Ubisoft Cries Wolf on Piracy, Cancels Future Soldier on PC

In a new turn of events after claims that Ubisoft's title I Am Alive may not reach the PC, Ubisoft is pulling an even bigger rabbit out of its hat. Ghost Recon: Future Soldier, the highly anticipated continuation of the Ghost Recon series, has apparently been cancelled for PC. Why? Piracy.

Ubisoft has now officially lost it. I'd like to keep things fair and in perspective, but they've simply just shot themselves in the foot. How can you respect a company that is laying down and saying "heck, piracy will just take up all of our would be sales so lets just not release it?". This is coming from a company that has the absolute worst DRM among all current PC releases. They usually are extremely intrusive, require a constant internet connection, signing up at their website and registering your game several times over just to turn it on and play. No wonder your titles are pirated so often when pirates over the game without all the intrusive DRM you have required that makes a game unplayable for paying customers. You are making your games such a poor value to PC gamers that you are encouraging your own piracy issues. If you make your games a better value by perhaps utilizing Steam's VAC system so that DRM is nearly unnoticeable people would buy your games at a much higher rate because your offering the same easy service that the pirates are.

Piracy is an issue, yes, but for a major company to roll over and just give up is inexcusable. CD Projekt Red, a small developer in Poland, has been able to sell 1million copies of its RPG hit The Witcher 2: Assassin of Kings (with about a quarter of the sales through digital distribution) with no large publisher behind it, no marketing, no console version released, and you guessed it, NO DRM. PC gamers do pay for games, we aren't all looking to score a free pirated version, we just don't want to deal with the crap developers hand us because they think piracy is a big deal and great inconveniences for us. Ignoring the PC platform is foolish, sure they aren't as readily available as consoles are as far as sales, but they aren't dying in the way most people would like to paint it. Until Ubsisoft gets it's act together (and perhaps gets back to making good games as they've been on a steady downfall when you look at the review patterns over the past 5 years), I'm not going to buy another title from them whether its on my PC, my PS3, or my Xbox 360 till they figure out how to better treat its customers. What do you think? Is piracy such an issue that Ubisoft should stop making PC games? Is Ubisoft just an awful company when it comes to how they handle PC games? Do we need stricter or more lenient DRM features? And is the console pirating and sale loses through used titles being really underplayed next to how easy it is to pirate on a PC? Sound off below!

Crazy People Petition Whitehouse for Skyrim Ban

At Kotaku there was a small, but very funny article about a petition against Skyrim. This isn't the run of the mill "we need a patch, there are issues with the game" fan complaints, this is full on "round up every copy and burn them" style. That's a little intense don't you think, to you know, destroy any mention of a game that sells millions? Well, maybe that's because the authors are a little out of left-field. Here is the petition in it's amazing original form, straight from Kotaku:

WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:
Immediately Ban the Deadly Videogame Known as "SkyRim" for The Safety of America's Youths.
Whereas videogaming has proven to cause social, ethical and health problems in people of all ages,

Whereas sexual perversion and homosexuality are threatening to destroy the Christian foundations on which this nation was built,

Whereas a new video game has just been created that far exceeds any others in the psychological and spiritual damage it does to teens,

We, the American people, today ask you,

1) To enact an immediate ban on the videogame known as "SkyRim" produced by Blizzard Entertainment.

2) To seize and destroy all copies already in public hands and erase its presence on the internet.

3) To prosecute the players of "SkyRim" to the fullest extent of the law.

4) To create a national database of videogame avatars and "screen names" so that teenagers can be better monitored.

Good chance it's a joke, but hey their are crazy enough people in the world that this could be legit. It also felt like a good time to poke some fun rather than my usual commentary on the happenings in the videogame industry. Mainly this was an excuse to bust out a Buddy Jesus pic, but I digress, let's look at everything wrong here.

1.) They call it "SkyRim"

First off, it's "Skyrim". It's the name of a country in the continent of Tamriel located on the planet Nirn in the Elder Scrolls Universe. It's not two words, it's not like they named the place "Sky Rim Job" or something (considering they allege "sexual perversion and homosexuality" is a big part of this game). So credibility is getting questioned here.

2.) "Whereas sexual perversion and homosexuality are threatening to destroy the Christian foundations on which this nation was built"

You mean Protestant?

3.) "To enact an immediate ban on the videogame known as "SkyRim" produced by Blizzard Entertainment."

Really? I mean c'mon, I can understand messing up the whole history of america and the pilgrims deal, but it says "Bethesda" right on the damn box.

4.) To seize and destroy all copies already in public hands and erase its presence on the internet."

You ever hear of 4chan or anonymous? Good luck with that one.

5.) "To prosecute the players of "SkyRim" to the fullest extent of the law."

I didn't know that 1000 bounty in each of the 9 holds was going to catch up to me in real life....

So, in conclusion, this whole thing is ridiculous. Yes, I have logged over 90 hours on Skyrim but I'm not going on shooting sprees, acting homosexual, or trying to burn down the christian church and none of my friends are so I think we are going to be fine. I think everyone else thinks it is a joke too when they get digital signatures on the petition from people with Skyrim reference names like "Dova K", "Fus Roh Dah", "Lusty Argonian M", "Balgruuf T", and "Tiber S". All in all, people just need to relax on videogames. Media sources like Fox feeding us awful information from people like Jack Thompson over recent years has given a bad image to games. There is nothing better or worse on television or a movie that you will find in a game and the rating in systems in place are there for a reason. No game is going to cause someone to do ridiculous things unless a careless adult can't read that a game like  Skyrim contains blood and violence and gives it to an impressionable person like a 5 year old or an unmedicated schizophrenic. So what do you guys think? This is a hilarious petition by crazy people, that you actually agree with them, or that this joke does point toward the issues of game content and the audience that they are meant for with the current ESRB rating system? Sound off below!

Torchlight 2 Delayed

Got an itch to play a dungeon crawler this holiday season? Well, you might have to hold your breath as Kotaku's Owen Good is reporting that Torchlight 2 is being pushed back to an early 2012 release. Runic games sited that it wanted more time to polish the title and even do a short beta before it's release.

The cooler thing, in my opinion, is the frankness the company has to the other reason it has delayed the title: all the great games that are out now. Think about it, this may have been one of the greatest years for videogames ever. IGN awarded perfect 10 scores to two titles already in Uncharted 3 and The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, not to mention the other amazing titles out there. Assassin's Creed: Revelations, Batman: Arkham City, Battlefield 3, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, Dark Souls, The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim, Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary, Minecraft, RAGE, Saints Row 3, and Star Wars: The Old Republic are just some of the big name titles that have (or will be out) by Christmas. It's a breath of fresh air to see a game developer realize that most people will be consumed in these games and that pushing their title into early 2012 can give them a better chance as being seen as a stand out title. 

The move could turn out to be a mistake however. By pushing back into early 2012, they have to compete with that other popular dungeon crawler. You know...oh what's it called....oh yeah, Diablo 3, probably one of the most anticipated games this decade. Being in direct competition with them could hurt their sales as they'll launch around the same time. Runic does, however, have a lot of the staff from the original Diablo game developing the Torchlight series, so it does stand a very good chance of being as good or better than Diablo 3, but it is still relatively not well known compared to the big franchise name Diablo has evolved into over the years. So hopefully Runic is not hurting themselves by doing this, I'd hate to see Torchlight 2 sink in this holiday seasons lineup, but it would be even worse to see it struggle against the Diablo juggernaut. So what do yo think? Is delaying a good idea with what is all available right now? Is it cool that they are willing to admit to this? Or are they making a mistake by not getting to the market before Diablo 3? Sound off below!

Website Time!

It's time for me to create a website for my MAGD 150 class that this blog was created for. As per request of my professor, I have to post my palette of colors here. It's a rough palette, most likely to change in the near future. The palette is based off an image from the Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim marketing material. I really like dark and sleek colors, keeping it very contemporary and as far away from gaudy colors as possible. Here is the palette:

Woll use the #0d0f0b black for background and text, text will be in a white box, tangaroa for body head text, bali hai for links. The main navigation will be Copperplate Gothic Bold , all other standard text will be Calibri with a bold Calibri for titles of articles. Mock layout:

And finally, for a logo I have a little web icon with my gamertag name as the site focuses on me on the web and the games I play. So it's a videogame resume of sorts.

The "Modern" Gamer

Call of Duty is by far the biggest, most publicly known video-game in the industry. It shatters sales records every year that they set with their previous games. Despite all of this, it is also one of the most slandered and despised game among gamers. Why is this so?

Brian Crecente at Kotaku had a novel idea to find out why: let everyone on twitter comment on why they don't like COD. The comments are interesting and varied, from claims that COD is the videogame equivalent of a popcorn film like Transformers to distaste with the management of its publishing company Activision and even some disgust of how unrealistic it portrays and over glorifies war. The unique voice of the community can be heard in this wide range of comments, but there was one in particular that really struck a chord with me from the twitter handle jerschobel: 

"it perpetuates stereotypes of gamer culture that simply aren't true. many who buy COD buy ONLY COD."

It made me think about myself as a gamer, what I play, and what games my friends play. We all lean toward certain genres, I certainly enjoy my FPS and RPG games, but I found that I do have a robust library. Titles like Frozen Synapse, Limbo, and Magicka can be found throughout my steam library from the very small developers that created them. I clearly enjoy my fair share of strategy games as well with turn based Civilization and the Total War titles, not to mention the real-time titles like Dawn of War II and the iconic Starcraft games. 3rd person action games even get the nod with Batman Arkham Asylum and Arkham City and I have never played a game so thoroughly as Assassin's Creed II in recent memory (100% completion including DLC in one glorious weekend). Yet, when I compare it to some of my friends and roommates, things start to diverge. 

To start, 2 of my roommates (with the exception of sports titles) own exclusively Call of Duty games on their Xbox 360. In fact, since the release of Call of Duty 8 (Modern Warfare 3) this past Tuesday, it's the only game they have played.  They have nearly 30 or more than hours into it's multiplayer mode and it's been for sale for only 5 days as of writing. That is a ridiculous amount of game time. Another 8 of my friends own only games from a total of 4 franchises (Call of Duty, Battlefield, Gears of War, and Halo) with the iterations of Call of Duty being considered their most played title. 4 more of my friends own the same titles, but start to add in more role-playing games like the Elder Scrolls, Fallout, and Mass Effect. Only 3 of my friends have a library as diverse or even more varied than the one I have.

It's interesting to see how dominate Call of Duty was among my friends that claim themselves as gamers. If you blow the numbers up by millions, it sure would outweigh a lot of the other players with very uniquely dispersed library's. The question is though: are those who seemingly play only the blockbuster AAA titles like Call of Duty the definition of today's gamer? The loudmouth, trash talking, racist, sexist, 17-28 year old guy on Xbox live is getting well known in society. Even popular viral shorts like "The Online Gamer" have been dedicated to this stereotype, with one of my friends actually making this mockery series look tame. A lot of my friends are highly competitive and hearing a small tirade of cussing from the other rooms in my house is common place at the moment. Is this becoming the face of the gaming community? Like movies, the Michael Bay movie with cheap thrills and no story and a massive marketing budget rule the roost and bring in the masses while the more well refined experiences get lost to a more niche audience? I for one don't like telling people that I am a gamer, in particular a Game Development major, and then get asked immediately about Call of Duty. I want to talk about the art and magnificence of Skyrim's landscape, the brilliance that The Old Republic looks to bring with story telling to MMO's, the creativity in Minecraft, and the success of free communities like League of Legends. *Sigh* or maybe I should just give up and be happy that the stereotype of a gamer is no longer the neck-bearded World of Warcraft die-hard. Regardless, I want to hear your thoughts on what you think a gamer is. Is it the new sterotypical COD rager, is it still that WoW guy in his mom's basement, maybe it's the rise of the female gamer? Sound off below!

Battlefield 3 Requires Online Pass For Consoles

Owen Good on Kotaku confirmed this week that Battlefield 3 will require an online pass in order to play the game online. The pass comes with every new copy of the game and if you do not have a pass, it costs $10 to acquire one. EA has been slowly integrating the online pass requirement for all the multiplayer components of their games recently, with titles like Dead Space 2 and Need For Speed: Hot Pursuit requiring it in addition to all of their sports titles.

Why is it a big deal? Mainly because it's becoming the best trend to combat used game sales. One of the biggest battles videogame publishers have been faced with in recent history is used game sales, namely through GameStop. Buying a slightly used game for a few bucks cheaper seems like a great deal for the consumer, but none of the money goes back to the developers while GameStop sees all the profit. Many gamers that buy used copies have been outraged as they are now essentially paying for a new game where these online passes make up the difference in price.

In my opinion, these online passes are genius. GameStop is a nice store and it's given me a great place to get some of my money back on games I no longer play or didn't like, but the used sales business as a whole is very damaging from my point of view. The dawn of online gaming and connectivity has made it easier to track the effects of used sales and many companies are seeing startling results. Heavy Rain reportedly had 2 million copies sold, but close to 3 million people have played the game online, meaning nearly 1 million units and anywhere between $5 to $10 million dollars in royalties that it's developer lost. As someone who wants to be involved in the development of games, seeing series lose large chunks to used games is concerning to me. The PC went through a similar even in the late 90's when CD keys became a standard and now we are starting to see a similar revolution in the console market and I fully support any means to try and make it more attractive to by games new. Anything that can help raise developers see more money from their sales to raise the quality level of new IPs or create sequels to critical successes is a positive in my book. What do you think? Do you agree with online codes to promote buying games new? Do you hate it and want to see in ban hammered? Sound off below!!!

Bioware Crossing Multiplayer Into Mass Effect 3

On Kotaku, Michael McWhertor had the biggest scoop in videogame news yesterday when he went over the details of Bioware's plans to add multiplayer to Mass Effect 3. Bioware has stated that they are adding 4 player co-op to the game and that the results of it will directly influence your single player experience. You do not play as Commander Shepard or any know characters, but instead create your own unique soldier from the ground up. You can pick a race (Humans, Turians, Krogans, and Asari are confirmed as options) and unique abilities, then form up to take down positions and capture territories from the enemy.

A unique class based co-op mode sounds pretty awesome, but why does Mass Effect 3 need it? As someone who has played through Mass Effect 1 and 2 more than once, I'm thoroughly happy with what I have: an engaging single player experience with deep, story driven choices that compile into a narrative entirely unique to me. It's a role-playing game at heart, creating a connection to my character through moral choices that define whether I'm the noble soldier ready to lay down my life for Earth or the dick who'd throw the nearest person under the bus to save his skin. When you add multiplayer to something like this, it seems out of place. Team and objective orientated gameplay is the polar opposite of it's audience and adding 4 player co-op with it's cover focused mechanics seem like it's trying to copy Gears of War. Why can't it be enjoyed as merely a great single player game?

Personally, I think it has to deal with the evolution of games and growth of expectations by demanding fans. 20 years ago we were happy to play through titles like Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past by ourselves, now we want that experience, competitive multiplayer, and the kitchen sink from current games. Great single player games are being watered down by wasting development time to make the now "mandatory" multiplayer aspect of their game. Just recently, great single player titles Bioshock and Dead Space had multiplayer added to their sequels and both titles suffered in overall quality compared to their original. We need to just sit back and remember that not everything is meant to be played in team deathmatch. We can't keep trying to blur the lines between the quality of an rpg like Mass Effect and a shooter like Gears of War, we'll eventually lose the battle as quality declines trying to appease both audiences and publishers planned release dates. What do you think? Are single player games quality being hurt by the demand of multiplayer? Do you like Mass Effect adding multiplayer? Sound off below!!!