Home |
Cheats |
Collection |
Cover Art |
FAQs |
Friends |
Profile |
Ratings |
Reviews |
Scores |
Screenshots |
Videos |
Milestones |
Exit
You are not signed into a user account. Please return to this page once you are signed into your free account for additional options.
Title: Sony finds back old form.
Posted: November 05, 2009 (11:34 AM)
Posted: November 05, 2009 (11:34 AM)
So, after having gotten used to "despondent Sony", who doesn't care about customers, and just wants to do what artists want, and then push out the content. And then having gotten used to "eager Sony", who wants to employ 3rd parties to do PR blitzes for branding purposes that have absolutely nothing to do with actual practices.
We are finally seeing Sony getting back to form. Whether it is the control-scheme in Killzone 2 - which no doubt was motivated by the idea that it should appeal to as many people as possible - that simply put ruined the gameplay and game-balance as it was intended. Along with promoting cheaters and glitchers to ruin everyone else's games. Or if it is in-game advertisements in WipeoutHD. Or perhaps obnoxious advertisement on the xmb in the shape of tickers that are impossible to remove, or extra icons littering the menu.
Any of those things - abusing the digital distribution network - show that Sony is now certainly back in form. We're no doubt going to see another DRM solution being fielded any day now that makes all games unplayable unless you swear allegiance to the "Playstation Family".
Seriously, what is the problem with you morons? Your product is a good one - and people are willing to buy a good product - if you PROMOTE THE GOOD PRODUCT AS IT IS.
Mood: Dra til helvete
Game of the Day: Katamari Forever
Song of the Day: Take This Job and Shove It, Dead Kennedys
We are finally seeing Sony getting back to form. Whether it is the control-scheme in Killzone 2 - which no doubt was motivated by the idea that it should appeal to as many people as possible - that simply put ruined the gameplay and game-balance as it was intended. Along with promoting cheaters and glitchers to ruin everyone else's games. Or if it is in-game advertisements in WipeoutHD. Or perhaps obnoxious advertisement on the xmb in the shape of tickers that are impossible to remove, or extra icons littering the menu.
Any of those things - abusing the digital distribution network - show that Sony is now certainly back in form. We're no doubt going to see another DRM solution being fielded any day now that makes all games unplayable unless you swear allegiance to the "Playstation Family".
Seriously, what is the problem with you morons? Your product is a good one - and people are willing to buy a good product - if you PROMOTE THE GOOD PRODUCT AS IT IS.
Mood: Dra til helvete
Game of the Day: Katamari Forever
Song of the Day: Take This Job and Shove It, Dead Kennedys
[reply][view replies (0)]
Title: The challenge.
Posted: September 29, 2009 (01:49 PM)
Posted: September 29, 2009 (01:49 PM)
I've always been like this. If a task was not a challenge in itself, or enjoyable and interesting along the way - then I never found the will to complete it.
Is it lazyness? To insist that the meaning of life should not be to die, but to live well for a number of years? Or perhaps that physical training should be engaging on it's own, with a good feeling of accomplishment - rather than be a chore you have to do in order not to become a disgusting wreck?
I suppose I feel the same way about games. I'm not playing games to complete them, but to enjoy the experience. Winning the game.. not really the point, is it. You don't win anything, after all.
Then again - maybe it's a question about scope. That games on their own - like most fiction or created narratives - must set overall objectives that can be reached and seen. And that this is why I enjoy games so much. Where I don't need to set objectives much on my own. And typically have the illusion of choice, until I inevitably reach the conclusion.
...
Then again - I suppose I do like games simply because they are not like reality at all. Where you can explore fictional scenarios and realities, as others see them.
Which, on reflection, sounded a little bit less insane right away.
Mood: Wistful
Game of the Day: MAG Beta
Song of the Day: Black Sabbath, "Sweet Leaf"
Is it lazyness? To insist that the meaning of life should not be to die, but to live well for a number of years? Or perhaps that physical training should be engaging on it's own, with a good feeling of accomplishment - rather than be a chore you have to do in order not to become a disgusting wreck?
I suppose I feel the same way about games. I'm not playing games to complete them, but to enjoy the experience. Winning the game.. not really the point, is it. You don't win anything, after all.
Then again - maybe it's a question about scope. That games on their own - like most fiction or created narratives - must set overall objectives that can be reached and seen. And that this is why I enjoy games so much. Where I don't need to set objectives much on my own. And typically have the illusion of choice, until I inevitably reach the conclusion.
...
Then again - I suppose I do like games simply because they are not like reality at all. Where you can explore fictional scenarios and realities, as others see them.
Which, on reflection, sounded a little bit less insane right away.
Mood: Wistful
Game of the Day: MAG Beta
Song of the Day: Black Sabbath, "Sweet Leaf"
[reply][view replies (0)]
Title: Rage
Posted: September 16, 2009 (05:54 PM)
Posted: September 16, 2009 (05:54 PM)
So I like to play Killzone 2 online. I've never really liked shooters, though. But.. remembering back to the way the controls were at launch - before GG caved to the Call of Duty brigade in a fantastic display of fail - I always convince myself the game still has some charm to it. Besides, the graphics are good.
But it's really a lie. At the moment, cheaters are running rampant, and lag between regions is unmanageable. Meanwhile the subtle touches that made the original control scheme interesting, are all gone completely.
So the game basically is annoying, and not original any longer. It has good graphics, but that's all. The 3d model based movement and positioning is wasted, and so is the bullet- physics. And if you're persistent online, you might be lucky enough to play 1 out of 20 games without crazy and progressively worse lag.
To top it off, lots of players in the top 8000 range are cheating. It's called a "lag emulator" - and it makes everyone lag. But gives the host an advantage.
But these are the people Guerilla Games apparently listen to. So I guess the people complaining about the cheaters will get a ding across the ear, or something. And the cheaters will get another medal.
Eric Boltjes is on the case.
update: Eric on the forum -
"Well the controller tweaks later on were a direct result of feedback from the community yes... And yes, unlike what a lot of people think, controls are extremely hard to get right and are not as easy as they look. But we try to give as much options to the users as possible!"
Moron!
Mood: Bad
Game of the Day: Wipeout HD
Song of the Day: Trine OST
But it's really a lie. At the moment, cheaters are running rampant, and lag between regions is unmanageable. Meanwhile the subtle touches that made the original control scheme interesting, are all gone completely.
So the game basically is annoying, and not original any longer. It has good graphics, but that's all. The 3d model based movement and positioning is wasted, and so is the bullet- physics. And if you're persistent online, you might be lucky enough to play 1 out of 20 games without crazy and progressively worse lag.
To top it off, lots of players in the top 8000 range are cheating. It's called a "lag emulator" - and it makes everyone lag. But gives the host an advantage.
But these are the people Guerilla Games apparently listen to. So I guess the people complaining about the cheaters will get a ding across the ear, or something. And the cheaters will get another medal.
Eric Boltjes is on the case.
update: Eric on the forum -
"Well the controller tweaks later on were a direct result of feedback from the community yes... And yes, unlike what a lot of people think, controls are extremely hard to get right and are not as easy as they look. But we try to give as much options to the users as possible!"
Moron!
Mood: Bad
Game of the Day: Wipeout HD
Song of the Day: Trine OST
[reply][view replies (0)]
Title: Reviews are difficult
Posted: August 16, 2009 (10:02 AM)
Posted: August 16, 2009 (10:02 AM)
There are many things in life that makes me wonder about how mankind ever managed to avoid being the first thing to go when the evolution came. Food distribution problems, politics, console wars, game reviews.
Specially the last one. The task: write something descriptive about a fairly simple experience, designed by others to entertain, so that other people can understand your impressions as you played the game.
There are many things to obviously avoid, of course. Shamelessly plugging the title out of love for previous titles from the same developer. Baselessly hating the game because of your own undescribed problems with undefined aspects of the game. Clinically describing the game while hiding your own personal impressions the descriptions are based on. Using esoteric language that's appealing, but fails to describe anything useful.
But mostly, it means avoiding to misrepresent the game, without describing absolutely everything. And that's the problem, of course. You want to write something that picks at what makes the game appealing, and how the game succeeds or fails at using this to create a good playing experience.
So what does other people take from the review? People who haven't actually played the game? Or, even people who don't regularly do play games?
I suggested once that maybe reviewing games as if they were movies was an idea. How the performances were. What parts captured your imagination and attention particularly well. How intriguing the plot was - that kind of thing. And the other guy said: good luck finding a game that works this way - because there aren't any.
-Games, you see, are just games. It's right there in the title, no? They are repetitive and simplistic, that always fail to truly be cinematic experiences except inside the heads of players - that is their strenght. To present simplistic interactive experiences that are designed to occupy your time while letting your mind fly.
- Any reviews of games (aha, here it comes) that attempt to describe such an experience therefore are subjective tales - and are bound to make every other player not exactly like you disappointed.
I'm not sure it was a very good point.
Mood: Vague
Game of the Day: Killzone 2
Song of the Day: "American Woman", The Guess Who's
Specially the last one. The task: write something descriptive about a fairly simple experience, designed by others to entertain, so that other people can understand your impressions as you played the game.
There are many things to obviously avoid, of course. Shamelessly plugging the title out of love for previous titles from the same developer. Baselessly hating the game because of your own undescribed problems with undefined aspects of the game. Clinically describing the game while hiding your own personal impressions the descriptions are based on. Using esoteric language that's appealing, but fails to describe anything useful.
But mostly, it means avoiding to misrepresent the game, without describing absolutely everything. And that's the problem, of course. You want to write something that picks at what makes the game appealing, and how the game succeeds or fails at using this to create a good playing experience.
So what does other people take from the review? People who haven't actually played the game? Or, even people who don't regularly do play games?
I suggested once that maybe reviewing games as if they were movies was an idea. How the performances were. What parts captured your imagination and attention particularly well. How intriguing the plot was - that kind of thing. And the other guy said: good luck finding a game that works this way - because there aren't any.
-Games, you see, are just games. It's right there in the title, no? They are repetitive and simplistic, that always fail to truly be cinematic experiences except inside the heads of players - that is their strenght. To present simplistic interactive experiences that are designed to occupy your time while letting your mind fly.
- Any reviews of games (aha, here it comes) that attempt to describe such an experience therefore are subjective tales - and are bound to make every other player not exactly like you disappointed.
I'm not sure it was a very good point.
Mood: Vague
Game of the Day: Killzone 2
Song of the Day: "American Woman", The Guess Who's
[reply][view replies (0)]
Title: Buyer recommendations/reviews
Posted: May 04, 2009 (10:47 AM)
Posted: May 04, 2009 (10:47 AM)
So the theory goes something like this: People wish to be catered for in a positive way, to be encouraged to buy a product. Hence critical buyer's recommendations don't succeed as well, nor cause more customer satisfaction. Instead of filling the subject with euphoria just from the thought of owning the product, the critical buyer will instead want more for less money, and will also fail to be impressed by gimmicks, coolness factor, peer- pressure and advertisements based on emotional attachment.
In other words, people only read reviews to enhance the product satisfaction of a product they've already decided they want (thanks to the advertisements that say nothing about the product).
Therefore reviewing games critically towards a standard you expect as a gamer, or even being a critic against what the game tries to accomplish - will be the same as ensuring you will work for free forever.
Because: there is no such thing as a company that wants it's products reviewed critically. And no large mass of users who do not read reviews to enhance their product satisfaction, just as the companies predict.
...
Which is of course complete crock. The only reason why people read reviews is to make sure what they already own is better than the crap their peers have.
Mood: Bored
Game of the Day: WipeoutHD
Song of the Day: "Rock and Roll", Led Zeppelin
In other words, people only read reviews to enhance the product satisfaction of a product they've already decided they want (thanks to the advertisements that say nothing about the product).
Therefore reviewing games critically towards a standard you expect as a gamer, or even being a critic against what the game tries to accomplish - will be the same as ensuring you will work for free forever.
Because: there is no such thing as a company that wants it's products reviewed critically. And no large mass of users who do not read reviews to enhance their product satisfaction, just as the companies predict.
...
Which is of course complete crock. The only reason why people read reviews is to make sure what they already own is better than the crap their peers have.
Mood: Bored
Game of the Day: WipeoutHD
Song of the Day: "Rock and Roll", Led Zeppelin
[reply][view replies (0)]
Title: Maturity in games...
Posted: March 19, 2009 (05:49 PM)
Posted: March 19, 2009 (05:49 PM)
And we have to start reinventing it, and all, and bla, bla.. What /is/ this?
http://kotaku.com/5175046/growing-up-games-when-will-mature-mature
An attempt at crushing the stereotype of video- game makers and players as being vicious children - by... turning them into stunted loners seeking meaningful romance in videogames? A softer, more searching child, I suppose..?
I remember when Psychonauts came out (..game written by Tim Schafer, creator of Grim Fandango, Monkey Island series, Day of the Tentacle, Full Throttle) - and I distinctly remember that, while many heaped praise on the game for being very good. And had many subtle pokes to informed readers about how deep and thought- provoking the story and writing actually was. As well as mentioned how charming and believable the characters were. And how good the direction and variety in the scenes tended to be. Or how entertaining the game was.
I also remember there was a distinct lack of people who reviewed the game, and with it encouraged players to take a dive into people's minds, and prepare to follow the threads of the narrative on the inside and the outside, so to speak. And perhaps learn something in the process, allowing the game to be both entertaining and thought- provoking.
I also remember the game being marketed very consciously as an action- filled platformer, sporting cartoonish villains and stereotypical heroes, flashing psycho superpowers.
While the hero having issues on his own, and being more heroic for dealing with them - that somehow never made it into even the subtext.
I mean - how hard would it have been to market the game with: battle your inner demons! ..Or something similar? The game also sold extremely well - even after the atrocious commercials went away.
But.. now it's time to reinvent maturity in games again? So we can get away with the gratuitous sex and violence - by making it seem natural in the context it is in?
Spare me.
Mood: Fandenivoldsk.
Game of the Day: Uncharted: Drake's Fortune.
Song of the Day: "Ghosts II", Nine Inch Nails, Ghosts I-IV
http://kotaku.com/5175046/growing-up-games-when-will-mature-mature
An attempt at crushing the stereotype of video- game makers and players as being vicious children - by... turning them into stunted loners seeking meaningful romance in videogames? A softer, more searching child, I suppose..?
I remember when Psychonauts came out (..game written by Tim Schafer, creator of Grim Fandango, Monkey Island series, Day of the Tentacle, Full Throttle) - and I distinctly remember that, while many heaped praise on the game for being very good. And had many subtle pokes to informed readers about how deep and thought- provoking the story and writing actually was. As well as mentioned how charming and believable the characters were. And how good the direction and variety in the scenes tended to be. Or how entertaining the game was.
I also remember there was a distinct lack of people who reviewed the game, and with it encouraged players to take a dive into people's minds, and prepare to follow the threads of the narrative on the inside and the outside, so to speak. And perhaps learn something in the process, allowing the game to be both entertaining and thought- provoking.
I also remember the game being marketed very consciously as an action- filled platformer, sporting cartoonish villains and stereotypical heroes, flashing psycho superpowers.
While the hero having issues on his own, and being more heroic for dealing with them - that somehow never made it into even the subtext.
I mean - how hard would it have been to market the game with: battle your inner demons! ..Or something similar? The game also sold extremely well - even after the atrocious commercials went away.
But.. now it's time to reinvent maturity in games again? So we can get away with the gratuitous sex and violence - by making it seem natural in the context it is in?
Spare me.
Mood: Fandenivoldsk.
Game of the Day: Uncharted: Drake's Fortune.
Song of the Day: "Ghosts II", Nine Inch Nails, Ghosts I-IV
[reply][view replies (0)]
Title: Everyone's a fucking editor..
Posted: March 06, 2009 (06:48 AM)
Posted: March 06, 2009 (06:48 AM)
Ok, so my Rise of The Argonauts review is up.
http://www.gamersdigest.net/1826/review-rise-of-the-argonauts/
Took me two days to write the first version. That was about 2000 words. Then it took another two weeks to eventually get it down to 1600 words.
Personally, I'm not sure if there's a particular point readers will start to snore and click away on something else. I've read reviews on 500 words that bored me to tears - but I managed to get through it because it was so short. And I've read large treatises on games like Planscape Torment and stopping naturally on the paragraphs to think a little bit before going on.
Should you really aim for short reviews like that, because your readers tend to struggle through a review in the first place?
You could maybe defend a large review if the game is entirely useless to people who can't hold their concentration for more than three seconds at a time as well.. so why cut it down?
I mean, reviews are more and more like complicated versions of "I like it, and so should you" commercials already. But is that what people actually want every time they read a review?
Sort of wonder how a book or a film- review like that would look: "yeah, and lots of interesting characters, but they fail and shit - junky directing, I don't like it. [insert witty retort directed at imaginary detractor]".
Well.. So I ended up rewriting a lot of it. And it probably became better in the end. *sigh*. Or maybe not - I posted the full review on Honestgamers under PS3 reviews. If it gets approved:
http://www.honestgamers.com/systems/game.php?console_id=59&game_id=35225
Mood: Malevolent
Game of the Day: Killzone 2
Song of the Day: "Forward to Death", Dead Kennedys
http://www.gamersdigest.net/1826/review-rise-of-the-argonauts/
Took me two days to write the first version. That was about 2000 words. Then it took another two weeks to eventually get it down to 1600 words.
Personally, I'm not sure if there's a particular point readers will start to snore and click away on something else. I've read reviews on 500 words that bored me to tears - but I managed to get through it because it was so short. And I've read large treatises on games like Planscape Torment and stopping naturally on the paragraphs to think a little bit before going on.
Should you really aim for short reviews like that, because your readers tend to struggle through a review in the first place?
You could maybe defend a large review if the game is entirely useless to people who can't hold their concentration for more than three seconds at a time as well.. so why cut it down?
I mean, reviews are more and more like complicated versions of "I like it, and so should you" commercials already. But is that what people actually want every time they read a review?
Sort of wonder how a book or a film- review like that would look: "yeah, and lots of interesting characters, but they fail and shit - junky directing, I don't like it. [insert witty retort directed at imaginary detractor]".
Well.. So I ended up rewriting a lot of it. And it probably became better in the end. *sigh*. Or maybe not - I posted the full review on Honestgamers under PS3 reviews. If it gets approved:
http://www.honestgamers.com/systems/game.php?console_id=59&game_id=35225
Mood: Malevolent
Game of the Day: Killzone 2
Song of the Day: "Forward to Death", Dead Kennedys
[reply][view replies (2)]
Title: This sucks.
Posted: February 20, 2009 (06:09 AM)
Posted: February 20, 2009 (06:09 AM)
About one month since last time. Finally finished with a commitment I've been stuck with for the last six months - but.. I'm an experience richer, I suppose. *grits teeth*
Meanwhile, the admin on gamersdigest.net (a page title apparently chosen for luring in casual gamers in the 45+ age group :p) was happy to push something i wrote about Killzone 2. It seems there might be review- copies once in a while as well. And the prospect of actually getting anything in return for writing things down - other than scorn, ridicule, envy, or deliberate silence - is starting to stir with an emotion I didn't think I had any longer.
What was it called again? Anticipation? No, that's not quite it. I wonder..
Unfortunately all is not well. I was supposed to interview the spokesdude on Psyonix - they recently released Super Sonic Acrobatic Rocket Powered Battle Cars on the PSN - about the development and publishing process. Apparently they self- published, and seems to have gotten all kinds of backing up to a point. Same as with Flower and flOw, or Riff - these titles are not bogged down in huge release cycles that publishers can expect returns on, instead being more of a boon to the PSN and so the Playstation brand. Meaning it's quality and image, rather than just sellability Sony seems to be looking for. Up to a point.
There are a few problems on the PSN, such as regions not getting the same releases, even though they evidently are not... exclusively going to sell in only one region. Other releases get delayed for months, for apparently no good reason.
SARP (Super Sonic Acrobatic...) was one of those releases - and here I was supposed to get any amount of dirt directly from a dev who did not seem terminally infected with Sony sychophancy.... and then he disappears. Curse me that I only have time to do this in my spare time, and couldn't be more immediate when he said he was willin to do an interview.
But then again, it's probably not going to be impossible to pick up some more data, and do a review on how the PSN has changed later on. I doubt no one will be willing to weigh in if I keep asking.
Asking /politely/.. fuck.
Mood: grit
Game of the Day: Final Fantasy 9
Song of the Day: "Discipline", Nine Inch Nails/The Slip
Meanwhile, the admin on gamersdigest.net (a page title apparently chosen for luring in casual gamers in the 45+ age group :p) was happy to push something i wrote about Killzone 2. It seems there might be review- copies once in a while as well. And the prospect of actually getting anything in return for writing things down - other than scorn, ridicule, envy, or deliberate silence - is starting to stir with an emotion I didn't think I had any longer.
What was it called again? Anticipation? No, that's not quite it. I wonder..
Unfortunately all is not well. I was supposed to interview the spokesdude on Psyonix - they recently released Super Sonic Acrobatic Rocket Powered Battle Cars on the PSN - about the development and publishing process. Apparently they self- published, and seems to have gotten all kinds of backing up to a point. Same as with Flower and flOw, or Riff - these titles are not bogged down in huge release cycles that publishers can expect returns on, instead being more of a boon to the PSN and so the Playstation brand. Meaning it's quality and image, rather than just sellability Sony seems to be looking for. Up to a point.
There are a few problems on the PSN, such as regions not getting the same releases, even though they evidently are not... exclusively going to sell in only one region. Other releases get delayed for months, for apparently no good reason.
SARP (Super Sonic Acrobatic...) was one of those releases - and here I was supposed to get any amount of dirt directly from a dev who did not seem terminally infected with Sony sychophancy.... and then he disappears. Curse me that I only have time to do this in my spare time, and couldn't be more immediate when he said he was willin to do an interview.
But then again, it's probably not going to be impossible to pick up some more data, and do a review on how the PSN has changed later on. I doubt no one will be willing to weigh in if I keep asking.
Asking /politely/.. fuck.
Mood: grit
Game of the Day: Final Fantasy 9
Song of the Day: "Discipline", Nine Inch Nails/The Slip
[reply][view replies (0)]
Title: How to get an article in print?
Posted: January 25, 2009 (09:04 PM)
Posted: January 25, 2009 (09:04 PM)
So I've written a piece on gaming and art - didn't think it was too bad, either - and thought: why not try to get someone to print it?
Heck if I know how to, though.
First attempt was writing the Escapist:
..please allow 2 to 4 weeks for a response.
I seem to have been in this situation before. I blog for www.uiqblog.com, and have posted a lot of content there that took a long time to write - had good standard, too - but whenever I tried to get any of it published, there's two things that crop up:
1. The reason I'm writing on the blog in the first place - I can choose my own style, and switch between analytical and plain nonsense just like I want to. Any continuity or recurring elements is optional. Factual reporting or just shaming someone for being an arse tends to be about the same, and the editorial board consists of myself and two other part- time bloggers. The biggest challenge we ever had was to what degree we were supposed to directly criticise SonyEricsson.
2. I'm not used to criticism. Not that I've had any - that's the problem. I don't know what sort of writing is likely to be accepted for a publication of some sort. Is the style I've become accustomed to using too argumentative, or too oral? Or does it add something to the articles that I explain my own thinking, or construct settings that fill in details?
I suppose what crossed anyone's minds the last time I tried - I wrote a lengthy review on a uiq phone for a Norwegian online magazine - was more or less that I was trying to continue my crusade on the blog. But it was a review geared towards business- users of smartphones, something the site sorely lacked. Trying to review smartphones as toys and video- devices.
Received no real comments on the review - at least none from the staff. So, I guess it wasn't what they were looking for.
Meanwhile, another review by the regular staff turned up for a similar phone, where the phone was hailed for being awesome - but would recieve a reluctant trashing for trading in animations on the screen for battery- life. No one mentioned ARM, processors, OS functions, connectivity options or what THE PHONE ACTUALLY WAS USEFUL FOR.
Something that - once again - sidelines anyone who use their smallish computer device for anything other than receiving MMS- messages with farting Santas. I really don't know why this happens. "Edda Media", the umbrella organisation that pays this outlet, among other publications, are not invested in online advertisement, but rather sponsorship deals and increased hardware sales. So how come there's a huge void of content directed at the business- users on that site?
But then again, I'm just an unpublished writer.
So - if someone knows of any place interested in printing some intellectual drivel on the nuances of story telling in Super Mario, contrasted with other plots only suitable for presentation in games - you'll let me know, right?
-fleinn
Mood: Mellow
Game of the Day: Riff
Song of the Day: Jethro Tull, "My God"
Heck if I know how to, though.
First attempt was writing the Escapist:
And as you can no doubt see, I've never written a pitch before, and I couldn't really say what you're looking for.
Writing style: it's going to be self- deprecating high brow silliness. Someone called it "post- intellectualism" once, but that's a bit too much, with giving me a whole new name for a style, and all.. I'm really just having fun. In the story, I'm analysing the plot in Super Mario, classifying it - and then highlighting how the story- telling in the archetypical video- game is not what makes it attractive - and that this is the reason why "games" are not thought of as art. While describing how a real plot can make a game exceed what the archetypical video- game is limited to, and so on. That's all perfectly true, of course, but it's not meant to be read as a serious analysis, which is obvious. The twist is that prejudice is silly, and it's possible to use unconventional means for telling good stories. Whether it is science fiction, or analyses about video- games.
Length, about 1600 words. Oh, and it's already written. I'd turn it in for a bit of professional writing advice.
..please allow 2 to 4 weeks for a response.
I seem to have been in this situation before. I blog for www.uiqblog.com, and have posted a lot of content there that took a long time to write - had good standard, too - but whenever I tried to get any of it published, there's two things that crop up:
1. The reason I'm writing on the blog in the first place - I can choose my own style, and switch between analytical and plain nonsense just like I want to. Any continuity or recurring elements is optional. Factual reporting or just shaming someone for being an arse tends to be about the same, and the editorial board consists of myself and two other part- time bloggers. The biggest challenge we ever had was to what degree we were supposed to directly criticise SonyEricsson.
2. I'm not used to criticism. Not that I've had any - that's the problem. I don't know what sort of writing is likely to be accepted for a publication of some sort. Is the style I've become accustomed to using too argumentative, or too oral? Or does it add something to the articles that I explain my own thinking, or construct settings that fill in details?
I suppose what crossed anyone's minds the last time I tried - I wrote a lengthy review on a uiq phone for a Norwegian online magazine - was more or less that I was trying to continue my crusade on the blog. But it was a review geared towards business- users of smartphones, something the site sorely lacked. Trying to review smartphones as toys and video- devices.
Received no real comments on the review - at least none from the staff. So, I guess it wasn't what they were looking for.
Meanwhile, another review by the regular staff turned up for a similar phone, where the phone was hailed for being awesome - but would recieve a reluctant trashing for trading in animations on the screen for battery- life. No one mentioned ARM, processors, OS functions, connectivity options or what THE PHONE ACTUALLY WAS USEFUL FOR.
Something that - once again - sidelines anyone who use their smallish computer device for anything other than receiving MMS- messages with farting Santas. I really don't know why this happens. "Edda Media", the umbrella organisation that pays this outlet, among other publications, are not invested in online advertisement, but rather sponsorship deals and increased hardware sales. So how come there's a huge void of content directed at the business- users on that site?
But then again, I'm just an unpublished writer.
So - if someone knows of any place interested in printing some intellectual drivel on the nuances of story telling in Super Mario, contrasted with other plots only suitable for presentation in games - you'll let me know, right?
-fleinn
Mood: Mellow
Game of the Day: Riff
Song of the Day: Jethro Tull, "My God"
[reply][view replies (0)]
| Friends... |
| My Forum Activity... |
|
Recent Game Ratings... |
|
I currently have no game ratings available. |
|
2005-2010 HonestGamers |
|
