As most of my friends know, I love comicbooks, especially the classics like DC. I like some Marvel comics, but I like DC more. There's just something very interesting about classic American style comicbooks. Today I came across this article about Wonder Woman's costume change . At first, I thought it didn't really make much sense to change the character in the first place. I think that when we start trying to revamp storylines and characters we take away the original meaning and history. I would not go as far to say that DC made Wonder Woman look "un-American", just because they took away her stars and colors. If DC really wanted her to be American, they would not have created her to be from a mythical place in Ancient Greece. As usual, people use the internet as a way to display their dislike for the current events in politics and it has been a "fashion statement" to politicize everything in our current culture. I dismiss the comments for the article as an American fear of change and difference. I feel as long as if the new version of Wonder Woman is as good or better than the original, it should not really matter. I plan on writing my own graphic novels, and I would not want to have it "re-imagined" thirty years from now.
The fans, as fickle as they are, should be grateful that DC chose not to re-image her as an anime style character. The comicbook for Wonder WOman 2.0 was released today, so I couldn't find an appropriate photo for her costume.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Quick Post: The New XBOX 360
I know that I should have posted this when I first saw it, but Microsoft has already released a newer, slimmer version of the XBOX 360. The article that I read about this says that they are going to discontinue the current model and that it will sell for a price drop of $100 off the original price. I do not plan on buying a new system anytime soon unless the one I have breaks on me. Instead, maybe if I have a chance, I'll get a better internet connection for gaming than the current connection that I have.
Eddo Stern Lecture Review
This is an older post from another blog for my digital media class in Spring '10. The reason why I am posting this here at a videogame/scifi blog is because when I thought that I was going to see something from a real game designer I was seriously disappointed. So, I decided to put the original post in one color and my true opinions about the exhibit in another color. Of course, I'll update this post with some images and video documents of his work. The blue highlight is what I wrote in the critique that I wanted to stress.
The Eddo Stern Lecture was held on April 14 2010 in RGJ Room 2006. His works consist of digital media and game art. He is from Televiv, Israel. He has experience working with sculpture, video, performance and fame design. His main focus in digital art is videogames as an art form. The content of his work varies from cultural, political and dark to comical and ironic.
Stern’s first performance work was the Tekken Torture Tournament which consisted of the hack version of Tekken, reconceptualized. Micro controls sense the life bars in the game and take control over the players’ muscles. This performance featured Tekken champions from Australia who could not even take the pain. Videogames usually are disconnected from the player even when the gamer is completely disengaged in the levels. This tournament proves that gaming experiences can be fully brought to life.
Unlike his Tekken Torture Tournament, Stern’s Waco Resurrection fully programmed and simulated performance installation based on the Waco incident with David Koresh. It consists of one to four players and has headsets that are modeled after Koresh. It also has voice recognition and players can chant “super powers”. The goal of the game is to collect as many followers as possible before the compound burns. More followers increase aura. There is a ten minute countdown before the character dies in the game inevitably. The content in the game mixes history with fantasy. Its intent is to relive the Waco tragedy.
Eddo Stern’s current project is a videogame that is playable for blind and deaf gamers. Like Waco Resurrection, this new installation is based on real life accounts. Gamers are played as Jon Walker Lin. The game has headsets that are designed to accommodate those without sight or hearing, and they are supposed to create a way to trade physical attributes for extra powers. Stern says that one of the biggest challenges to this game is creating heads-up display to fit the needs of blind and deaf videogame players. For this game, he has an audio HUD instead to accommodate blind gamers. Those who have all senses can experience the blind/deaf experience in this game.
Stern also creates sculptures that embed technology and hacked games. Keyboard Castle is one of his works where the mechanical bot plays the hacked version of Everquest in everlasting loops and it randomly talks to those who are engaged in it. The structure of the sculpture is modeled after a castle. Fort Paladin is a hacked version of America’s Army. Like Keyboard Castle, Fort Paladin has a bot that runs on itself and is structured like a medieval castle.
I had a second to ask Stern if he has ever presented any of his games at videogame conventions such as PAX and E3. He answered yes. When I asked him about their reaction, he tells be that he has either been well received or met with scorn by the game designers there.
My reactions to his pieces are unique to any other piece that I have seen in art so far, because I could not fully comprehend the intent of his work. I am both a budding artist and someone who loves to play videogames. As an artist, I found his work to be creative and original, especially his sculptures. From seeing his presentation on his game designs, I am not so much in favor of them. However, as a gamer, I find that his games may not be well received by the gaming world. The idea of creating something for people who are blind or deaf is great. I feel that mainstream game designers can learn from him. I believe that the idea of videogames as art does not sit well with me, unless the game is written well enough to have a tasteful and artistic meaning. I also find that his games that are based completely on tragic events may trivialize what really happened and it may be more received by the digital art world than the gaming world.
I think that first, the average gamer would not appreciate that fact that a game designer placed art over the integrity of the game. I appreciate that Stern wants to expand his work to blind and deaf gamers. Accomodation and diversity are really needed in the gaming industry. However, to fork over about $100 for a cheesy headset is asking too much for an average gamer who is currently in college. Unless the game is damned good, he can forget about setting that price.
Second, I found his Tekken challenge to be strange, at best. When I wrote a critique of this lecture, I could not really state how I felt about his performance pieces, because I had to critique his work as art, which I had a hard time even doing that. I am die hard fan of the traditional definition of art, even after taking Digital Media classes. I feel that Stern's work is killing the definition of what true digital media art is and the tradition of the mainstream gaming industry, which still has a hard time accepting the indie games.
The Eddo Stern Lecture was held on April 14 2010 in RGJ Room 2006. His works consist of digital media and game art. He is from Televiv, Israel. He has experience working with sculpture, video, performance and fame design. His main focus in digital art is videogames as an art form. The content of his work varies from cultural, political and dark to comical and ironic.
Stern’s first performance work was the Tekken Torture Tournament which consisted of the hack version of Tekken, reconceptualized. Micro controls sense the life bars in the game and take control over the players’ muscles. This performance featured Tekken champions from Australia who could not even take the pain. Videogames usually are disconnected from the player even when the gamer is completely disengaged in the levels. This tournament proves that gaming experiences can be fully brought to life.
Unlike his Tekken Torture Tournament, Stern’s Waco Resurrection fully programmed and simulated performance installation based on the Waco incident with David Koresh. It consists of one to four players and has headsets that are modeled after Koresh. It also has voice recognition and players can chant “super powers”. The goal of the game is to collect as many followers as possible before the compound burns. More followers increase aura. There is a ten minute countdown before the character dies in the game inevitably. The content in the game mixes history with fantasy. Its intent is to relive the Waco tragedy.
Eddo Stern’s current project is a videogame that is playable for blind and deaf gamers. Like Waco Resurrection, this new installation is based on real life accounts. Gamers are played as Jon Walker Lin. The game has headsets that are designed to accommodate those without sight or hearing, and they are supposed to create a way to trade physical attributes for extra powers. Stern says that one of the biggest challenges to this game is creating heads-up display to fit the needs of blind and deaf videogame players. For this game, he has an audio HUD instead to accommodate blind gamers. Those who have all senses can experience the blind/deaf experience in this game.
Stern also creates sculptures that embed technology and hacked games. Keyboard Castle is one of his works where the mechanical bot plays the hacked version of Everquest in everlasting loops and it randomly talks to those who are engaged in it. The structure of the sculpture is modeled after a castle. Fort Paladin is a hacked version of America’s Army. Like Keyboard Castle, Fort Paladin has a bot that runs on itself and is structured like a medieval castle.
I had a second to ask Stern if he has ever presented any of his games at videogame conventions such as PAX and E3. He answered yes. When I asked him about their reaction, he tells be that he has either been well received or met with scorn by the game designers there.
My reactions to his pieces are unique to any other piece that I have seen in art so far, because I could not fully comprehend the intent of his work. I am both a budding artist and someone who loves to play videogames. As an artist, I found his work to be creative and original, especially his sculptures. From seeing his presentation on his game designs, I am not so much in favor of them. However, as a gamer, I find that his games may not be well received by the gaming world. The idea of creating something for people who are blind or deaf is great. I feel that mainstream game designers can learn from him. I believe that the idea of videogames as art does not sit well with me, unless the game is written well enough to have a tasteful and artistic meaning. I also find that his games that are based completely on tragic events may trivialize what really happened and it may be more received by the digital art world than the gaming world.
I think that first, the average gamer would not appreciate that fact that a game designer placed art over the integrity of the game. I appreciate that Stern wants to expand his work to blind and deaf gamers. Accomodation and diversity are really needed in the gaming industry. However, to fork over about $100 for a cheesy headset is asking too much for an average gamer who is currently in college. Unless the game is damned good, he can forget about setting that price.
Second, I found his Tekken challenge to be strange, at best. When I wrote a critique of this lecture, I could not really state how I felt about his performance pieces, because I had to critique his work as art, which I had a hard time even doing that. I am die hard fan of the traditional definition of art, even after taking Digital Media classes. I feel that Stern's work is killing the definition of what true digital media art is and the tradition of the mainstream gaming industry, which still has a hard time accepting the indie games.
Sunday, June 20, 2010
The "Direction" of Ungrounded
Because I do not have cable to join in on the excitement of E3 2010, I have been going into other interests within the geek/nerd spectrum. I always had an aquired taste for science fiction. So, I decided that instead of exclusively writing about videogames, I'll also be writing about science fiction movies, televisions shows and books. I started this summer with the Battlestar Galactica series. I plan on eventually writing a long overdue review on this show. I believe it's worth reviewing, and writing about in depth. I still plan on putting other posts here about videogames, tech and music.
TV Shows for this Summer and Fall of 2010:
What I plan on writing for these TV series:
Books I will be Reading/ Reviewing
TV Shows for this Summer and Fall of 2010:
- Battlestar Galactica (Reimagined)
- Caprica (prequel of BSG)
- Stargate SG1
- Stargate Atlantis (Spin-off)
- Odyssey 5
- Dr Who
- Star Trek (Very First Episode to Final Episode and Movie)
- Babylon 5
- FireFly
- Andromeda
- Jake 2.0
- Jeremiah
What I plan on writing for these TV series:
- Reviews for all shows
- The cultural relevence of BSG
- My opinion on the best scifi show ever made, after watching all series
- Star Trek vs Star Wars (If you're a fanboy/girl, leave my site. I don't need romantic ideas based on opinion here)
Books I will be Reading/ Reviewing
- Fountainhead by Ayn Rand (BioShock)
- Atlas Shrugged By Ayn Rand (BioShock)
- Anthem by Ayn Rand (BioShock)
- Darkness Falls by Kyle Mills
- Watchman (Graphic Novel)
- Maus and Maus II by Art Spiegelman (Comicbook, not scifi)
- Dune Series by Frank Herbert
- Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Phillip K Dick
- Various books by Octavia E. Butler
Sunday, May 30, 2010
The Gamers vs The Critics
I had the pleasure of spending my winter vacation playing a really awesome game. This past weekend, one of my online friends and I got into a heated argument about the game I played. I personally think that it's silly to argue about games, because we all have different tastes, but because he's a guy, and I'm not, he insists that he's right about it being a crappy game and I'm wrong, because the majority thinks the story on the campaign mode sucks balls. Just because the majority might think that Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 sucks, it does not really mean it does. Infact, it won game of the year by several critics and received higher markings than the first Modern Warfare game. When it comes to games, I don't believe the cynical gamers who complain about sequels when there are so many damn games out there to try. When one looks at the history of videogames, we can see that there are patterns of sagas, sequels, series and franchises. I like to compare it to a Twilight fan talking about how bad Anne Rice's books are, when this fan only read about two or three chapters of the books. I noticed this alot, especially with the people who are fans of the Halo series or anyother series.
I'm a huge fan of the Halo series, but I acknowlegde that Halo: ODST was killed by Modern Warfare 2. Two different genres...I know, but if you're a Halo fan and you're defending ODST, just because you don't like one or two part of the Modern Warfare 2 storyline or level design, then you need your head examined. The game critics found it to be a good game for a reason. They know what a good game is. They also know what poorly designed videogames look like. I would go as far as if you want to know what game you should buy, read the reviews with caution, some may end up saying "well, the reviewers are paid by the designers to promote their games". Yeah, that's a possibility, which is why I say also to see the game for yourself. If you want to do so without buying a game, there is always Blockbuster, Gamefly or your friend next door. Rent or borrow the game to determine if you think it's a good game. If you want to read reviews, I know that GameSpot and GameFaqs are good, they are reviewed by fans. Just make sure you find a review that is not biased. When I review games, I have my favorites, but I try not to judge a game just because the developers changed something that I liked in the original game, unless it does work in the new game.
I would honestly say that I liked the second Modern Warfare game more. It "feels" better than the first game. When I played MW2 it does not feel like Call of Duty. I was glad it didn't feel that way, because I was getting pretty tired of a worn down series. I noticed that when it comes to videogames, gamers are "jaded" but they tend to hate change so much. I was reading an Amazon.com review on Splinter Cell: Conviction by a customer, and one of the commenters complained that the game "turned into a third person shooter". Well, yeah, Sam is not part of the agency anymore, what do you expect him to do? Go by all the Echelon rules? It would not have made sense if Sam Fisher went rogue, and still going through the game as though it 's first installment.
I think it's pointless to argue with those who turn out to be cynical about everything, and not take into consideration that the gamers are the ones who determine the industry, not so much the designers. When I played Halo: ODST, I knew that it wasn't going to be as great of a game as the three previously. When I played it, I was seriously disappointed, because expected more from Bungie. It seemed like an expansion pack instead of a new prequel between the second and third games. But then again, it's the pressure by the fans and the industry. I think it's more important to turn up an excellent game that was 5 yrs on the making than turn up a crappy game that was made in a year.
I'm a huge fan of the Halo series, but I acknowlegde that Halo: ODST was killed by Modern Warfare 2. Two different genres...I know, but if you're a Halo fan and you're defending ODST, just because you don't like one or two part of the Modern Warfare 2 storyline or level design, then you need your head examined. The game critics found it to be a good game for a reason. They know what a good game is. They also know what poorly designed videogames look like. I would go as far as if you want to know what game you should buy, read the reviews with caution, some may end up saying "well, the reviewers are paid by the designers to promote their games". Yeah, that's a possibility, which is why I say also to see the game for yourself. If you want to do so without buying a game, there is always Blockbuster, Gamefly or your friend next door. Rent or borrow the game to determine if you think it's a good game. If you want to read reviews, I know that GameSpot and GameFaqs are good, they are reviewed by fans. Just make sure you find a review that is not biased. When I review games, I have my favorites, but I try not to judge a game just because the developers changed something that I liked in the original game, unless it does work in the new game.
I would honestly say that I liked the second Modern Warfare game more. It "feels" better than the first game. When I played MW2 it does not feel like Call of Duty. I was glad it didn't feel that way, because I was getting pretty tired of a worn down series. I noticed that when it comes to videogames, gamers are "jaded" but they tend to hate change so much. I was reading an Amazon.com review on Splinter Cell: Conviction by a customer, and one of the commenters complained that the game "turned into a third person shooter". Well, yeah, Sam is not part of the agency anymore, what do you expect him to do? Go by all the Echelon rules? It would not have made sense if Sam Fisher went rogue, and still going through the game as though it 's first installment.
I think it's pointless to argue with those who turn out to be cynical about everything, and not take into consideration that the gamers are the ones who determine the industry, not so much the designers. When I played Halo: ODST, I knew that it wasn't going to be as great of a game as the three previously. When I played it, I was seriously disappointed, because expected more from Bungie. It seemed like an expansion pack instead of a new prequel between the second and third games. But then again, it's the pressure by the fans and the industry. I think it's more important to turn up an excellent game that was 5 yrs on the making than turn up a crappy game that was made in a year.
Videogame Journalism (Brief About Life: Why I Would Never Call Myself a Journalist)
This summer we have alot of games being previewed for the annual game convention E3. I hear different things about E3 such as "No Fans Allowed" (press badge required) and "We now allow fans". Although I won't be in LA this year for E3 or even ComiCon (due to school), those are still conventions that I would want to put on my wishlist for next year. I do plan on going PAX, but it depends, again, on school (I can't wait to graduate from college. I hope to make it ASAP).
Although I review games and talk about them extensively on this blog, I, however, AM NOT A GAMING JOURNALIST! I see it as a possible career someday, but it's pretty male-oriented and male-dominated. The videogame industry can be difficult to break into and be taken seriously if you are a young woman. It's the same way with the art world, the comicbook industry, the music industry, or any industry that does not require women to either sit and look pretty, or take care of others. I don't want to scare my male readers, but there is some truth to what I'm saying.
My English instructor when I first came to the university that I attend currently told me that instead of protesting, picketting, boycotting, complaining or even criticizing the videogame industry, be a catalyst of change by being a part of it. It's really difficult to bring about change when there are so few other women who share your hobbies.
I find that when I lived on campus there were other who did game, but they were male. This is off tangent but if I thought of it before, I would have blogged about living in my hall for 2009-2010 school year. It was the most turbulent school year I've ever been through. I don't recommend living on campus for some people. It can stunt social growth.
I found some of the gamers on campus to be arrogant bastards. If someone from a major company showed them a good game, they wouldn't know what to think of it. I'd say the same for the online community of gamers that I once belonged to. Fanboyism kills everything at best.
When I first went to my current school, I entered as a pre-journalism major, and I wanted to minor in computer science. I had to take a reporting class because it was required before going into public relations or magazine writing, which were fields I wanted a career in. My instructor was and still is an editor of the city paper. She insisted that I go into newspaper and write for the school paper. I would have done that if I wanted to go into a field that is dimishing as I'm speaking, due to online news sources (Why pay for the cow if you can get the milk for free/) and if there were still dignity and integrity in the field of journalism. The school paper lacked those things, and so did the school magazine. If I could change anything about the world of art or the field of journalism or even the entertainment industry in all media, I would make it where it is required to have passion and honesty in what works get exposed.
At the end of my journalism class, I told my teacher that I'm switching to art, earlier in that semester I told my TA in my computer science class that I wanted to go into art instead of journalism, and he told me to add computer science to major so I can be a shader for the gaming industry. I told him that's a pretty good idea. Computer science overall requires alot of dedication and precision. By those damned guy gamers, I was told that I need to be a computer engineer to be in the gaming field. I'm like "Not everyone in the videogame industry are programmers!" I know that I berrated my mom about age not meaning anything, but she does have a point. People have told her things that kept her from her dream, and I do not want to be like that. I plan on asking an instructor who teaches the gaming classes about game design and what degrees I need.
I don't necessarily think that game design will be my passion. I was told by a friend (don't speak to him any more, because he wasn't a good friend in the first place) that I needed to be in a more social field. I don't consider myself to be a social person. I try to be, which failed last semester (fall09/spring10), I just want a career or a niche that I can call my own. Hence the reason why I don't call myself a journalist in videogames.
Why not a Journalist?
First of all, I do not call myself a journalist, because unlike being an artist (that I am), journalism is a professional career, even though current journalists do not treat it as such. If I learned anything from my journalism classes here and at home, I learned that inorder to be a reputable journalist, you must register as one. I forgot what it is called, but it's similar to getting a license to practice real estate, or law or even medicine. It's so they can distinguish a real journalist from a not-so-real one and hold you accountable for your work. It's basically a press badge. I don't have a journalism degree, so I don't get one. My friend was a journalism major here, and she said that it's hard as hell, because I have to know every single thing about the field along with some classes aside. One of the requirements of a magazine journalist or newspaper journalist is interviewing. I hate to talk to people about their work. I hated that in my Digital Media class, I had to write questions to the artist about their work. What I love about art and writing is the broadness of these passions. I can do whatever I want in art, whether or not it sells, I'm sure someone would buy it. In writing, I can write whatever I want, there will be disagreements, but people will read it. Not so much in a group oriented career. There is less freedom and lesss room for journalism than in creating art, reviewing books, music, movies and videogames and so forth.
What Will I be Writing, Then?
I have a subscription on Youtube who talks in his videos about politics in videogames. I came up with the idea of writing about the poltical, social and cultural relevence of the games that we play today and the games that we've played yesterday. I will use literature to talk about these, along with reviewing the games that I play and discuss other forms of entertainment such as music, movies and books (scifi). I will also write about random sites I find interesting, or stupid. I am not sure if my idea is new, but if it's never been done before, I found a niche in writing. I don't know too many people who are willing to sit and watch interviews with dead people, and read their work and write about whether or not the gamer designers got it right. I hope for whoever reads my blogs that I make them as creative, entertaining and insightful as possible. I do not think that any magazine or any website will cover what I'm about to...
Although I review games and talk about them extensively on this blog, I, however, AM NOT A GAMING JOURNALIST! I see it as a possible career someday, but it's pretty male-oriented and male-dominated. The videogame industry can be difficult to break into and be taken seriously if you are a young woman. It's the same way with the art world, the comicbook industry, the music industry, or any industry that does not require women to either sit and look pretty, or take care of others. I don't want to scare my male readers, but there is some truth to what I'm saying.
My English instructor when I first came to the university that I attend currently told me that instead of protesting, picketting, boycotting, complaining or even criticizing the videogame industry, be a catalyst of change by being a part of it. It's really difficult to bring about change when there are so few other women who share your hobbies.
I find that when I lived on campus there were other who did game, but they were male. This is off tangent but if I thought of it before, I would have blogged about living in my hall for 2009-2010 school year. It was the most turbulent school year I've ever been through. I don't recommend living on campus for some people. It can stunt social growth.
I found some of the gamers on campus to be arrogant bastards. If someone from a major company showed them a good game, they wouldn't know what to think of it. I'd say the same for the online community of gamers that I once belonged to. Fanboyism kills everything at best.
When I first went to my current school, I entered as a pre-journalism major, and I wanted to minor in computer science. I had to take a reporting class because it was required before going into public relations or magazine writing, which were fields I wanted a career in. My instructor was and still is an editor of the city paper. She insisted that I go into newspaper and write for the school paper. I would have done that if I wanted to go into a field that is dimishing as I'm speaking, due to online news sources (Why pay for the cow if you can get the milk for free/) and if there were still dignity and integrity in the field of journalism. The school paper lacked those things, and so did the school magazine. If I could change anything about the world of art or the field of journalism or even the entertainment industry in all media, I would make it where it is required to have passion and honesty in what works get exposed.
At the end of my journalism class, I told my teacher that I'm switching to art, earlier in that semester I told my TA in my computer science class that I wanted to go into art instead of journalism, and he told me to add computer science to major so I can be a shader for the gaming industry. I told him that's a pretty good idea. Computer science overall requires alot of dedication and precision. By those damned guy gamers, I was told that I need to be a computer engineer to be in the gaming field. I'm like "Not everyone in the videogame industry are programmers!" I know that I berrated my mom about age not meaning anything, but she does have a point. People have told her things that kept her from her dream, and I do not want to be like that. I plan on asking an instructor who teaches the gaming classes about game design and what degrees I need.
I don't necessarily think that game design will be my passion. I was told by a friend (don't speak to him any more, because he wasn't a good friend in the first place) that I needed to be in a more social field. I don't consider myself to be a social person. I try to be, which failed last semester (fall09/spring10), I just want a career or a niche that I can call my own. Hence the reason why I don't call myself a journalist in videogames.
Why not a Journalist?
First of all, I do not call myself a journalist, because unlike being an artist (that I am), journalism is a professional career, even though current journalists do not treat it as such. If I learned anything from my journalism classes here and at home, I learned that inorder to be a reputable journalist, you must register as one. I forgot what it is called, but it's similar to getting a license to practice real estate, or law or even medicine. It's so they can distinguish a real journalist from a not-so-real one and hold you accountable for your work. It's basically a press badge. I don't have a journalism degree, so I don't get one. My friend was a journalism major here, and she said that it's hard as hell, because I have to know every single thing about the field along with some classes aside. One of the requirements of a magazine journalist or newspaper journalist is interviewing. I hate to talk to people about their work. I hated that in my Digital Media class, I had to write questions to the artist about their work. What I love about art and writing is the broadness of these passions. I can do whatever I want in art, whether or not it sells, I'm sure someone would buy it. In writing, I can write whatever I want, there will be disagreements, but people will read it. Not so much in a group oriented career. There is less freedom and lesss room for journalism than in creating art, reviewing books, music, movies and videogames and so forth.
What Will I be Writing, Then?
I have a subscription on Youtube who talks in his videos about politics in videogames. I came up with the idea of writing about the poltical, social and cultural relevence of the games that we play today and the games that we've played yesterday. I will use literature to talk about these, along with reviewing the games that I play and discuss other forms of entertainment such as music, movies and books (scifi). I will also write about random sites I find interesting, or stupid. I am not sure if my idea is new, but if it's never been done before, I found a niche in writing. I don't know too many people who are willing to sit and watch interviews with dead people, and read their work and write about whether or not the gamer designers got it right. I hope for whoever reads my blogs that I make them as creative, entertaining and insightful as possible. I do not think that any magazine or any website will cover what I'm about to...
Sunday, May 16, 2010
BioShock vs BioShock 2
Gameplay: I find that the game play in the second installment to be more refined than in the first. There are more gene tonics, more stages for plasmids and there newer uses for gene upgrades. Being a Big Daddy has its advantages over playing Jack, a tool for the Fontain Corporation. Delta gets to carry more more money and more Adam than Jack in Bio Shock. The gameplay is slightly more cohesive, and the player has more to do. However, in the second game, I did experience some audio skipping, some clipping and some freezing. These issues seemed more addressed in the first installment than the second. I don't know if I can really blame it on the developers for being so crunched for time when they are about to release these games.Storyline: The storyline in the first installment makes more sense than in the second game. At the end of the first game, the develeopers gave us gamers the impression that the Rapture story has ended. I'm not going to discredit the second game. BioShock 2 picks up where the first games leaves off. If you're a gamer who is more concerned about story than gameplay, like I am, then you will understand that you want questions from the first game answered like "Who rules Rapture now?", "What will happen to the Little Sisters and Big Daddies?" and "What kind of government will take control of Rapture now that Andrew Ryan is dead?" The second game pretty much answers those questions with a story now told by an old-generation Big Daddy and a more aggressive, and more tyranical villain (Sophia Lamb), who is after him.
As I played both games, I noticed that there is a sense of duality with both of them. In the first game, the leader of Rapture (Andrew Ryan) pushed for a society based solely on rationalism and self-preservation. The second installment, the people of Rapture are lost and they are search for the opposite which is a sense of belief and collectivism through a new leader (Sophia Lamb). So, pretty much, the story went from being an Ayn Rand-esque libertarian based story to a socialistic dream of citizens being members of a family. As someone who will be minoring in philosophy, I find that both philosophical concepts to be relevent to the cohesiveness of the storyline. When a well worshipped leader dies and his ideologies leave with him, people need something to turn to. The storyline of BioShock 2 reminds me of what happened to Soviet Russia after its communist collapse, except it's the complete opposite. In the game, Sophia Lamb pretty much tells the citizens of Rapture that altruism trumps the self. In the first Bio Shock game, Andrew Ryan tells the people that the self is so important. As someone who is currently in school, I completely grasp this, but anyother gamer may not fully comprehend the storyline. They may only understand the ethical choices that have to be made such has whether the Little Sisters should be rescued or harvested. For a story, Bio Shock has a sophisticated storyline for a target audience that is typically between sixteen and thirty- five years old.
(In another entry I'll discuss the cultural and philosophical relevence to these games and how they related to Ayn Rand's works.)
Graphics/Environment: As for the environment, both games are complete artistry. I'm not saying this because I'm a huge fan of both games. I am saying this because the only people who know how art in videogames should be done are people who know the gamers and what they are looking for. The levels in both games are carefully rendered. I love how the developers combine art deco with sealife and urban decay. These types of games should be called art games. The main characters in the game are well detailed and carefully rendered, especially the Big Sisters and the splicers in the second game. Both games run neck to neck when it comes to environments and graphics.
Music: I really admire how there is a mixture of old jazz and bullets in the game. I believe that there should be better voice acting on the splicers' part. Instead of repeated phrases throughout the game, they should say more. I would also say the same about the little sisters' voices. The voices in the first game are slightly better than in the second. I do think that the 1940's proper accent goes well with the game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
