. It will sell about 5 or 6 million copies worldwide – very respectable, yet far from the juggernauts of Call of Duty 4, GTAIV, etc. The sales will skew slightly higher on the 360, given the larger install base. Had the game not come to Xbox 360, most of those same buyers would have purchased the game for PlayStation 3, and the numbers would have been roughly the same, perhaps a bit lower. Microsoft will have succeeded in taking software dollars out of Sony’s hands but earned few additional hardware dollars. Despite the positives I mentioned above, Microsoft’s big E3 announcement accomplishes little more than taking some money out of Sony’s pocket.