Nintendo Goes Mobile: A Game Changer?

Picture courtesy of Game Informer

This past week, Nintendo made a stunning announcement that they were teaming up with mobile game publisher DeNA to release games and apps on mobile devices. This was long rumored, and Nintendo constantly denied any desire to enter the mobile market, especially when its 3DS brand of handheld gaming devices has been selling incredibly well, even beating out both the PS4 and Xbox One in sales for the month of February. Nintendo will develop all of the games (which will all be brand-new, and not ports of existing games) while DeNA will lend their expertise to make sure the games fit within the mobile space. The announcement came alongside the reveal that Nintendo was also working on a new, next-generation home gaming console; usually news about a new gaming system would take center stage, but the revelation that gamers will soon be able to play Mario and Zelda on their smart phones or tablets is a huge deal.

In the wake of this announcement, Nintendo's stock rose almost 33%, which is great news for the gaming giant. Nintendo has always been a company that plays by its own rules, for better or worse. Most recently, this mindset has backfired in a major way; the Wii U has been a major critical and commercial disappointment (which is possibly the reason why they are currently working on a new, more powerful system) and many long-time fans are becoming more and more fed up with company's failure to keep up with the ever-changing gaming market. However, with the decision to develop and publish games on mobile devices, it seems as if Nintendo is finally willing to keep up with the times.

Even with the commercial and critical disappointment of the Wii U, Nintendo is still the world's most recognizable and popular video game company. Developing and releasing their games on smart phones and tablets is arguably the smartest move the company can make, especially in today's market. Mobile gaming is the biggest and most profitable in the entire industry, so by bringing their games to mobile devices, Nintendo has the opportunity to reach a new market and create a generation of new fans. Nintendo president and CEO Satoru Iwata stated that the company hopes that their mobile games will help people become "interested in the Nintendo IP" and will become more motivated to buy a Wii U or 3DS.

Nintendo claims they want to begin releasing mobile titles as soon as this year, which is an admirable and attainable goal. In my opinion, the sooner they can get their games on mobile devices, the better. Despite their recent upswing in sales, Nintendo still has a lot of catching up to do if they want to go toe-to-toe with Sony and Microsoft. Hopefully this decision will lead to much greener pastures for the company; as someone who grew up with Mario, Zelda, and Donkey Kong, there is nothing I would like to see more than Nintendo be on top once again.

Helldivers Review: Glory in (Constant) Death

Image courtesy of Sony Computer Entertainment

The beginning of each new year can be somewhat of a dead zone for gaming; all of the biggest releases are still on the horizon, and a solid new game is hard to come by. I typically use January/February as a place to catch up on my gaming backlog, but sometimes, out of nowhere, a great game sneaks up on me to (once again) push all of those unfinished games to the side.

Case in point: the brilliant and insanely tough Helldivers, a PlayStation-exclusive top down science fiction murder fest from Arrowhead Game Studios (whom you may recognize as the developers of Magicka).

If you've played Magicka, then Helldivers should feel right at home; you can team up with three of your buddies and traverse a near-endless stream of procedurally generated maps killing enemies and completing objectives. However, friendly fire is always on, meaning you have to coordinate with your friends in order to succeed. This adds a new layer of strategy and coordination; if you want to survive, you have to work together. And watch where you point your gun.

The setup for the game is straight out of Starship Troopers: you are a Helldiver, the best soldier that Super Earth has to offer. It is the distant future, and you are tasked you with eliminating the evil alien menace that is plaguing the galaxy and out to destroy Super Earth's way of life. It's up to you and your Helldiver pals to spread managed democracy across the universe and ensure freedom for generations to come! It's gleefully hilarious, especially since your character yells out "Have a fresh cup of tea-mocracy!" and "FREEDOM!" just about every time you kill something.

Gameplay is simple enough to grasp but has enough layers to create some unique strategy. You travel from planet to planet (each with varying difficulty) completing objectives, all the while trying to escape with your life. You have an arsenal of weapons that can be expanded and improved the more you level up. Each planet you visit also has scientific samples that you can collect to gain research points, which are in turn used to level up your weapons and abilities. Each player has the ability to call in support via strategems; equipment ranges from turrets and ammo to an APC and even a giant mech suit. Before you leave each mission, you have to wait on your escape shuttle; it's a little 'last stand' of sorts, with enemies coming at you from all sides. It's frantic and incredibly fun, especially when you throw other players and multiple strategems into the mix. Controls are precise, meaning you have no one but yourself to blame if you die.

Helldivers doesn't hold your hand at all. It rarely does you any favors, so that means it's up to you to take care of yourself and your teammates. Everything in this game can kill you: your friends, your own weapons, your defensive equipment, a teammate's drop pod, even the rescue shuttle can flatten your ass. You may thing that's a little too much, and at times it can be (especially when you're close to the end of a mission) but trust me when I say that nothing that Helldivers threw at me was frustrating. In fact, the multiple deaths made the game that much more fun (and hilarious). The feeling of accomplishment you get when you clear an insanely tough mission is incredibly rewarding.

You can play the game solo, but I would strongly suggest you either play with friends or use matchmaking. Helldivers is made for co-op, and it's much more entertaining and rewarding playing with others.

We're barely into 2015, but Helldivers is all but guaranteed to secure a spot on my "Best of" list at the end of the year. It's been a while since I have played as rewarding and entertaining game as this. I highly suggest you gather three of your closest buddies and dive straight into hell; you'll have a damn good time.

Just prepare to die. A lot.

The Order: 1886 and Quality vs. Value

Image courtesy of Twinfinite.net

Over the weekend, copies of Sony's upcoming major first exclusive title The Order: 1886 found their way into the hands of a few gamers, one of whom decided to upload his play through of it on YouTube. This caused a major controversy; not because someone put an entire play through of a yet-unreleased, highly anticipated game on YouTube for all to see, but because the game clocked in at about five hours. Many gamers became rather upset (actually, enraged would be the more accurate term) at the fact that a massively hyped, full-price single player-only game would offer such a short playtime. People have been debating The Order: 1886 all week long (it's still a trending topic on Twitter as I write this) and despite all of the anger it has attracted (this is the Internet, after all, and 'hate' is the only language people speak), the dispute over game length brings up some interesting discussion.

For me, game length really isn't a factor. I would much rather play a shorter game that feels concise and complete, rather than one that is lengthened with unnecessary padding (Alien: Isolation comes to mind, though I did still thoroughly enjoy that game). I cannot say whether The Order: 1886 is a 'good' or 'bad' game yet because I haven't played it; I have pre-ordered it, and, despite all of the outcry over it, am still eagerly awaiting the chance to get my hands on it.

Many people angered at the game's length immediately assume it is a bad game. That argument holds absolutely no ground. It seems to me that people are mixing up the concepts of 'quality' and 'value'. Allow me to explain:

First, remember that value is defined as "the worth or usefulness of something".

For the purposes of my explanation, let's take the entire concept of quality out of the equation and focus solely on value:

• If you buy a game for $60 and it lasts you 10-15 hours, that means you paid about $4 per gameplay hour. That is a good value. The game was a good use of your money.
• If you buy a game for $60 and it lasts you 3-6 hours, that means you paid about $10 per gameplay hour. That is a bad value. The game was a bad use of your money.

The only thing a game's length has an impact on is your wallet. Whether or not you enjoyed those six or twenty hours is completely up to you. Regardless of how long or short a game is, if you enjoyed playing it, that means you made good use of your time, and vice versa. To me, if a game is great, the fact that it's long or short is made irrelevant. A game should always be measured by how good or bad it is, not by its length. For all I know, The Order: 1886 could contain an absolutely fantastic five hours. And if that's the case, then I'll be glad I played it.

If you feel that a five hour game has no reason to be $60, you have every right to think that. But that doesn't mean the game itself is inherently bad because of it. You have to remember that quality is a perceptual, conditional, and somewhat subjective attribute that can be understood differently by many people.

In the end, the length of a game typically is the result of the developer's artistic vision. If Ready at Dawn felt that five hours was long enough to contain their vision for The Order, then you have to respect that. You don't have to like it, but just honor the fact that it's the game they wanted to make.

Gaming is an expensive hobby. Do what you wish with your money. My philosophy as I've gotten older is this: if there's something out there that you have interest in and want, go get it for yourself. Pay no attention to the opinions of others and make your own judgements. Is The Order: 1886 too short for your liking? Great, don't buy it! Are you fine with paying $60 for a five hour game? Great, buy it!

So in the end, what I'm asking is this: judge a game by its quality, not its length.

Legal Battles within the Video Game Industry

The video game industry is no stranger to legal controversy, especially when it comes to copyright infringement. The following are three of the most recent legal fights that have occurred in the gaming world.

EA Sports (Madden NFL) versus Former NFL Players

Perhaps the most widely publicized legal battle happening in the games industry is the fight between EA Sports and retired NFL players over unpaid licensing fees and the unauthorized use of their likenesses in the games. This case has been a topic of conversation for a long time, as in 2009, the NFL Players Association settled with the players for $26 million; the reason being that the players claimed the union did not seek out the best possible marketing deal for the players and worked with EA on a deal that would not give them proper compensation. However, the players still seek further payment, and the 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has authorized this case to continue. In its defense, EA cited protection under the First Amendment, saying that the use of the players’ likenesses was incidental. EA ran into a similar problem with their NCAA Football games, where the company was unlawfully using college players’ likenesses without permission. EA lost that fight, and had to pay a $40 million settlement andstop producing any more games in that series.

The likelihood that EA will be able to win this lawsuit is very low. At the same time, the chance that EA would be forced to stop making games in the Madden franchise is extremely unlikely. If what the players claim is true, then EA and the NFL Players Association could be in some serious trouble, and rightly so. It is one thing to not ask permission to use a person’s likeness, but deliberately crafting a deal that would cheat someone out of fair compensation is completely wrong. This case is still ongoing, so it will be interesting to see how it pans out. But for now, EA has little ground to stand on.

Nintendo’s YouTube Affiliate Program

Over the past few years, the popularity of “Let’s Play” videos on YouTube has exploded. For the uninitiated, a “Let’s Play” video is one where a person records his or herself playing a video game while also providing live commentary. Most video game companies welcome this sort of extra exposure, but Nintendo has famously been the biggest opponent of the “Let’s Play” community. In 2013, Nintendo began claiming all revenue from video that featured any of their games, as well as shutting down some YouTube user’s channels altogether. Nintendo felt the use of their products was unauthorized, and wanted all user-generated content that featured their games taken down. As a result, Nintendo faced a major backlash from both YouTube users and long-time fans. In response, Nintendo has recently revealed plans for an affiliate plan that would allow people to produce content featuring Nintendo products, but have to split any revenue user make with the company. Nintendo has already begun tagging all videos that feature their games, making sure they receive their 50% share of the revenue.

Personally, I feel that Nintendo is stuck in the past when it comes to many current video game industry trends, especially when it comes to the “Let’s Play” community. Though I myself do not fully understand the appeal of watching someone else play a video game, I understand that it is extremely popular and incredibly profitable. Nintendo has every right to want to control the rights to their products, but the YouTube users who feature their games in their videos are doing no harm to the company or its products whatsoever. They are not “stealing” Nintendo’s content and claiming it as their own. If anything, they are giving Nintendo a little bit of extra marketing.

EA versus Zynga

In 2012, EA sued video game developer Zynga for copyright infringement, as they claimed that Zynga’s game The Ville was a direct copy of EA’s game The Sims Social. In a rather angry and emotionally charged blog post, the general manager of The Sims Social, Lucy Bradshaw, said that the lawsuit was a step towards “protect(ing) the value of originalcreative works and those that work tirelessly to create them”. Zynga is no stranger to copyright lawsuits themselves, as they have faced legal action from developer SocialApps over the similarities between their own game myFarm and Zynga’s ultra-popular game Farmville. The suit waseventually thrown out and both companies reached an out of court settlement.

To be fair, almost every single game that has been released takes at least some sort of inspiration from another. Go down any video game isle in any major store and you will see countless bargain-bin clones of other major franchise video games. EA had little footing in this suit since, in video game industry terms, developers are basically allowed to copy the basic gaming concept. Znyga did not “copy and paste” EA’s game; they took the basic idea and changed many of its concepts and gameplay mechanics. I understand EA’s reasoning, but unless they are allowed to put a patent on their own game design, they have no power in controlling if other developers create games that are similar in design to their own. 

An Empty Feeling (and It's Unexpected Cure)

Image courtesy of Accidental Creative

As busy as my life can be, I still try to find time to sit down and enjoy some good old fashioned video games every chance I get. Problem is, lately I've chosen to do something else with my free time instead of play games. For some reason I can't explain, I've feel like I haven't been enjoying games as of late. And to be frank, that notion kind of shocks and astounds me.

Gaming is my biggest hobby, one that I've enjoyed since I was a kid. So it's strange to me that all of a sudden I just want to ... stop.

Does that mean I don't like video games anymore? No, of course not. Quite the contrary, in fact. To get to the bottom of all this, I took a look back at the previous gaming year and all of the games I played, particularly those I crammed into the holiday break. That's when it hit me.

I'm burned out on video games.

Problem was, even in recognizing this, I still couldn't pry myself away from Destiny or Far Cry 4, despite me getting bored or angry with them after a few minutes. I didn't want to play video games, but at the same time, I wanted to play video games (if that makes any sense).

In an attempt to cure this craziness, I dusted off my old Super Nintendo and popped in The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past. I started up a new game save and just played. For hours. After a while I moved away from the SNES and carried on with my life. When the time came to pick up games again, I flipped open my 3DS and carried on with Shovel Knight, a game I had been (unfortunately) neglecting. Again, I couldn't put it down. Suddenly, the love for I always had for video games was renewed, and all was right with my world again.

Seems the cure for my video game blues was firmly settled in old school sensibilities. Playing the SNES reminded me of why I love games in the first place, as did the brilliant retro-stylings of the amazing Shovel Knight.

So what's the point of all this? Well, it's two fold. Firstly, even someone who loves games as much as I do can get tired of them after a while. Secondly, it's always good to revisit the past. You never know what you may find there.

Playing those 16-bit games made me realize something. The video game industry is not as fantastic as you (or it wants you to) think it is. Game design has reached new heights, but also has forgotten its roots. As good as many games are today, they could be so much better. But how do we do that? Well, that's an answer for another day (and blog post!).