G-pinions

Those snot-nosed kids at Penny-Arcade really get my goat sometimes. Sure, they provide almost-sure-fire comedic gaming goodness three times a week, were in one way or another the inspiration for this site and are damn generous, but they often wield their power irresponsibly/hypocritically. The source of this temporary ire was a written entry of theirs this week, bitching about the Black demo and saying things such as "after playing the demo I can't imagine any reason to purchase the final game." Considering that the demo is more or less what they showed at E3, in MAY (which they even acknowledge), I think it's a damn impressive showcase of their game design philosophy "gun porn", for those not keeping up with things). But this isn't about what I think.

I used to be an avid reader of their front page, the comic almost secondary; they can be fantastic writers on occasion, and I was often interested to see their take of the current industry issues. Then World of Warcraft came out, and it's never been quite the same since (read: "not boring"). PC games in general in fact - not a hot topic, by and large not very interesting, and not the thing we need to hear one more opinion about (everyone who plays PC games, ahem, also has a PC). Anyhow. I would guess that a good percentage of their readership comes for the comic and doesn't stay for a whole lot else. So when skimming the front page only imparts the knowledge that Black isn't so hot, it's not really fair. They mention that it's just a snapshot of the development cycle, but still get as down on it as possible. if someone were to visit their site on that particular day for the first time, well hey, their comics aren't very funny and they just sit around hocking their merch. Which isn't true at all. All I'm saying is that if they're going to bash in incredibly early demo of a game, they can do it with a little more regard and think about the consequences of passing judgement so hastily. Black doesn't do anything new, but it certainly seems to be reinvigorating the genre a bit. Kind of like that one game they like to mention all the goddamn time.

I don't want to get completely down on them though, as they do link to some quality stuff on occasion. Such as this Dead or Alive 4 review which echoes much of the sentiments that I shared nary a month ago. I thought I was the only who saw through the unforgiving, broken gameplay. A particularly delicious excerpt: "The result is an AI which is utterly frustrating to play against, and which you never feel like you've beaten because you're actually good - you beat it because the CPU rolled the dice and decided to make a completely ridiculous schoolboy error at an opportune moment for you. It's like winning the lottery; you're glad it happened, but under no illusions that you did anything great in the process." Good stuff.

Smaller. Lighter. Sexier.

I remember at E3 when Nintendo was talking about their upcoming online enabled games for the NDS. I listened attentively, hoping they would accidentally reveal something I actually cared about, but they kept blabbering on about how accessible it would be and how they expected most of their users to go online at some point. Every company spews the same crap before reality sets in: people don't really go online. Less than a quarter of all Xbox owners actually went online. If the draw of Halo 2 - the only online game I've actually enjoyed - couldn't convince people to go online, how would the severely stripped down service version Nintendo was offering be any different?

Well, according to GameIndustry.biz, more than 3 million NDS users have already gone online. There are roughly 8 million NDS systems out there (correct me if you have more up-to-date numbers) so that is a rather impressive percentage. When you factor in only three games can go online at this point - Tony Hawk, Mario Kart and Animal Crossing - this is even more surprising. Half of all Mario Kart DS owners went online in the first week after its release.

I realize that this is a tally of every unique user who has ever logged on. It doesn't matter if they were on three hours or three days, it counts the same. I'm sure a lot of those players have only gone on a couple times, with the hardcore sect making up a small percentage of users. I realize all this. But I'm still shocked that so many people went online at all. The WFC service right now is horrendous, but if this is just a trial for what they are going to be doing with the Revolution, things could get pretty interesting.

I fully expect Nintendo and Sony to offer some service to compete with Xbox Live. Even though I don't like playing games online, I love the achievements and Live Arcade. I would use those things all the time. I hope Nintendo doesn't look at their nausiatingly simple NDS service and assume they can just move this barely functional experience over to the Revolution. It's really a pain in the butt to use. You need to enter your buddy's ten digit number and vice versa to play each other, and the numbers don't even transfer from game to game. It's all well and good for the NDS, which is trying to make portable wireless gaming a reality, but the console world is a completely different entity. I believe you need a fully integrated online community to get the attention of most gamers.

I don't think the NDS' online success will necessarily pave the way for the Revolution system to take off. Nintendo has been setting up wireless hotspots all over the world to encourage gamers to get online, but they won't be able to do such a thing with the home-bound Revolution. They will have to convince gamers to set up a wireless network in their own home, which, if my unused wireless router is any indication, is not an easy task. I can't imagine Nintendo or Sony will be able to top what Microsoft has done with the 360; but if they can at least offer a reasonable facsimile while remaining free, they may be able to sway enough people to give online gaming a shot to finally make the whole experience worthwhile.