Posts Tagged ‘ Videogames ’

I’d Rather Skip the “Skip Boss” Button

After my recent article, I didn’t expect to so quickly be writing another in response to a game site’s article, but here we are.

Rock Paper Shotgun spurred some Twitter attention this week when they published “Now Ubi’s opened the door, can we have our “Skip Boss Fight” button?” by John Walker. Walker wrote the article in relation to Ubisoft’s “Discovery Tour” mode for Assassin’s Creed: Origins, which will remove story, quests, combat, and challenges and allow players to simply wander and explore the game world.

Walker states it’s odd that this addition is a big deal because he feels it shouldn’t be, and that “games should be delighted to include modes that remove all their difficulty and challenge, and players should cheer when they hear about it.”

I find the Discovery Tour an interesting addition to Assassin’s Creed and I can see a lot of value in the idea for some games, maybe even a lot of them (hear me out, dear gamer). The Assassin’s Creed series are set in different historical time periods, where historical fact is blended (though often bent and altered) with fiction to create an alternative what-really-happened-behind-the-scenes version of history. Yet there’s always a kernel of actual history in the games, particularly with Animus entries. You wander past a historical landmark in-game and you can read about that historical landmark with the push of a button. You can learn about Notre Dame by walking up to it. You can learn about devices invented in that time period. Origins seems to be taking another step and including cultural practices in ancient Egypt as well.

The addition of a tourism mode allows players who are interested in history and ancient cultures and practices to simply wander around and learn about these things without being hassled by guards or worrying about getting into fights or walking somewhere they’re not welcome and causing all kinds of trouble. I can see some benefits to the concept.

People interested in history and learning about the time period can do so without having to learn a game. Counterpoint, of course, is they could, and probably should, read a book for a better look at history than any video game is going to provide. But if a game can intrigue a kid or teenager to explore the game world, then move to books and reading for a deeper understanding, there’s a net benefit there.

Stepping away from historical settings, this mode could be interesting in some games that build their own worlds as well. As the protagonist is typically in their teens at the earliest, they have some life experience in their world. Having a non-combat exploration mode allowing you to interact with NPCs and learn about history, culture, and details of the game world would let the player get a ground level knowledge base before the storyline’s initial trigger than sends the proverbial poo to the fan. A tutorial mode could be suggested instead, but those typically get added as a required intro to learn how the game’s combat works.  An exploration mode allows players to try it if they wish and players who want to hop straight to story and gameplay don’t have to bother with a tutorial at all.

So honestly, I’m on board with the “Discovery Tour” idea until we see how it plays out. I do think it’s something that should be more of a focus for studios working with VR right now – allowing players to explore historical and modern landscapes and locations for a virtual vacation get away. Visiting historical places, learning about cultures around the world all from the comfort of your own home. Combine this with Google Maps one day and our VR options for cheap “world” travel becomes quite expansive.

However…(you didn’t think this was all agreements & unicorns, did you?)

Stabby-The-Unicorn-Pink-clean_800x

Okay, maybe there is a unicorn for gamers…

I’m not so sure games and gamers should be delighted and cheering to include modes “that remove all their difficulty and challenge” either.

What is the point of a Mario game where you push the directional pad to the right and hold the button until you get to the end of the stage? After all, you’d have to remove all enemies and all pits. No jumping, just hold a button until Mario reaches the flag. What’s the point?

What is the point of playing a Metal Gear Solid game where you just walk through the corridors of the base without enemies to avoid, without having to employ stealth, and with no bosses? It’s just walking through hallways until you get a cut scene.

What is the point of Ninja Gaiden if you just run through a level with no enemies and no bosses?

What is the point of Call of Duty if you just walk through combat zones where there’s no combat?

What is a puzzle game if you remove all the puzzles?

What is the point of chess if every piece can move anywhere you feel like putting them on the board? Sure, you can do that, but then you’re not actually playing chess, are you?

Walker is taking what I think is a good idea to extremes of absurdity with this notion. Even Assassin’s Creed: Origins isn’t offering up the game itself with no combat. The Discovery Tour mode doesn’t allow you to play through the story or do the assassin’y stuff so much as let you explore the game world as the character might before the Assassin Order begins – before there’s a moment that spurs one to action.

The idea of the no-combat, discovery/exploration mode works fine for open world games, especially if there’s other things to do. I’ve been playing Watch Dogs 2 and before I go off on a crusade to bring down Big Brother, I could easily go around the city and spend time getting familiar with it by doing the Uber- oops, sorry, I mean Lyft- oops, sorry, I mean Driver SF quests. I could do racing on the E-Kart tracks. I could find Scout X locations and take pictures. I could do a number of things before focusing on the story.

It just doesn’t work as well in non-open world games. Instead, I think we’re already in a good place with most games offering different difficulty levels. I started Platinum Games’ Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutants in Manhattan on easy, thinking I’d play through it on easy, then normal, then hard if I was still interested.  I’d use level ups and power ups from lower difficulty to be better equipped for harder difficulties. I wound up playing on easy for two levels and not realizing I was then on normal for the rest of the game (I forgot to change the difficulty on the level select screen after the first two).

I’m assuming because the Discovery Tour idea doesn’t work in non-open world games is why Walker suggests the “skip boss” addition instead, allowing people to play through the levels of normal combat without having to fight a boss. But since you can already play on easy mode in most games where bosses are toned down quite a bit, I’m not entirely clear why it’s necessary to skip them.

I might test this with my mother one day and see if she can get through a few levels of a game on easy mode. She’s never played a video game in her life to my knowledge. Except Spider Solitaire. Don’t challenge her in Spider Solitaire, sucka, she’ll stomp your high score.

Mr T

I pity the fool that challenge my mama to Spider Solitaire!

“Bring on the Riff-Raff!”

While he starts off talking about removing all challenge and difficulty and is suggesting a “skip boss” option, what Walker actually wants is for games to be more welcoming and inviting to more skill levels. To make games more accessible to more people. A noble idea and one that I can’t see how anyone can argue against on its own. It’s been Nintendo’s core value for decades. But more on this idea later.

He then notes his previous articles that argued players should be able to skip ahead in games just as with books or movies, combat should be skippable, and you shouldn’t need to be good to play video games.

What film critic actively suggests movie goers should skip 25% of a film? What book review says to skip every other chapter of a book? Why are only gaming journalists frequently and actively encouraging the product they write about to be ignored in part?

The Lord of the Rings has not been edited to 1/3 of its length with the language altered to be easily digested by a 6th grade reading level (Scholastic lists it at grade 9-12). Oscar winning films for Best Picture aren’t being reworked to appeal to the Michael Bay fan. And really, who spends $20 on a Blu-ray just to skip 25% of it on their first viewing?

The crux of the argument is that simplifying games and removing all challenge would invite a wider range of audience and would ultimately make games better. Or, as the article states, “welcoming the Outsider in is always how society broadens and blooms.” But does it apply to video games?

Pleasing All of the People All of the Time

World of Warcraft started out as an MMORPG, a niche genre growing from popular titles such as Ultima Online, EverQuest, and Final Fantasy XI, but WoW largely removed the grinding aspect from leveling. Some might say they made the MMO concept easier with quests and all classes being more capable of solo combat, but what they really removed was the need to group for every aspect of the game. It was more a shift of design than truly making the genre easier at launch. As WoW became a cultural phenomenon, it drew a much wider crowd. The nerds from high school who played MMORPGs were there, but now they were joined by the jocks that stuffed them in lockers and played Call of Duty or Halo in college. Even casual mobile gamers started playing as well..

As the population grew diverse, so did the demands. Players wanted more raid content on a regular basis. They wanted harder raid content. But also more accessible raid content. They wanted larger 40 man raids back. Only they also wanted small 10 man raids. They also wanted more 5 man dungeons. For that matter, there needed to be more world content outside of dungeons. And how about more mini games? While Blizzard responded in various ways, it’s hard to say the modern World of Warcraft resembles the game that launched, The Burning Crusade expansion, or even the launched Wrath of the Lich King expansion. Blizzard began to develop the game to cater to everyone simultaneously and the game, for better or worse I’ll leave to other debates, changed a great deal and diluted from the focus that made it the most popular MMO of all time.

If WoW vastly improved by drawing in Outsiders by the droves, it hasn’t been reflected in its subscription numbers. As these large changes were implemented and the focus started to shift, even adding in what is unquestionably a blatant Pokemon rip off in Pet Battles, subscription numbers dropped and have never returned to their peak levels for more than an immediate post-expansion launch. Blizzard no longer reports on subscription numbers at all. Granted, it’s not the bulk of their profit anymore and so it’s not as important, but if they were still worth bragging about, I’d wager they would be.

None of the major features in a World of Warcraft expansion that deviated from the original core have been high demands in other MMOs such as Final Fantasy XIV. It’s as though a genre has its core components and fans of that genre play the game for them. Bringing in Outsiders can actually dilute the game design as developers try to make people who are not interested in the genre happy, potentially at the alienation of their existing fan base.

Gaming Has Always Been Inclusive

“Gaming has always been inclusive. The idea that there was this Golden Age when all games were cripplingly hard, and only the Chosen were able to play, is bullshit. In fact, back in these imagined halcyon years was when games invariably came with cheat codes, god modes, all sorts of ways to subvert and play differently. And despite the outright terror that articles like this are harming their precious gaming, that the Outsiders are changing games to what the self-identifying Us perceive as “worse”, we’re currently experiencing a heyday for super-high-difficulty, super-challenging, extremely tough games, like we never have before.”

Wait… what was that first line? Gaming has always been what?  Inclusive, you say? Then aren’t we done here? Aren’t we good to go? Gaming’s always been inclusive, so why does gaming need to be changed to draw in a more inclusive range of players?  Checkmate, atheists!

Checkmate chicken

It was either this or a John Cena meme. Suck it.

Walker is right, though. There wasn’t a period where all games were cripplingly hard. The NES era had a lot of hard games, sure, but part of that was how new many of us were to the medium, just learning how to control these little people on the screen with our fingers on a controller. The other part was simply padding the game. Seriously, a lot of games on NES are extremely hard because:

  1. They’re directly taken from arcades which wanted you to die often to feed more quarters
  2. They want you to get more than 4 hours of play out of your $60 purchase. Otherwise, gamers (or more accurately their parents) would have been returning games for not being worth the cost and would stop buying new ones. The high difficulty was there to keep you playing.
  3. Nintendo was doing their part to combat childhood obesity by making kids frustrated enough to get sick of this BS and go outside and play. (Okay, I’m just making this one up…. or AM I?)
Tinfoil hat

#3 is totally true, I just know it! I swear! REALLY!

Walker is also right that there were cheat codes. Some of these were developer codes to test things that were then never taken out of the final product. Others were left intentionally as a reward to discover. And for the rest of the games, all the way up until PS2, there was Game Genie and Game Shark. However, it was always kind of a fringe aspect of gaming. You didn’t have Electronic Gaming Monthly and Nintendo Power telling you why everyone should have a Game Genie or that Game Genie cheat codes should be included with every game purchased, which is essentially where we are now.

Frustrating Boss Fights

 

I understand Walker’s sentiment of frustration with difficult boss fights, but I can’t relate to a desire to have them completely removed. I’m actually more in his camp in the MMO realm of things. I’ve never been a cutting edge content raider, preferring to enjoy the time raiding with friends. So long as we have a good time and make some progress for the night, we can finish a raid weeks, or months, later with a buff to help. In FFXIV, we even tend to spend our raid time farming previous expansion raids for mounts more than work towards tackling the hardest of new raid content.

WoW has Mythic difficulty, normal difficulty, and LFR difficulty for their raids. Mythic is the hardest, normal is a challenge that can be overcome by a group working together with some practice, and LFR is…well, honestly it’s basically just an exercise in the simplest requirements and so long as you’re pushing attack buttons the group will probably win. It’s ridiculously easy and honestly takes all the fun out of raiding. Compared to Final Fantasy XIV‘s 24 man raids that still have some mechanics that can kill everyone, but are easy enough to accomplish with 23 strangers who aren’t in voice chat but mostly know what to do? There’s really no contest which is a more rewarding experience in my mind.

It’s this level of simplicity that I just can’t relate to nor understand. The desire for absolutely no challenge whatsoever, for no gameplay at all, no risk of any fail state. The desire to not even require the most minimal of effort and still be rewarded for it when playing a game. I can understand, and will fully support, multiple difficulties in games. I have no issue with Easy mode. If easy mode allows you to just hit attack a couple dozen times and you need to not get hit by one particular attack and the rest of the fight is negligible, that’s pretty straight forward. For me, easy mode can pretty much be “story mode” with no true challenge to the combat and everything tuned down somewhat akin to the cheat codes of yore. Just kick it to easy mode, kick back, and have a mindless night of fun.

I can certainly understand demands for bosses to be properly tuned. When a boss is “incongruous to the rest of the game” rather than a “comprehension test” of what you’ve learned and acquired, there’s reason to dislike the boss fight and push for, and expect, better design from developers.

But simply wanting a “skip boss” button?  That is the opposite path. That’s telling developers they don’t NEED to design games well. They don’t need to make interesting bosses. They don’t need to balance and fine tune them properly. Because if it’s broken, whatever, the player can skip it and they’ve got a deadline to meet.

It adds a new chorus to a very unfortunate song that’s developed in time:

If the game’s broken, whatever, we can patch it.
If the story’s incomplete, whatever, we can patch it (and charge money for the DLC later).
If the boss is poorly tuned and too hard, whatever, they can skip it.

Though, I suspect publishers (more than studios) will get the idea of an extra verse:
If the player wants to skip everything, whatever, we can charge them tons of money for it and mobile gaming proves that “pay to win” is a massively profitable business model.

I think that, more than anything, may be what gamers push back against, even if they don’t consciously realize it. They don’t want console/PC games to become even more bloated with microtransactions where pay to win is less of an option and more of an encouraged path. Games should not be designed to be so mind numbingly grindy that paying for item boosts becomes the only way to save your sanity.

Gamers, and particularly games journalists, should be holding developers’ feet to the fire for poor design and poor boss battles, not encouraging laziness via an option that tells both gamer and designer neither need really care about it.

Which brings us again to the point of journalists being good at games, and of gamers being good at games. My answer is: No, neither necessarily need to be. Just as there are gamers of all levels of skill, there can be journalists of varying levels of skill. But if a game is difficult, even on easy, that doesn’t mean the game is immediately bad and needs to remove ALL forms of difficulty to cater to every person in the world. It may just mean that game is designed for more skilled players and isn’t for you.

I mentioned in my previous article that I had replayed Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers on SNES recently and it’s pretty easy. If someone struggles with Battletoads, they might like Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers instead. After that, they might like TMNT IV. I wouldn’t say that Battletoads should just have no boss battles. I would say someone should try a game more suited to their skill level and come back to the harder one when they’ve improved. With modern games and the multiple difficulties, it’s not even as necessary as it used to be to find another game.

Some games are designed for players who enjoy a serious challenge. It’s a niche and there’s nothing wrong with developers designing that game for that niche. It’s the demographic they’re making the game for and that’s who they want to play their game. That’s perfectly okay.

Games journalists are quick to lambast gamers for being upset over disappointment with games like the ending of Mass Effect 3. They’ll berate gamers for being “entitled” because the game didn’t cater to their wishes or that it wasn’t what they wanted. Yet here we are with games journalists insisting how developers should make their games.

It’s like demanding Hollywood to edit a film to only include what you want and edit out all the parts you don’t. It’s demanding an artist to remove birds from his paintings because you just don’t like birds. It’s telling Stephen King to change his books because the scary parts are too scary for your tastes. There’s always another option: watch a different genre of movie, find an artist you like, or read another book. Likewise, you can play another game that better fits your tastes and skill level.

It’s not as though that’s hard these days. There are more games than any gamer can ever complete (even though we delude ourselves into thinking one day we’ll conquer our backlogs). Even if the popular game is too challenging on easy difficulty, surely there are other games in the genre that are more to the desired skill level to be more enjoyable.

Game room

“I assure you, I’ll play through every one of them eventually!”

Oh No, Gamers, You’re Not Off The Hook Either

Maybe we as gamers, and myself in writing this, are being too literal in our reading of Walker’s words. About 1/5 into the article, he states “‘Skip Boss Fight’ is a totem for my larger point here, and it’s a title under which I’d include Ubi’s recent announcement (despite their rather awkwardly trying to wrap it all up as wanting to be Edumacational). It’s the spirit such an option captures, and it’s one that I think the industry would do well to breathe deeply into their souls.”

Stepping away from the specifics of Walker’s suggestions – skipping content, skipping boss fights, skipping combat, let’s take the spirit of the idea for a moment: Making games more approachable for a wider variety of play styles/skill levels and making a wider variety of playstyle games.

In this regards, I have to say to you, dear gamers, calm the h*ck down.

Calm down

That’s a h*ckin’ cute pupper, so you gotta listen.

There is a rather unnecessary streak of elitism in gaming that we each individually need to get a handle on within ourselves. I play Uncharted on normal. My friend plays on hard his first play through. After we’ve finished the game, we’ve never focused on the difference of difficulty. We usually talk about the story. Sometimes I’ll mention a particular fight that was just brutal for me and I can’t imagine what it was like for him. I acknowledge he’s taken on a greater challenge with these games. He doesn’t think I’m less of a gamer and I don’t see him as more of a gamer. We just like different difficulty levels with Uncharted.

I may play through a Platinum Games game on Easy, Normal, and Hard where he may play through on Normal and be done with the game, despite playing Uncharted on hard. I don’t gain more Gamer points to get better than him as a result.

I’m most exposed to this elitism in MMOs where hard mode raiders look down on anyone else and think anything the developers do that isn’t catered specifically to them is a waste of time and resources. Seriously, guys, let’s not be the elitist jerk raiders of the gaming community.

So if a game designer wants to reach as many potential customers as possible and they decide they want to include varying levels of difficulty, don’t fly off the handle about it. It’s their decision. It can actually be good for the game, and for the community around the game.

Final Fantasy XIV’s team has said they design their raids from the hard mode down. The easier version removes a mechanic and lowers the amount of damage some abilities do until they feel it’s more manageable for a lower, average, skill level of players to do collectively without voice chat and without the familiarity of playing together. The rewards are a bit better for the harder mode and the hard mode raiders do that and don’t need to do anything else. The normal mode players typically supplement their play time with other activities for rewards and remain a bit lower than the hard mode level. It’s two separate lanes on the same road, that’s all.

That’s not to say every game must have multiple difficulties, either. Again, it’s perfectly fine for a developer to design a game aimed at a niche audience. If they want to do so, they have every right to do so. No multiple difficulties, no concessions, no compromise. If that’s not your type of game, you don’t have to play it and nobody should be criticizing the development team for their design vision.

Ghosts & Goblins

“Dark Souls is the me of the modern generation, ya punk kids!”

But gamers then have no right to criticize development teams who choose to add them, or create completely different games, either. “Walking Simulators” have just as much right to exist if that’s what a developer wants to make. If we’re going to say developers should be free to make difficult games, or violent games, or games with sexy women, then developers must be equally free to make games like Gone Home and Her Story without coming under attack for it. Sure, we’re free to debate among ourselves if they qualify as games by definition and we can certainly voice disagreement with them deserving awards, but they have the right to exist if the developer wanted to make them.

Rather than attacking it, or anyone who enjoyed it, we have to take the same stance we demand of others: “This type of game isn’t for me, so I just won’t play it.”

Likewise, if a studio makes a game toned down and easier, that’s acceptable as well. How many Dark Souls fans wish more gamers experienced the game the way they do? What if there was a game similar to Dark Souls, but easier, that they could recommend to their friends? What if those friends beat the easier game and felt ready to step up to Dark Souls and managed to get through the game and love it? Haven’t you just brought a new gamer into the Dark Souls fold, albeit after a detour? Don’t you have someone new to swap stories with?

For that matter, if a friend beats a game on easy and you tell them how much crazier a fight is on normal, hard, or nightmare, isn’t that a fun story to share that they can still appreciate based on their experience and knowing how much is added to the fight in higher difficulty versus what they encountered? It might even make them curious to try harder content. It might make them decide to “git gud.”

A Difficult Conclusion (C wut I did thar?)

I disagree with the idea of adding the option to skip content, skip combat, or skip bosses. I just feel it’s too much of a request for the developers to design their games with the intention of players not playing their games and isn’t ultimately healthy for the industry or the games themselves.

Something about skipping content just doesn’t sit right with me. I know it has no bearing on my experience. I know if someone skips every boss, that won’t impact my experience playing a game. But I do worry about the message it can send to studios and publishers. I worry about people that may buy a game, enable invincibility and play through the easiest difficulty, then blast the game for being too short. And I know that sounds ridiculous, but it happens pretty often in MMOs. We get access to flying, skip all combat, complete quests, and then complain there’s not enough to do.

There’s not enough to do because we actively skipped the gameplay that was designed to be experienced! Yet it doesn’t stop people from complaining about it. That carrot on the stick is a powerful tool and game developers often have some understanding of psychology and how to employ it to get players to try “just one more time.” Giving away the cow for free on easy mode will remove any motivation to try a harder difficulty afterwards. There’s simply no reward, so most people will consider the one play through enough and if it was too short, the game may be dismissed as a bad game. This has a very real impact on the developers.

We don’t have cheat codes, Game Genie, Game Shark, or anything like it, but it’s been a part of gaming for just about as long as there have been games. I don’t see anything inherently evil with them still existing (so long as they’re not bleeding into multiplayer as then you’re starting to impact other players’ experience). Most likely, though, I suspect the idea of invincible armor and instant-kill weapons could become more appealing to add as optional DLC. After all, you had to buy a Game Genie separately back in the day, right?

I much prefer the notion of games having multiple levels of difficulty, with easy mode being very approachable for just about anyone who can pick up a controller. I’m even okay with the idea of modernizing the old cheat codes with that DLC or simply a toggle option to be invincible and just play through the game that way if someone so chooses. Even if they’re storming through the game invincible and able to 1-hit kill every enemy, at least they’re exploring the levels, seeing the enemies, and even experiencing the bosses along with the story more than outright skipping it.

While I may disagree with John Walker on a “skip boss” button, I can certainly understand why multiple difficulties to welcome a larger variety of player skills is admirable. I love video games and I want more people to enjoy them and love them as well, even if they aren’t as good as I am when playing them. I don’t think the multiple difficulties or removal of challenge should be demanded or pressured, but if developers want to explore these options, they should be free to do so.

After all, they’re creating the games. So long as they’re creating them the way they want to, and not because they feel they have to, I’d want to see gamers support them in spirit, if not necessarily with their wallet. Let them make what they want and let everyone voice their opinions on what they’d like to see, but don’t expect all developers to implement all ideas.

Journalists, if a developer doesn’t have a more accessible easy mode or skip boss option, don’t attack them for it. No one has to buy it.

Gamers, if a developer does have a more accessible easy mode or even a skip boss option, don’t attack them for it. No one has to buy it.

Sorry this is such a long article, but there was just a lot to unpack on this topic. If you disagree with me, that’s perfectly fine as this is just my opinion. If you want me to hear your opinion, leave a comment and let’s discuss it!

Dear Escapist: Know Why The “Gamers” Image Isn’t Dead?

This week, The Escapist published an article with a strange double headline. The page’s tab header reads “The “Gamers” Image is Dead and We Should Bury It” while the article headline itself reads “”Gamers” Are Still Dead Y’all.”

Taylor Hidalgo starts off saying that gaming is alive and well, but “the basement-dwelling Mountain Dew goblin teenager stereotype who screams at his mother for “interrupting” his boob-modded Call of Duty match to give him his pizza rolls image others have of gamers is still very troublesome. It’s an image we need to resist.” So is this image dead and we should bury it or is the image alive and we should resist it? Which is it?

And for that matter, an image we need to resist? It’s an image that games journalists have been pushing as the primary representation of gamers for the past 3 to 5 years, if not  longer. If the gaming community is supposed to present a better image, doesn’t that include the journalists who are supposed to have their fingers on the pulse of the gaming community? Countless gamers have voiced their stories of how gaming got them through depression, stopped them from committing suicide, helped them through the awkward period of being a social outcast in school, or how they became more sociable through socializing with their online friends while gaming.

Instead, they feature article after article about the worst they can find about gamers. They push a single side of gaming communities: the very one Hidalgo says is troublesome. Meanwhile, writers like Liana Kerzner are ignored, their voice unwelcome in publications. Liana is one of the few I find on Twitter who frequently speaks on the positives of gaming culture and the accepting attitude the community has offered her through the years.

There are countless critics of games and the gaming community, yet so few first and foremost describe themselves as video game historian and preservationist Patrick Scott Patterson does: as an advocate for video games. Rather than miring himself in the negatives, Patterson most often focuses on the positives or, more often, the facts of industry history.

Journalists refuse to cover these positive aspects of the gaming community. It runs contrary to the basement dwelling goblin they so frequently push as the de facto image of gamers. It also doesn’t earn outrage clicks and drive traffic like controversial articles do, which may explain why inflammatory headlines and accusatory articles are more commonly seen.

A Problem With Vocabulary

Mario's_Early_Years_Fun_With_Letters-title

I find it ironic that Hidalgo talks about a problem with vocabulary as part of the struggle when journalists, supposedly wordsmiths themselves, seem incapable of considering their audience when choosing their language for articles.

Just this week, Ubisoft announced there would be a mode in Assassin’s Creed: Origins that had no story and no combat. The purpose of this mode was to allow players to simply wander the game world and take tours of historical information to learn about ancient Egypt’s places, cultural traditions, beliefs, and practices. It’s essentially an interactive museum mode, which Assassin’s Creed has always had to some extent. Being able to read entries about various locations has always been in the series, this just removes interruptions for players to focus on that if they choose. It’s an optional mode and one I think could prove interesting after completing the story or, for some, to explore before the story or even separate from the story entirely.

However, articles are presenting it as if Ubisoft is exploring the idea of Assassin’s Creed being “fun without the murder,” as though the series may shift towards a model that removes combat entirely. Nothing I’ve seen from Ubisoft’s quotes or Ubisoft employee tweets suggests anything of the sort, yet journalists choose language that heavily leans that direction.

I have seen a lot of gamers give knee jerk reactions to these headlines, thinking the game is being dumbed down, everything that makes the series what it is (assassin’s gonna assassinate, after all) will be removed. I roll my eyes at these comments and point out it’s an optional mode that just removes the triggers for combat. It likely took no time to implement and alters nothing of the game’s basic premise. I suggest they consider it more of an add on mode rather than exploring a way to alter the series as a whole. I get far fewer responses still raging about Ubisoft ruining the game when discussing it as such.

I understand why gamers are on edge. The games media falls over itself to praise games like Gone Home, which gamers refer to as “walking simulators” since there’s no game play beyond wandering around and clicking on things. If you read a few articles, games journalists make it sound like these games are the future and should be replacing violent action games as a whole. The journalists will quickly turn around and say they never suggest games shouldn’t be made, but it’s simply not true. It’s been stated often and repeatedly that games not meeting with the approval of progressive politics should basically dwindle until they’re a footnote in gaming history. Again, ironic that journalists are so unaware of the language, tone, and vocabulary they use that they can’t understand defensive responses from the very audience they write for.

And if gamers are supposed to speak to others without using language that a non-gamer wouldn’t understand, why are journalists constantly writing articles with strings of academia phrases that only make sense to third year gender studies majors? Why use a five dollar word when a ten cent word will suffice? Telling a gamer to approach a game from the critical lens of feminist analysis in regards to cishet heteronormative standards with white colonial influences is just as fruitless as Hidalgo’s examples of “frame perfect links, expert jungling, getting mana screwed, pocket Mercy, No Mercy runs, TAS runs.”

The ignorance of the media in casting accusations while turning away from any mirror directed at themselves astounds me and only succeeds in these writers and their audience talking past each other rather than with one another. While we’re on the topic of using words wisely, why attack “Gamers” as an identity, group, or image when you want to challenge the “public stereotypes of Gamers” instead? That’s something everyone should be able to get behind; Gamers are collectively so much more than that.

Are Journalists Out of Touch? No, It’s the Culture That Is Wrong.

Out of touch

The next part of the struggle, Hidalgo says, is gaming culture itself.

“It’s hard to push into games from the outside because there is resistance to the concept of glossaries. More pertinently, those who need them.” Yet new players have entered Final Fantasy XIV with no knowledge of the series and/or no knowledge of MMOs in general and praise the welcoming community in the game. Forums frequently have beginner guides with, yes, glossaries for those who would need them, not just for MMOs, and there are all sorts of wikis online now generated by the communities.

With gaming growing into the largest entertainment industry, reaching across multiple age groups and a vast array of new players from every age, journalists are surprisingly blind to opportunities before them. If new players, young and old, are coming in unaware of the different cultures within gaming (and there is not actually one single “gaming culture” as RPG communities differ from FPS communities differ from MMO communities differ from fighting communities), why are the games sites not growing a subdivision for these new players? Articles written expressly for people who are picking up a controller or the mouse and keyboard for the first time, regardless of age?

Remember I mentioned Patrick Scott Patterson being an advocate for games? He’s written for a games publication you’ve probably never heard of: Little Player, a bi-monthly magazine for kids. This is a publication specifically for kids, reviewing games rated EC, E, and E10+. I’ve not seen the big sites mention this publication, nor have they emulated it.

Rather than demanding gamers accept that all games need to be designed for all skill levels, why not write for different skill levels? The recent Dean Takashi Cuphead kerfuffle made me realize that if my mother decided to try a video game, where could I tell her to go read about them that would make sense to her? Why are there not journalists specializing in articles aimed at children, aimed at adults, or even seniors who are interested in games for the first time? This idea hit me more profoundly just recently as a friend and I replayed Power Rangers for SNES. It’s not a hard game, but it felt like it was a beat ’em up aimed at kids and people who never played that type of game before. It was a perfect suggestion to play for someone new to the genre before they step up to Final Fight or Double Dragon and then on to Battletoads, for instance.

Now, granted, I do agree that modern games do better with their multiple difficulties than having entire games for different skill levels and I think gamers who despise these options are doing a disservice to their community. If someone isn’t good at video games, but enjoy playing on easy mode in the solitude of their own home, it’s not hurting anyone. If they play easy mode in a fighting game until they are completing entire play throughs perfectly, then start normal to do the same and work their way up to the hardest difficulty, how is that bad? If anything, it’s training to “git gud.” But where are the articles aimed at introducing the different difficulties and advising these new players on which is best for them? Not just commenting on them, in a review, but divisions of sites dedicated to new players diving into the differences of these games, their difficulty level, and introducing them to learning the ins and outs?

If the gaming community accepts different subforums for different aspects of their games, do journalists really think gamers wouldn’t accept a wider variety of skill levels being reported to if the reporting sites were divided into similar categories?

Hidalgo goes on to say that things “that widen games to audiences formerly in the outside of the culture read as some kind of betrayal. Those who feel passionately about games seem to want to keep them close, locked into a familiar shape with familiar communities.” Hidalgo doesn’t give specific examples, so it’s hard to say what gamers are resisting without wild speculation. However, Gamers frequently complain about retreading the same thing on an annual basis and go nuts for innovative new presentations of familiar ideas or fresh new IPs as a whole. Valiant Hearts has a 10/10 on Steam. Okami is still beloved 11 years after its release and the HD PS4 release has many gamers excited to revisit the artistic world. Journey was praised by gamers and press alike.

There’s Room Enough For Us All

The problem we run into is that journalists so frequently push these things that “widen games to audiences formerly in the outside” as replacements for games that are enjoyed rather than new additions to the landscape. You don’t see movie critics saying art films should outright replace the summer blockbuster. And much like Hollywood, the games industry needs their mindless blockbuster tentpoles as well.

If Ubisoft didn’t have revenue flowing in from the annual Assassin’s Creed or Tom Clancy SomethingOrOther blockbuster, would we have gotten Valiant Hearts or Child of Light from that same studio? Journalists don’t seem to acknowledge the concept and as such, I feel a lot of gamers overlook the same when they also complain about “yet another Call of Duty” or the like.

I keep repeating myself that there’s irony in this article and journalists refuse to look in the same mirror they want gamers to gaze upon. But once more, if journalists want gamers to settle down and let new arrivals to the community enjoy games that aren’t violent or take new approaches to gameplay, those same journalists must also allow some gamers to enjoy their boob modded Call of Duty games without accusing them of hating real women.

In-Groups and Out-Groups

Hidalgo goes further in critiquing the “culture that feels those already playing belong to the in-group, and out-groups trying to join either need to fold themselves quietly, or leave. That games don’t belong to anyone but those already in.” This is human nature and something you’re going to find within every community.

Should one expect to enter an Amish community and want them to start using smart phones to text you when the next community event is?
Should one expect to enter the reggae scene and want more heavy metal guitar riffs in the music?
Should one expect to join a romance novel book club and expect to focus on Japanese shonen light novels?
Should one expect to join a local Japanese Cultural Society and expect more focus on tribal cultures in the rain forests of South America?

No, to join any of these communities, the out-groups are expected to fold into the community, to understand the community before injecting new ideas. Why should gamers not expect newcomers to enter and integrate before raising questions and considering change?

And that strikes at the heart of a lot of the problems. Gamers are being told they’re toxic quite often by people who again and again indicate they have no understanding of the community they’re criticizing in the first place. This causes that community to push back, perhaps sometimes too harshly, which leads to accusations of aggressiveness.

Sexism in the Community

Hidalgo gets a little more specific with the problems in the gaming community, claiming women “have a hard time pushing into game communities without the expectation to just tolerate the sexism already present.” I’ve been playing video games since I was in kindergarten and I’ve never been exposed to sexism that women would have to accept. I started playing MMOs with EverQuest, joining a guild that was run by a woman. I played World of Warcraft for ten years where the guilds I was in had single women, married women (their partners often playing), with raids having a mix of men and women and some guilds and raids also run by a female guild leader. In college, my friends and I hung out with one of the biggest gaming nerds you’d ever meet and nobody thought her odd for it. I’ve been to gaming conventions and gaming meet ups where nobody ever said one word about women in a negative way. Most gamer guys want, more than anything, a partner that shares their love of the hobby, so why would they actively want women out of gaming?

I’m not going to claim there is absolutely no sexism in gaming and just because I’ve not seen it directed at the women I’ve played alongside doesn’t mean other women haven’t experienced it, or even the women I’ve played alongside haven’t. Women get hit on in games, sometimes far too aggressively, and are even attacked when they reject the person coming on to them. They can be treated as less capable just for being a woman, but again, I’ve not see it happen in all my years online.

Slut, bitch, and other slurs are hurled too often, I’ll agree, but I don’t think it’s fair to treat this as an exclusively gaming culture issue. This is a wider issue with anonymity and a lack of empathy in online interactions. You see it everywhere online, from debates over film to what toppings belong on pizza. Some subset of people take things too far and while the gaming community can take steps to be better than other online examples, it feels like they’re often treated as an outlier rather than an average example of an issue with society online as a whole.

There’s also the fact that people are unnecessarily cruel to men online as well. The same people who will be blatantly sexist towards women are the same types who will be blatantly cruel towards men for any perceived weakness and will attack what they think is most vulnerable, whether it be race, orientation, or masculinity. I’ll see gaming journalists on Twitter rant about toxic masculinity and men seeing women as sexual conquests turn around and insult men as being “virgin losers.” In doing so, they imply a lack of treating women as sexual conquests makes a man somehow inferior, which seems to feed into the very thing they claim to be against. It’s weird.

Fostering a Positive Community

As for how to address this situation? Attacking gamers as a whole isn’t going to solve anything. Instead, if journalists want to contribute to positive change, they need to be discussing ways developers have encouraged good behavior rather than complaining about bad behavior. This is where developers can take actual action in fostering more positive communities.

Take Final Fantasy XIV, for example. After 10 years of World of Warcraft, the community was often lamenting to being more and more toxic. This happened as the game became more and more anonymous. Queueing for dungeons with people from other servers you’ll never see again for the rest of your gaming life removed any concern for behavior where server reputation previously carried some weight. Players who were new to a dungeon often stayed silent and just hoped nobody noticed they had no idea what they were doing, even after Blizzard added a dungeon guide in the game. If you screwed up, you expected to be assailed with raging accusations of poor performance, being a “shit player” and the like.

Moving over to Final Fantasy XIV, the same cross-server anonymity exists, yet the behavior is largely praised by new players as a completely different experience. The FFXIV dev team have implemented positive reinforcement. When a player has never run content before, the group is notified someone is new to the dungeon. I most often see happy responses because running someone through their first time gives veteran players bonuses for completing it. Players are often more patient to explain fight mechanics as a result and I frequently see reassurances not to be too worried. I’ll even see players give tips to new players about roles the veteran is not currently playing, but have played at length otherwise. At the end of dungeons, players can give commendations to players who did well or were helpful.

Likewise, harassment is dealt with harshly in FFXIV, with cancelled and banned accounts being a real possibility for repeat offenders, but I personally think the various subtle positive reinforcements have more impact.

I’ve been in 8 man dungeons where my friends and I made up 5 of the 8 and thus had majority control. We had one new player, a healer who wasn’t new, and a DPS rounding out the group. The DPS was constantly bad mouthing the new player for mistakes. We tried to ease the tension by talking, but they remained aggressive, so as the majority we kicked them. The healer, who we didn’t know, immediately thanked the group for it, even though they weren’t the target of the abuse. We got a replacement, explained the situation and continued to try the fight. We got closer, but spent our entire 90 minutes attempting and failing to win. In the end, everyone was still happy with the progress and the new player was very grateful for the tips and for sticking with it. We disbanded thinking they had a solid understanding of the fight and would be able to clear it in the future. I’ve seen similar situations where I didn’t have the majority vote being with friends, but the player screwing up stayed and the player bad mouthing them was kicked out of the group.

You’d never believe this sort of behavior happened in any gaming community if you listened to the articles online.

I’m not personally familiar with it, but League of Legends implemented a “Player Reform” system and, while its success and methods can of course be debated, it’s an example of developers looking at how to foster improved experiences for the community rather than simply saying the community is bad. Blizzard has been evaluating what it can do with Overwatch to foster a more positive community as well.

Racism in the Community

Moving from a focus on women, Hidalgo notes that “Minorities who speak against the overwhelming lack of representation are just called racists themselves for failing to accept that whiteness is the default, and any deviation is somehow confrontationally political where overwhelming underrepresentation isn’t.” Once again, writers and readers speak past one another rather than with one another. Many gamers welcome minority characters and a wider diversity of protagonists, but the critics who propose such things so frequently do so by insisting existing characters should be erased, removed from future games, and replaced with the new minority.

Or worse, that the existing character is somehow bad because they’re white. Their tone indicates that simply being white is itself wrong. Any time a game doesn’t have a minority protagonist, it’s “problematic” and entire articles are dedicated to the grave injustice rather than simply noting potential ways a change in protagonist might affect story possibilities or would have fit the period better. The atmosphere has become so confrontational and so bullish that many gamers have become skeptical of attempts by developers as pandering for journalist approval rather than deeply developing these characters, which only makes things worse!

Gamers do have a point, though: there’s a difference between representation and token representation. I also have an issue with utilizing minority protagonists only for said protagonist to be supported by a bevvy of stereotypes, such as black characters being commonly joined with hip hop soundtracks or typical “gangsta” costume design and such. A young black man can’t be into heavy metal or classical music, or dress in comic book t-shirts rather than sports jerseys?

Yes, some people take their resistance to these characters too far and some are likely genuine racists themselves. You’ll find bad apples in every orchard, but that doesn’t mean they’re the standard. Again, journalists tend to focus and report exclusively on negativity and ignore any positivity from gamers.

Fantasization of Sexual Femininity and Toxic Masculinity

The last point, however: “Fantasization of sexual femininity and toxic masculinity is the expected normal, and any push for alternatives is seen as invasive and unwanted.” Without getting sidetracked again about vocabulary and how these phrases come across more like buzzwords now days, the problem, Mr. Hidalgo, is many gamers don’t accept the “toxic masculinity” academia that you’re claiming to be a negative in the first place. I’ve seen claims that a male character killing demons is violent power fantasy and thus toxic masculinity itself. But I’m not sure how would one prefer bloodthirsty demons hellbent on the ruination of all mankind be dealt with if not a bladed weapon to the horned skull.

As for fantasization of sexual femininity, well, that’s not present in every game on the market either. Some are overly exaggerated and ridiculous and even gamers laugh about the silliness of some of them. But they also don’t agree that it’s harmful to society and no studies have conclusively suggested they’re wrong. I won’t talk in depth about this aspect because it would probably take at least another 10,000 words as it first requires agreeing on what constitutes negative sexualization of femininity versus acceptable sexualization. Again, we dive into vocabulary that’s not exactly aimed at the average reader, so I’ll leave this to the previously mentioned Liana Kerzner’s upcoming Lady Bits video series (Disclosure: I backed the series on Kickstarter as I’m interested to see what comes from Kerzner’s approach to the subject topics).

Game Designers Can’t Be Open With The Community

I will agree when Hidalgo says “Honesty about design is read as manipulation, and developers are punished for getting out of line or designing games in “wrong” ways,” though. There are vocal people in the gaming community who have a hair trigger to attack developers and designers and while I find them foolish, I struggle to completely blow them off and blame them for being defensive when journalists and even some developers have actively bred a hostile environment against them. A lot of the time, what Hidalgo may see as aggressive punishment, I see as lashing out over being hurt. “Hurt people hurt people” as the saying goes.

The claims Hidalgo quotes from Charles Randall state that game developers would share everything gamers want to know about game design if not for the toxic community has a grain of truth with a smear of bullcrap. As Liana Kerzner has noted, developers have to be careful what they say because if they dare say something interesting, it becomes controversial, and PR reps are going to keep them gagged from talking whatsoever. The smallest statement can be dragged up years later to smear a developer to force them to make public apologies at what should be a great moment for them, their team, and their career. It’s not just the gamers that developers have to be careful around, it’s the press that’s eager to tear them apart for saying anything not deemed progressively correct.

The Games, They’re A Changin’

I respectfully disagree with Mr. Hidalgo that gamers insist games must continue to be the same as they have been for 40 years. The fact that games have grown and spread as much as they have, to a wide range of diverse types of games, proves this is simply inaccurate. What many gamers are opposed to is that the way games are, and have been, are inherently bad and that they, as people, are somehow inferior human beings and inherently bad for enjoying these games.

While many critics will claim “nobody wants to take away your games,” they turn around and write article after article about how these games are harmful and need to be forever abandoned. Journalists are not approaching gamers in good faith by simply covering new games with different ideas so much as detailing why games that are loved are “problematic” and need to be changed. If developers and journalists would come to the community from the stance that there’s room for both kinds of games, for all kinds of games, a lot of animosity would calm down with time. Then criticism of specifics can be addressed without the overall paranoia. Note, I say “with time.” It’s going to take some time for games press to rebuild a trusting relationship, even if they present an olive branch to the community and start working to build those bridges.

While I can fully agree we need to accept that the criticism about the sexuality built into games like Bayonetta or Lollypop Chainsaw is valid, I fully disagree that “No one is saying these games are inherently bad” because that’s precisely what the journalist-praised Feminist Frequency videos repeatedly stated, as well as explicitly stating there should be no games styled and developed in this way in current year. It doesn’t help that in criticizing games like Bayonetta, or Ivy from Soul Calibur, the critics demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of what the game’s story and presentation is commenting on. Bayonetta and Ivy are equally decried as sexual objectifications by feminists while simultaneously praised as strong examples of empowerment flaunting female sexuality by….yes, feminists. If different schools of thought among feminists don’t agree, how can we expect gamers who aren’t steeped in feminist theory to accept that these characters are unquestionably “problematic?”

As for the “skimpy nuns, bikini-clad martial artists, exposed-breast ninjas, and The Witcher sex scenes” creating an image that the games community doesn’t resist, I ask why should the games community resist the image? The games community isn’t presenting this image as representative of them as a whole, YOU ARE. Journalists focus on specific games, or even single scenes in a single level of a game, and treat them as representative of every single game on the market. Not to mention the double standards of sex scenes with female companions being decried as “virtual porn” while sex scenes with male companions get articles gushing over which guy is the hottest.

You don’t see the entire film industry labeled as toxic because questionable pornography exists. You don’t even see the film industry condemned by a majority of publications as promoting toxic masculinity because summer action movies simply exist. Entertainment Weekly hasn’t labeled all of HBO’s programming toxic because of one scene from Game of Thrones. Instead, writers in that medium acknowledge there are a wide range of movies. Why can’t writers in the games media do the same?

A Look In the Mirror

magic mirror.png

Mirror, mirror, I’m not sexist. But can I prove it to a journalist?

One thing I can fully agree with Hidalgo on is “Dispelling the toxicity does mean taking a hard look in the mirror.” But that’s something the journalists who want to lay the entire blame squarely, and exclusively, on the gamers have refused to do for at least the last five years. Actively ignoring positive communities and gamers within them does nothing to help present the maturity within the community as a whole. As a result, I don’t see the gaming community as responding with aggressiveness, but defensiveness.

Games journalists’, and their sites’, hands are not clean and until you accept that you and yours are fostering a hostile atmosphere with the gaming community, there’s not going to be an end to the unproductive devisiveness. Journalists have to start coming to their articles with a mentality of discussion rather than one of aggression towards their readers. If you stop attacking them, they may stop counterattacking in defense of themselves and their hobby. Once these gamers feel they can stop looking over their shoulder, they can start to look in the mirror at themselves as well.

Let’s Bury The “Gamers” Stereotypes

 

Yes, the “worst aspects of the “gamer” image need to be universally examined and challenged,” but they need to be examined and challenged in good faith, not blanket statements and accusations stated as fact from on high. And while these “challenges need to be accepted as a part of the culture,” the press needs to report on valid criticism of the criticism as well, accepting that counter points to these challenges are just as valid as the challenge itself.

Where Taylor Hidalgo hits the nail squarely on the head is this:

“The parts of the gaming community that encourage furious dissent aren’t being evaluated enough, and that’s keeping communities at their most angry. This culture needs to start fighting an image it’s never fully earned but still has. That image is holding gaming to an image that has been in the deathbed for years, but needs to finally by buried.

Games have already changed, and will continue to change, and holding onto an aggression-centric culture isn’t helping.”

He’s totally right. The parts of the gaming community that encourage furious dissent aren’t being evaluated enough – because their arguments and their points of view aren’t evaluated at all. We’re at a point where criticism is viewed as the truth and any opposing view to that criticism is invalid. The idea that “the truth is somewhere in the middle” has become a phrase of derision, as if it’s somehow a vile concept to explore.

What’s most frustrating about this article’s conclusion is that this image of the angry white straight male gamer is INDEED an image it’s never fully earned but still has, and one that the gaming community has tried to fight for years. The problem is their most high ranking allies, the gaming press, turned against them and perpetuate that image as the only representation of gamers. How can gamers fight this image when the only exposure from the media is to twist everything into this image? How can this image die if it keeps being resurrected over every possible complaint?

Necro.jpg

Stop necro’ing the stereotype, guys!

If we’re going to finally bury the image of gamers as a “basement-dwelling Mountain Dew goblin teenager stereotype who screams at his mother for “interrupting” his boob-modded Call of Duty match to give him his pizza rolls,” then the gaming press has to stop making that the only image they claim exists. The gaming community has raised hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars for various charities through the years. They go out of their way to help other games. They are contributing members of society. But if the gaming press continues to focus exclusively on negative stories, weaving negative narratives, and depicting gamers as hateful, nothing the community does is going to change that misconception.

The way gamers have been treated the past few years makes me think of a line from Zootopia: “If the world’s only going to see a fox as shifty and untrustworthy, there’s no point being anything else.” If the gaming press is only going to portray gamers as mean and vicious people, how many gamers have given up on trying to be anything else? The press has, in a way, engaged in psychological warfare against gamers and I’ve seen more than a few admit on Twitter that they’ve essentially given up on trying to prove they’re better.

zootopia

And that’s a pretty sad thought.

If the gaming press wants the community to be better, they’re going to have to accept that they truly are better than their worst. The gaming press has to stop judging gamers by the worst actions of some while judging themselves only by their own best intentions. Your readers aren’t evil. The majority are not sexist or racist or bigoted.

If you want them to show you their best, give them the chance to be their best. Spotlight them at their best. The more you call them monsters, the more you encourage them to give up and accept the role along with the title.

Suggestion for New Ubisoft Game: Marvel’s Daredevil

I have to admit the Assassin’s Creed series is a guilty pleasure for me. I didn’t love the first one, but it was enjoyable and I could see potential to build on what it started. Assassin’s Creed 2 and Brotherhood were a fantastic improvement and Revelations was a satisfying conclusion to Ezio’s trilogy. Assassin’s Creed III offered a fun addition in ship combat, which took center stage with Black Flag. I didn’t play Rogue and I picked up Unity and Syndicate when they were cheap, but I didn’t get around to them for a long time.

The past few weeks, I finally started playing Unity. More than a year after release, the bugs are mostly smoothed out, so I had a fairly standard play through in that regard. Overall, I wasn’t as pulled into the story now that the meta narrative has been largely abandoned and we’re just loosely still concerned with modern day conflict. Arno didn’t grab my interest at first, either. Then, as I upgraded gear and started looking at color options I unlocked, something occurred to me.

assassins-creed-daredevil.jpg

With the Prowler outfit dyed red, I’m basically playing Assassin’s Creed: Daredevil. I can be le diable de Paris, the devil of Paris, rather than Hell’s Kitchen. Oddly enough, this simple thing increased my interest in the game. Switching from a sword to a mace, a non-lethal weapon, completed the motif. I could have played the DLC and unlocked a cane club as well, which would have been better, but I wasn’t that committed to the idea.

Medieval mace

Don’t ask me how smashing this over someone’s skull is non-lethal, though.

 

The leather of the Prowler set is absolutely perfect in the red. In the light, it’s the bright red Daredevil is known for. In shadows, it’s a dark red and can almost look black at times. In some shading, it even looks a bit brown, like dried blood. It’s exactly what I imagine Daredevil’s costume is really meant to look like, the right shade of red and the right material to go from red to concealed in the shadow.

As I progressed through the game, Arno’s relationship and partnership with Elise even gave me a slight Matt / Elektra vibe with the two being close, then driven apart by differing loyalties, enemies due to those loyalties, then ultimately teaming up again.

Running across roof tops, parkouring around the city, leaping across streets with impossible bounds to grab onto a ledge and climb up to perch upon the gothic architecture of a Catholic church, even the series’ Eagle Vision akin to Matt’s sonar/radar ability; it all fit so well, I began to realize something…

The Assassin’s Creed engine, at its fundamental base, is perfect for a full fledged Daredevil open world game!

Daredevil

Recently, it’s no secret Disney/Marvel has begun to license out its properties to reliable studios to work on rather than making games in house. Square Enix is working on an Avengers game while Insomniac is developing a Spider-Man game.

The good news here is Insomniac is being allowed freedom to do their own world, or a more comic based world, for Spidey, so a Daredevil game could use a gamut of comic book villains and could stay more true rather than being limited to the more gritty and grounded Netflix MCU world.

If Ubisoft were to gain said license and make such a game, the Assassin’s Creed engine and gameplay would be near perfect for implementing the radar and horn-head’s method of traversing the city with just a few tweaks to allow for his grappling hook for the taller buildings and greater distance between city blocks. Combat would work better with a bit of Rocksteady’s Arkham series influencing it, giving Daredevil the ninja martial arts style and better fluidity of tackling a dozen enemies at a time.

I’d love to see a few opportunities woven into the story to delve into the Murdock side of Daredevil with court cases to be able to play through as well. Not all would dig this, so perhaps optional side missions to access.

The parkour of Assassin’s Creed, the Arkham-esque combat, with just a hint of both series’ crime solving, plus some of Spider-Man’s web swinging to translate into the briefer grappling for Daredevil. He doesn’t have the full web swinging of Spidey, nor the grapple and glide of Batman, so it would have to be adjusted to work for DD. The overall idea certainly intrigues me and I’d love to see Ubisoft tackle the project.

Anyone else think Assassin’s Creed has the right elements for the foundations of a Daredevil game?

 

Fox (Game) Hunt: 8/23/17 – A Hunt and a Thread

I had a pretty rough week with the post office losing a package, a rather expensive order that’s been delayed 2 years not getting a response for an update, and yet another delivery sending the wrong item. Phil suggested some game hunting was in order to counter the negative vibes and so once again, we headed out on the hunt!

First Stop – Cash America

Pawns shops were our main target again, this time looking for current games that were priced cheaper than GameStop’s trade value. With the 60% bonus credit deal, it’s possible to rack up quite a bit of store credit, which can be used for new games coming out or retro games on their site.

With this in mind, our first stop did not disappoint. Red Dead Redemption, Injustice, GTA V & NBA 2K17 on 360 for $35. Trading these in with the promotion was $75 store credit (though I lost a few bucks to refurbishing fees). Plus I grabbed Destroy All Humans and Call of Duty 2 on PS2 for $1 each.

Second Stop – First Cash Pawn

We went to a different First Cash this time, going in a completely different direction that our previous outing. Not too much to choose from and the one game with value had the wrong disc in it, but I got a GameBoy Advance SP for $15 with a carrying case and a Namco Museum game in it. That’s all in all worth about $50-$60.

Pawn Shop Busts

We hit some more pawn shops in the area we were in, but were coming up empty. The only thing I added to the finds was a free copy of Whacked on Xbox without the manual. Not bad for free, but overall it looked like we were mostly done.

Final Stop – Half Price Books

I’ve said before a lot of people dismiss Half Price Books, but I still like to check them from time to time. I’ve found good stuff in clearance before and a lot of the stores are getting better about pricing games fairly instead of how they used to price Super Mario Bros/Duck Hunt at $50 and anything Zelda was $50-$100. There are a few in my area that I really like stopping by, so after grabbing a bite to eat, we went by one of my favorites.

And it proved the right choice.

Someone had recently brought in a treasure trove of games. Phil snagged a handful of Game Gear games with their manuals for $2 each before he started eyeing things in their cabinet. He picked up Persona 4 and I picked up Persona 3 on PS2, but Persona 3 had a crack in the center of the disc and Persona 4 was just a little overpriced, enough to pass for now.

Inside the case, however, was Legend of Zelda Link’s Awakening DX complete in box for $50. Lost Kingdoms for $15. Atelier Iris 3 for $20, Alundra for $50, and Shadow Hearts for $40.  I had been looking for Shadow Hearts for a while to complete that trilogy, so I grabbed all these only to find Shadow Hearts was factory sealed. Yes, please and thank you.

I also picked up Alone in the Dark on Dreamcast, though the second disc looks a bit rough. I think it should be okay, though. For $6, I added Buster Busts Loose complete in box for SNES as well. Super Scope 6 was in clearance for $2 with the receiver in clearance for $3, so I just need a Super Scope now. Finally, Okage was $15, which is sliiightly higher than Pricecharting, but I’ve been looking for it and the couple bucks would be taken up by shipping most likely, so I added that.

There were a couple others I was considering, but ultimately put them back due to their high price. While Phil was checking out, I ran over to the actual clearance section for a final check. To my surprise, there were a lot of games there. Checking them in Pricecharting, I started adding more to my pile. These would all be sell/trade bait, but I couldn’t pass them up at $2 each.

Carve, Adrenaline Misfits, 187 Ride or Die, NCAA 07 Football, Quantum Redshift, Max Payne 2, College Hoops 2K7 all on 360 for $2 each….but did I mention they were also factory sealed?

A few $10 value PS2 and GameCube games at $2 each were tossed in because why not? Their main guy that keeps the game area organized, prices their games, and sort of owns the section told us he had a lot more games he hadn’t managed to go through and price yet, but if we came back the next day he’d let us go through them and he’d price what we wanted. Essentially we’d have first crack at whatever was left. Final grab, I asked him to quickly price Punisher on Xbox, which was $10 and also factory sealed. I added that to the pile as well.

With that, I headed to check out as the store was nearing closing time.  We had plans for Thursday night, our weekly night that all my friends on Final Fantasy XIV do something as a group, so I wasn’t sure we could make it back.

As the night came to a close, I headed home and Phil returned to his, both of us pleased with our finds for the day. However, the thought of going back kept gnawing at me.  I popped open Google hangouts.

“Hey Phil…FC night is usually around 7. I’m off work at 4. We could meet back at the store at 4:30 and see what he has and still make it back in time to meet up with everyone on XIV.”
“Sounds good to me. I’ll see you there.”

The plans were set.

p_20170823_222605.jpg

p_20170823_222710_1_p.jpg

 Title Purchased Est. Value
Whacked $0 $7
Destroy All Humans $1 $7
Call of Duty 2 $1 $3
Red Dead Redemption GotY $5 $12
Injustice $5 $10
NBA 2K17 $5 $20
GTA V $5 $12
Carve sealed $2 $6
Adrenalin Misfits sealed $2 $5
187 Ride to Die sealed $2 $10
Mario Aniversary CD sealed $2 $5
Nascar Dirt to Daytona $2 $11
Max Payne 2 sealed $2 $10
Quantum Redshift sealed $2 $10
The Punisher sealed $10 $35
NCAA 07 sealed $2 $10
Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 4 $2 $6
Playstation Mega Mem Card $2 $5
SNES Dust covers x 2 $1
GBA SP Platinum $15 $50
Alone in the Dark $10 $20
Buster Busts Loose $10 $25
Link’s Awakening DX $50 $67
Tony Hawk’s Underground $2 $7
Scooby Doo Night of 100 Frights $2 $10
College Hoops 2k7 $2 $19
Legaia 2 $2 $10
Lost Kingdoms $10 $16
Alundra $50 $60
Shadow Hearts sealed $40 $80
Atelier Iris 3 $20 $20
Okage $15 $15
Super Scope 6 $5 $5
Total $286 $588

Return to Half Price Books – GOLDMINE!

 

We returned to the Half Price Books and sure enough, the guy started bring out stacks and stacks and stacks of games. And of these stacks of Playstation 2 and Xbox games… almost every one was factory sealed.  Silent Hill 4 The Room. The Warriors. TMNT 2 Battle Nexus….. Haunting Ground. As I started picking what I was interested and building a maybe pile, he would come and go through and price them. It quickly became clear that we were going to get the option of getting these at their complete price, not sealed price. $100 for Haunting Ground is good, but factory sealed? Unbelievable.

In the end I walked away with 30 games. Some open ones I’m keeping. Some NES CIB games are for a guy I know that’s going for a complete NES CIB collection. The sealed ones I planned to sell/trade for things I want. I’m not a sealed collector, I want to play these games one day, but I know some do collect sealed copies.

That said, TMNT 2, MGS 3, and Haunting Ground might be staying with me for a while. It’s just pretty cool to have factory sealed games of IPs that you love, or in the case of Haunting Ground, a sealed game that’s not only rare, but has a really cool story of finding it.

p_20170824_185637_1_p.jpg

p_20170824_185809_1_p.jpg

 Title  Spent  ~ Value
 Dino Stalker $10 $35
 Rave Master $14 $20
 The Warriors $20 $75
 Haunting Ground $100 $250
 Wild Earth African Safari $5 $16
 Capcom Fighting Evolution $8 $26
 Dead to Rights II $5 $30
 Quidditch World Cup $5 $22
 colin mcrae rally 2005 $5 $35
 Ghost Rider $5 $18
 Manhunt $8 $38
 Scooby Doo Unmasked $5 $17
 The Sims $5 $37
 TMNT 2 Battle Nexus $5 $40
 Everblue 2 $5 $60
 Jaws Unleashed $6 $50
 Saints Row $4 $35
 MGS 3 Snake Eater $8 $20
 Aliens vs Predator Extinction $20 $70
 Silent Hill 4 The Room $20 $78
 Morrowind $10 $33
 Tenchu Z $8 $40
 X-Men Legends $2 $22
 Dukes of Hazzard Return of General Lee $15 $50
 Test Drive Unlimited $6 $32
 Hogan’s Alley $6 $20
 Battleship $15 $15
 Firehawk $15 $15
 Atelier Iris $25 $35
 Mana Khemia 2 $54 $50
Total:  $425 $1284

Should Game Journalists Be Good At Games?

In the last week or two, the debate has once again flared up on Twitter and various sites over whether or not games journalists should be good at games. The source of the new dust up of discussion stems from Dean Takahashi’s article at Venturebeat ‘Cuphead hands-on: My 26 minutes of shame with an old-time cartoon game.’

Takahashi starts his piece by acknowledging he sucks at Cuphead, but he immediately offers a defense: “the run-and-gun platformer from Studio MDHR and Microsoft is difficult.”

That would be a fair defense if not for the 26 minute video that shows Dean’s inability to overcome a jump in a tutorial and then his repeated deaths on the first level, even the first encounter with enemies in the first level to some degree.

Takahashi goes on to say “While my performance on the captured video below is quite shameful, as I never finished the level, I think it shows quite well why Cuphead is fun and why making hard games that depend on skill is like a lost art.”

I agree with the statement and it’s a reasonable one to make that could warrant some interesting discussion, but it doesn’t resonate with gamers when you don’t get through the first grouping of enemies in the first level. Takahashi didn’t finish the first level… he barely even started it. Yes, Cuphead looks fun and making hard games that depend on skill is rarer now than the late 80s and 90s, but the video doesn’t really give gamers a reason to believe Cuphead is an example of a throw back to those style of games.

I give Mr. Takahashi a little leeway, unlike many lambasting him on social media who seem to have watched the video and never read the article. He notes he didn’t realize you can’t jump on enemies like Mario games. If a gamer comes at this with a platformer mentality, that’s fair. This isn’t a platformer, it’s a run and gun more akin to Contra.

My issue is that the video also shows a lack of learning from those mistakes. You should only die a couple of times jumping or running into enemies before you realize that should be avoided. Takahashi also notes “I think you’ll all agree that at the very end of the video, it was very unfair that I died by jumping into the forest canopy.”

No, Mr. Takahashi, I don’t agree. You didn’t jump into a forest canopy, you jumped into an enemy that we can see descending from that place just before. The final death just happened to jump into that enemy before it descended into sight from the leaves. The fact that a games reporter doesn’t realize this, even after reviewing their own video, is disappointing.

I am not without sympathy

However, I’ll give Dean some credit. He roasts himself in his own article. He talks about his shame. He invites us to laugh at his poor gameplay video. I think he goes wrong trying to justify it with the reasons I’ve mentioned above instead of continuing to roast himself and keep encouraging the laughs.

There are also plenty of reasons that could better explain, but not try to excuse or dismiss, the poor performance. Dean Takahashi has been in the tech and games journalism industry for 25 years. Assuming he started fresh out of high school at 18, that would put him in his early 40s.

Hard truth, gamers: we’re not immortal and the one boss we can’t defeat is time. We age. Our reflexes will slow down. I see it on forums all the time as gamers in their 30s and 40s feel they no longer have the motivation and reflexes for twitch gaming, hard mode difficulty, or hardest level raiding in MMOs. Many note their reflexes and reaction times have decreased.

Now compound this with the possibility of action platformers and run and gun not being your favored game genre since childhood and it starts adding up to a more sympathetic picture. Add to it that he was apparently trying to hold a bit of an interview with the developer at the same time and things continue to add up to contribute to poor gameplay. Dean didn’t address any of this, but if all of these factors hold true, he should have. It would have added a touch more sympathy to the painful presentation and could have painted an increasingly hilarious picture.

Now, I’m not entirely excusing Dean. Others have noted he gave Mass Effect a poor score when he didn’t realize he could assign stats and points to basically level up in the game, so there’s some history of being bad at games here. I’m not telling anyone to give Mr. Takahashi a free pass, but 2 incidents shouldn’t be a career execution.

Nice advice, but shouldn’t journalists be good at games?

Short answer: No.

Medium answer: Not necessarily good, but competent.

Nuanced answer: If they’re reviewing games, they should be competent to play them, but not all game journalists are reviewers and thus not all game journalists need to be good at video games. Some just need to be good at journalism. (Though, yes, I’m aware of the Super Meat Boy error).

Maybe Dean Takahashi really is bad at playing video games, but still loves playing video games. I would say this just means he shouldn’t review gameplay, not that he can’t be a good games journalist.

Takahashi notes in his article on 9/8/17 “The DeanBeat: Our Cuphead runneth over” he writes around 30 stories a week, or around 1560 articles per year, but only a dozen or so game reviews per year. So Takahashi is, by admission, more of an industry games journalist, not a gameplay/game review journalist.

That’s perfectly reasonable, and gamers should actually want people like this in the industry. They’re the ones likely to bring us stories about developer profiles, company rumors, analysis of what various industry circumstances could mean (like the ongoing Ubisoft battle to fend off Vivendi) that don’t require being good at games, or even competent at them, or even understanding game design concepts.

That doesn’t mean Takahashi, or journalists like him, should never touch a controller at a convention like Gamescom, either. I still found value in his shameful gameplay article noting the 1936 Japanese propaganda film inspiration for the game. If a journalist is bad at a game, but can offer more bits of info like this from developers during their 30 minutes at a convention preview, I can find value there.

While those journalists are doing a few previews at a show, but mostly writing stories about industry events, people in the industry, and potential impact of industry changes, or even technical facts about hardware, other writers who make it their focus to play and review games can simply do that (and hopefully also go to the conventions and shows for previews as well).  People like Takahashi enjoy talking to people. Others like playing video games. So why send someone who loves playing and reviewing games out to talk to people if they don’t enjoy doing so?

Why ask a tank to heal and a healer to tank? Different classes can have different specializations and there’s no reason journalists can’t, or shouldn’t, do the same.

Is there a place for bad gamers in games journalism?

 

People have said Dean Takahashi is incompetent at games, that’s he’s not even at a basic level. He’s bad at games.

(Mr. Takahashi, if you’re reading this, full disclosure, I had a good chuckle at the Cuphead Tutorial vs. Pigeon Problem Solving comparison. I won’t apologize for that chuckle and as much as you’re buried in hateful criticism, I’d hope you can get some self deprecating amusement as well. That said, you write better than the pigeon, so don’t feel like the Internet has entirely gone to the birds. You could fully embrace that and ponder a “Dean & The Pigeon Review Team” as a bit)

I’d go so far as to say that journalists like Takahashi could be beneficial to the industry in ways that core gamers are overlooking. Nintendo loves to attract the demographic of “general consumer” more than core gamer. It’s been explosive for them with the Wii and even the DS and 3DS to some extent. Mobile games are huge with general consumers rather than core gamers. MMOs have long been bastions for wide range of demographics, particularly skewing older than core gaming traditionally has. Square Enix has Father of Light (Dad of Light in the US) on Netflix right now about a son reconnecting with his 60 year old father through Final Fantasy XIV.

A journalist who isn’t a core gamer could possibly offer insight to parents who didn’t grow up gaming and are curious about trying it. As in Father of Light, retirees have time on their hands and with gaming an ever growing phenomenon across all age groups, why shouldn’t people who have never picked up a game be allowed to do so? Why couldn’t they have some articles aimed more towards them than we core gamers?

I’m not saying Dean Takahashi, or journalists who have shown similar “fails” with their gameplay, are all equivalents to 60 year old retirees who have never played a video game, but I am saying that the journalists who do more industry coverage and less gaming might have a voice those similar not-yet-gamers may find useful. Possibly even to the point of a whole new, if small, division of games coverage.

So, yeah, much to my surprise and complete opposite of my first instinctive response, bad gamer journalists may actually have a place in the industry. I think the key is to go a step further with, and now we get sticky, disclosure of that fact.

AAAAARRRRGH GERBLURGAAAATE!

I’m just throwing it out there because others are already doing so and it’s going to get brought up anyway. Yeah, yeah, GamerGate, “actually, it’s about ethics in game journalism,” etc., etc. Get it out of your system. This isn’t really about that, but tangentially it is about a layer of disclosure.

This entire dust up started with “I suck at Cuphead.” I’ll reiterate, I think the mistake was the follow up “but in my defense” statement, which I think Takahashi agrees with per his later article.

If a journalist isn’t a core gamer, doesn’t get to spend much time gaming, and is more of an industry journalist, that’s fine. Just say so up front. Just comment your time is spent writing about things and people in the industry more than the games and gameplay, but you did have the chance to go hands on at a press event, convention, or whatever.

Write it from the perspective of someone who doesn’t get to pick up a controller often. Write with the clarity that the game isn’t for people who aren’t really gamers. It’s not an entry level game. If someone who’s been in the industry reporting on games for years finds themselves screwing up this much, someone who’s never played a game might want to find something else to start with. Find an angle that uses your weakness as a foundation and a strength. Make it clear you’re not really “among” core gamers at this point and this article really isn’t written for them as they won’t benefit from it as much.

Absolutely some will still call for your job, but you’ll find a lot of gamers surprisingly reasonable when they’re just told up front the article probably won’t help them along with some insight as to why.

And if you played poorly and you know you played poorly, but you want the readers to join in and laugh, don’t make excuses. Own that comedy of errors to the fullest extent and roast yourself thoroughly in the article. The readers are going to, you might as well fire up the grill and get the cookout started yourself.

Impromptu Fox (Game) Hunt

Aug 9, 2017

After Let’s Play Game Expo, my friend Phil (@terranceharken) still had the itch to hunt for some games. He wasn’t able to return to the convention on Sunday, so his haul was lighter and he was just really wanting to try and find some new gems. We’ve been friends since grade school and we normally hang out and check out an anime or play games once a week, but he wanted to go hunting this week instead.

As I determined this was “his” hunt, I volunteered him to drive and we headed out.

Since he works nights and I work days, it puts limited time on the options for game hunting and poses serious challenges for the idea of doing game hunt videos at flea markets and garage sales. Truth be told, I’ve long thought we’d not have much luck game hunting on a weeknight since our options are limited, but we’ve had some luck in the past.

I suggested with the limited time we had, we hit pawn shops this time, so we headed off.

First Stop – Goodwill

Goodwill has become extremely hit or miss and I rarely find anything of value. Occasionally they’ll get a good bundle in, but they typically put those in auction either online or in store now. It’s still worth stopping in and checking their games and CDs for the off chance something worthwhile got mis-sorted. We came across a very good condition Guitar Hero II guitar with strap and game case/manual (no disc) still in the box. For a couple bucks, I took it.

Second Stop – First Cash Pawn

I’ve had good luck with this pawn shop chain, finding Wii U games for $5-$10 when they were still worth $30 and coming across some PS3 and Wii games for good value in the past. This stop was severely lacking in games, but they had a $10 Wii U Pro controller. I’ve been wanting one for a while, so I grabbed that in a heartbeat! So far, Phil’s hunt was proving fruitful for me, but not so much luck for him.

Third Stop – Entertainmart

Found in Arlington, TX, this location was featured in the first episode of The Game Chasers. The location has drastically shrunk since it first opened. It closed off its separate game area and brought it into the main area of floor space. It’s since been dwindling the games and everything was marked down or even ½ off when we were there. The music section was a fraction of what it once was. It feels like the place is going out of business.

I talked to one of the employees and it turns out I was right. Sort of. They’re not going out of business, but they’re shifting their focus of what they want to offer. For video games, that means current and previous gen, not older stuff. They’ll still do movies and music as well, and they’re planning to move to a smaller location next year. Personally, I think they’re making the wrong move focusing on current & previous gen games. Plus, they’re moving closer to the Arlington area mall, which puts them in direct location competition with a GameStop inside and outside the mall.  I don’t expect we’ll find any good deals there in the future.

Fourth Stop – Cash America

Another Cash America stop, but this one had quite a few things. Phil went ahead and got Final Fantasy XII Collector’s edition steelbook. I found 11 games for $1 each. I’ll rarely pass on a $1 game. Adding the FFXII to my stack, I got the whole bundle at $5 the total, bringing Phil’s game down to about the sweet spot to pick it up.

Fifth Stop – Game Over Games

I’ve been to Game Over outside Austin, TX before and I didn’t find much I was willing to buy. Most of their games seem terribly overpriced. I found a few Atari games at this location that I needed, but they came out way higher than what I’d pay on eBay. Most PS2 and Xbox games seemed to hover around $20, even when they’re $10 on eBay. I understand stores having some mark up for overhead, but double the price of an Ebay purchase seems really high.

However, I’ve seen others comment that their more common games are overpriced, which are what the casual buyer is more likely to look for and buy without concern, while their rarer games tend to be priced fairly or even at reasonably good deals. This allows collectors to hit their store for the rarities while the store is supported by non-collectors just looking for old games to play. I guess that makes some sense, but it doesn’t keep me coming back in.

Despite my opinion, Phil found a number of games he was looking for, including Sonic 2 on Master System, and some Game Gear titles, for reasonable prices and finally made this hunting trip worth his time.

Final Stop – Movie Trading Company

We mostly went into Movie Trading Company expecting to find nothing because their prices are typically $5 higher than eBay averages, but we were hoping to find something we needed/wanted just to get a bag for all the games in the car outside. We had a couple of stacks and no bag, so hopefully we’d find something.

We looked. We searched. We hunted. We didn’t find anything.

As we were calling it quits, we checked their case one last time and found Grandia Xtreme for a fair price, about $7 under online average. It was complete and on my list, so I bought it to get us a bag. As we were checking out, though, I spotted a Mario statue. It turned out to be a DS holder I’d had been interested in the past. His hat was damaged, the bill of the cap broken off but still able to hold in place. They had it marked at $20 but with the damage, they offered to do ½ off, so I went ahead and took it as well.

Overall, not a bad haul for a day I expected to be fairly empty. Just goes to show, you really don’t know what you’ll find or where. It’s all a matter of going out and looking.

8-9-17-game-hunt-haul.jpg

Game Spent Value
Guitar Hero II $3 $20
Top Gun: Fire At Will $1 $5
Disney Infinity 2.0 $1 $2
Cars $1 $5
Need for Speed Most Wanted PS3 $1 $10
Need For Speed Underground – Most Wanted Disc $1 $10
Wipeout In The Zone $1 $5
Shrek the Third $1 $3
Top Gun Combat Zones $1 $4
Madagascar $1 $5
LotR Return of the King $1 $6
Simpsons Road Rage $1 $5
Grandia XTreme $20 $27
Wii U Pro Controller $10 $20
Mario DS Lite Holder $10 ~$45
Total $64 ~$150

Let’s Play Game Expo 2017

Let’s Play Game Expo (LPGE) started 3 years ago and was held at the Plano Convention Center the first two years. I first became aware of the convention through flyers at one of the stores that helped get the convention started: FX Game Exchange. In only three years, the relatively small convention has rapidly outgrown its inaugural location in Plano. From the start, the arcade set up has been above and beyond what I’d expect at a small convention and this year was no different. There’s also a free play console area in addition to the free arcades.

Jpeg

Just about 1/3 of the arcades set to free play at the convention for the weekend.

The vendor count has only grown with over 85 vendors at this year’s convention according to the website.

Jpeg

Likewise, this is maybe 1/3 of the vendor area.

The other big draw has been the tournament scene held each year. This year’s tournaments included Low Tier City 5’s national Smash Bros. Tournament, The Ultimate Q*Bert Hi-Score Tournament (with special guest Warren Davis, creator of the arcade game itself), an Oregon Trail tournament, Quake III, and even a Virtual Boy tournament among many others. The Nintendo Playstation was also on hand for viewing.

Jpeg

Tournaments are shown on a main stage.

Normally, the convention has been in June, but with the move to the new, larger, venue along with tournament scheduling, it was scheduled for the first weekend in August. The problem, at least for me, with this was the short time between LPGE and Retropalooza in October. Not as much time to recover spending money as a June to October stretch.

I had sold some finds, put money back, and had games to trade, hoping to knock out the last 15 or so N64 games still on my hunting list for around $200 to $250, then knock out a chunk of Atari 2600 or GameCube titles on my list. In total, I was taking $825 cash along with $3,000 worth of games to trade. I was more than ready to work a deal to knock those games off my list, taking the losing end of a trade in order to get closer to completing my primary collection goal.

Day 1 of LPGE

My friend Phil, @TerranceHarken, met me at the expo at opening. He and I both paid $8.50 online in advance for convention parking, only to find it was $8 at the parking garage. On top of that, there was no in & out privilege for parking. A bit frustrating as parking was free at Plano’s location.

Nostalgic Nerds

All the same, we headed into the convention to start the big hunt. Our first stop was to visit a buddy of mine that makes up one half of The Nostalgic Nerd. Looking over what they had, nothing jumped out immediately… except Chip n’ Dale Rescue Rangers 2. For $240.

Let me take a moment to promote these guys just a bit. What Patrick and Matt do with Nostalgic Nerd tends to beat most other vendors at conventions. They price based on Pricecharting and add tax on the sticker, so what you see is what you pay. Rescue Rangers 2 is at $225 on Pricecharting and they had it at $240, but other vendors were anywhere from $250 to $300 for this gem. Overall, their prices were better than other vendors. They also are eager to trade, offering 75-80% of Pricecharting values in trade or 50% in cash. But I wasn’t here to buy an expensive NES game!

First Purchase

Moving on from Nostalgic Nerd, I had to start looking around. We started meandering along the rows of vendors. Phil found a place that had Final Fantasy V for Game Boy Advance complete in box for a reasonable price and was going to buy it, but I hopped in and asked about Superman on NES and got it bundled in for $5 off the total of the two. Comic book based games are a sub-list I’ve been collecting for, so I was happy to grab that one.

“I love the Power Glove. It’s so….bad.”

The first thing that I came across that really interested me was the Power Glove, with hook ups. The Power Glove is one of those items that I don’t need, but think is cool to have. However, they wanted $100 for it and I was definitely not paying that. Moving down a few tables, we found another one for $60, also with everything but the box and any paperwork. I considered it briefly, but wanted to wait before dropping a large chunk of money. When I hesitated, the guy dropped it to $40, which seemed like a good enough deal to me, so I walked away with a Power Glove of my very own.

Jpeg

The Power Glove gives me John Cena level invisibility

An Unexpected Find

Continuing to venture through the vendor area, I came across a copy of Valkyrie Profile for Playstation. I asked mainly out of curiosity and the guy wanted $120, but right off said he’d do $100 on it, which he was pretty sure was the disc only price on Pricecharting. That seemed fair, but I wasn’t planning on buying pricey Playstation games at this convention. Still, I had to look it up and see and the current price was showing $85 for disc only, so he agreed to do $90 if it was cash. So, once again, I decided it was a fair deal to knock out one of the last 3 notably expensive Playstation games on my list, and an RPG at that. I was quickly going down the spending hole and I had barely been here an hour. (Side note: Funny enough, I am in a Facebook group with the guy and neither of us realized it at the time).

A Few Good Pick Ups

We also came across a copy of Star Fox complete in box for $35 at a vendor that had a few other games well below Pricecharting values. However, they had some issues, so I passed on the others (minor cosmetic issues here and there mostly), but I decided to take the Star Fox so I could upgrade my box at home. I also found an Atari 2600 cartridge of Snoopy and the Red Baron, which I’ve been looking for a good while now for $5 off regular price.

I found a booth that had Ocarina of Time Collector’s Edition, Dr. Mario 64, and a guy sharing the booth that had Tactics Ogre 64: Person of Lordly Caliber. Prices were fair, but I was really hoping to find ALL my N64 targets in one location and work a killer deal in a large bundle. Still, I kept thinking about those for a while.

We made a few more final loops and Phil picked up some extra games before he had to head out around midday due to work.

Going Solo

After he left, I kept looking around vendors, seeing if I had missed anything and what I wanted to make mental notes for a return trip on Sunday rather than pay sticker price. A lot of vendors do deals before closing up the last day to avoid packing and hauling things back home.

I decided I hadn’t seen Ocarina of Time anywhere else, so I went back and got Dr. Mario 64 and OoT together. I didn’t get a great deal for the two, the guy taking $3 off, which brought them down to Pricecharting prices, but it was something.

On my way out, a guy had N64 games they were still trying to get out. Tubs of them. We went through and found a few more on my list: Castlevania Legacy of Darkness, 007 The World Is Not Enough, and Wipeout 64. I went back to the Ocarina of Time booth and tried to get Tactics Ogre for $35, then $40 but the guy was staying firm at $45.

So, having had no luck with anyone willing to take anything I brought for trades, I went back to Nostalgic Nerd and let them pilfer my list for what they’d want. In the end, they cleaned out a good portion of my complete Sega Genesis games, a number of NES carts, some N64, and Wii titles. I left the first day with one final game I never really thought I’d pick up: Chip n’ Dale Rescue Rangers 2.

Jpeg

I honestly never thought I’d actually pick this up.

Overall, the first day was pretty good.

Jpeg

Day 1 results

Day 2 of LPGE

I returned the second day and had a good start to the day saving that 50 cents by paying at the garage rather than online and got a great parking spot. It’s important to appreciate small victories.

Jpeg

Pretty close to the elevators, I’d say.

No Returns or Exchanges…sorta!

I started off by going back to the guy I had bought Ocarina and Dr. Mario 64 from after I had realized the night before I already had Dr. Mario! Despite keeping a list, it seems I had forgotten to remove it from my hunting list. I was asking for a straight value trade and I’d put the balance of cash towards his price on Battletoads in Battlemaniacs, but he wanted an extra $3 on it. I told him I’d think on it, but was rubbed a little wrong by the idea. He recognized me, he remembered the purchase, he knew I had bought from him the day before, but wasn’t willing to make the trade on value for the mistake. Instead, he wanted to recoup the $3 he had knocked off (which was $3 over Pricecharting to begin with). I was fairly sure I wasn’t going to take the deal, but wasn’t going to completely write it off.

A Really Good Trade In

One thing I had seen the day before was a copy of Thousand Arms for Playstation at a booth that was asking $125 for the game with manual and case. I had a copy of the game without the manual and research had revealed it had originally included a holographic card as well as memory card stickers. The game, case, and manual was regularly $50 on eBay, but I had asked them what the trade value would be on mine without the manual. They had told me $90, but I hadn’t made a trade. The more I thought on it, however, the more it seemed like a good deal considering I had only paid $20 for my copy. As such, they were my next stop for the second day.

Going back, they were still good with a $90 trade credit on my copy without the manual, so I handed it right over and bought a complete copy with manual, case, game discs, along with sticker sheet, a second sticker sheet (missing 1 sticker), and 2 of the holographic cards on eBay for $85. I then picked up Shiren the Wanderer for Nintendo Wii, Radiata Stories, and Banjo Tooie for a friend.

Patience Wins Out

I didn’t find much else and spent most of the day looking around and chatting with vendors, though I did get Dig Dug with a very nice label for $3.  I then went back and got Tactics Ogre 64 for $40 (let a game sit on the table for two days and people are more ready to make a sale!). Next to them, I picked up Shadow Hearts From the New World for $20.

Finally, I was getting ready to wrap up the day and went back by Nostalgic Nerd. I had been considering some Sega Genesis games they had, including Phantasy Star I and II and had brought some more NES games for trade.

Instead, I wound up taking Sonic Adventure 2. I had spent enough cash, I was starting to get tighter on the wallet and wanted to keep to trades. However, Matt just had to tell me of a booth he was sure was cutting good deals during the weekend and with the day winding down, I had to check them out.

Final Deals

Sure enough, they had reasonable prices and I was debating a bundle of games, but really wanted a Star Wars game for Atari 2600 I had seen. I had them put the bundle aside so I could see how the Star Wars panned out. After getting it, Star Wars: The Arcade Game, for $20, I headed back but saw Superman on Atari 2600…and snagged it for one whole dollar!

I returned and scrapped a game from the pile, but still got Golden Axe II for Genesis, Phantasy Star Online Ver 2.0, and Evolution the World of Sacred Device for Dreamcast. However, when I come back to make that deal I find Matt and Patrick of Nostalgic Nerd going through the guy’s stuff to make some deals for themselves! I couldn’t help but swing by their booth and grab a pic.

Jpeg

“Gone deal hunting, back later.” – Those nerd boys are at it again!

The weekend was winding down to a close and I still had half my money left. I went back to my car and locked everything in the trunk before going back to browse this year’s free play arcade.

All in all, I felt like I took home a pretty big haul of some high value games, which tends to be the real benefit of conventions these days. If you’re still looking for more common and lower price titles, eBay and game stores are still a pretty good source, but for the real valuable games, conventions tend to have a lot of them.

Jpeg

Day 2 results

I don’t feel like trades are as strong at conventions as they used to be, though. Unless you have rare and higher value things, people just aren’t interested in doing trades, with a few exceptions. Some stores want to boost inventory of common games and anything Nintendo first party is likely to be a consideration. I just didn’t have much luck with anyone even wanting those this time.  As always, cash is king, even if people are taking credit cards at conventions more often now.

So here are my main pieces of advice for conventions:

  1. Look for your rarer and hard to find items on your list.
  2. Walk around to every booth before buying things. Look for price differences and buy the best value for your buck.
  3. Try to look for multiple things you want at a single booth and bundle up. You’ll usually get better deals that way.
  4. Practice your negotiating skills at garage sales and flea markets. They’ll help at conventions too!

Now there’s 2 months left until Retropalooza, so it’s time to get out and hunt, find some deals, and do some trades and flips to build up cash for the next round of convention hunting!