I have heard good things about it. I'm not sure i like their pricing model all too much, but that will get figured out as it matures. Also the selection last i checked was terrible.
I have heard good things about it. I'm not sure i like their pricing model all too much, but that will get figured out as it matures. Also the selection last i checked was terrible.
PopMatters' Moving Pixels blog - kind of an all encompassing look at video games and how they relate to culture at-large.
Joystiq - reviews n' shit
Ars Technica - more reviews n' shit
Giant Bomb - Patrick Klepek is the best actual games journalist. Continually finds fresh, interesting, original stories about a variety of topics related to videogames.
Eurogamer - Also has a great news team. If you've seen a story that has been repeated across multiple blogs, chances are good that it originated at Eurogamer.
Gamasutra - Awesome features on developers and development studios, great for getting an inside look at the games industry.
you can't publish a game on the Xbox (or what have you) without getting permission
that is the very definition of non-freedom
Okay, fair point, but that doesn't change the fact that they seem to claim that consoles would stagnate or outright kill gaming culture and that's why they love PC gaming. The issue here is that they could be all for PC gaming without seemingly being all against consoles. You had a problem with me saying totally unverifiable things about indie gaming earlier on? Totally correct, and I shouldn't have been. But they are producing just as much unverifiable claptrap as me.
You can say PC gaming is free. You can say console gaming is not. To attribute any sort of ultimate benefit towards game development or gaming in general on either one of these facts is a much longer debate than the shallow historical references tossed about in that article. It is, in short, kind of horseshit.
also, the indie games on the xbox have an incredibly low bar set to them. most of them range from unplayable to just bad. I kind of enjoy standards as they exist.
0
Options
VivixenneRemember your training, and we'll get through this just fine.Registered Userregular
you can't publish a game on the Xbox (or what have you) without getting permission
that is the very definition of non-freedom
Okay, fair point, but that doesn't change the fact that they seem to claim that consoles would stagnate or outright kill gaming culture and that's why they love PC gaming. The issue here is that they could be all for PC gaming without seemingly being all against consoles. You had a problem with me saying totally unverifiable things about indie gaming earlier on? Totally correct, and I shouldn't have been. But they are producing just as much unverifiable claptrap as me.
You can say PC gaming is free. You can say console gaming is not. To attribute any sort of ultimate benefit towards game development or gaming in general on either one of these facts is a much longer debate than the shallow historical references tossed about in that article. It is, in short, kind of horseshit.
I don't think they said they DON'T love console gaming. I think they said they value PC gaming because publishing an indie game does not require getting approval from someone else, as console gaming does. I never got the impression that they are against consoles, they are simply acknowledging their view that PC gaming contributes to indie gaming more than consoles do.
I'm not saying that view is necessarily CORRECT nor that I necessarily AGREE with it, they are just stating THEIR interpretation of the situation.
you can't publish a game on the Xbox (or what have you) without getting permission
that is the very definition of non-freedom
Okay, fair point, but that doesn't change the fact that they seem to claim that consoles would stagnate or outright kill gaming culture and that's why they love PC gaming. The issue here is that they could be all for PC gaming without seemingly being all against consoles. You had a problem with me saying totally unverifiable things about indie gaming earlier on? Totally correct, and I shouldn't have been. But they are producing just as much unverifiable claptrap as me.
You can say PC gaming is free. You can say console gaming is not. To attribute any sort of ultimate benefit towards game development or gaming in general on either one of these facts is a much longer debate than the shallow historical references tossed about in that article. It is, in short, kind of horseshit.
I don't think they said they DON'T love console gaming. I think they said they value PC gaming because publishing an indie game does not require getting approval from someone else, as console gaming does. I never got the impression that they are against consoles, they are simply acknowledging their view that PC gaming contributes to indie gaming more than consoles do.
I'm not saying that view is necessarily CORRECT nor that I necessarily AGREE with it, they are just stating THEIR interpretation of the situation.
In the console-war, the only real casualty is the gaming cultural form. If anyone wins, gaming loses. Any kind of console fandom is just choosing who you want to be chained to.
Maybe I'm not understanding this, and I say so with sincerity rather than sarcasm, but that definitely sounds like anti-console sentiment to me.
I think they're saying that being a fanboy of a specific console is bad. But everyone knew that already. And nobody "wins," because the market is big enough to support all three major companies at this point, and competition is actually healthier for gaming culture or whatever they're talking about. I mean, just looking at indie companies, having Live and PSN there to compete with PC things like Steam for the right to put the best games available on their system is, I have to imagine, pretty good for those independent developers. The PC is definitely more open than consoles as far as getting your game out there. But that openness also means it's harder to break through and get your game known, and it's harder for consumers to sort through the shit to find the gems.
Both have their place, and if RPS wants to focus on the PC side, sure! Sites like that are incredibly helpful in sorting out what's worth your time and what you can pass on. But there's a reason that these indie developers put up with the limitations they face with Live (it's money and exposure, those are the reasons).
I don't know what the point of this post is. I think by the time it gets posted the post I'm replying to will be way above it and I don't even know who I'm arguing with. WHATEVS.
so would it be fair to say that most people think of writing about games as instrumental, eg. they use writing about games as an indicator as to whether or not they would buy a game exclusively, and are not interested in writing about games as something to read for its own merit
I suppose I should have quoted the rest of that paragraph because they go from talking about fandom to describing the evils of the corporations behind consoles, which have nothing at all to do with fandom.
edit: oh but I pretty much agree with everything else geebs said. my issue is that they definitely seem to focus more on "pc good" and "console bad" than "both have their place in current gaming culture and we just happen to prefer PC gaming."
so would it be fair to say that most people think of writing about games as instrumental, eg. they use writing about games as an indicator as to whether or not they would buy a game exclusively, and are not interested in writing about games as something to read for its own merit
anyone mind if i ask this one again
Most of the time, yup, unless it's one of those really amazing games that you need to know every teeny thing about.
so would it be fair to say that most people think of writing about games as instrumental, eg. they use writing about games as an indicator as to whether or not they would buy a game exclusively, and are not interested in writing about games as something to read for its own merit
anyone mind if i ask this one again
What do you mean by its own merit? A good review will talk extensively about the qualities of the game and use that as an ultimate recommendation. Are the two so mutually exclusive?
I find myself reading the Iwata Asks interviews quite a bit just because its really interesting to see what kinds of ideas went into the making of a game and the processes that evolved over time when it was being developed.
Some people, probably. But tons don't even read good reviews. Mostly I'd imagine if a publication puts out something that isn't a review on a game that just bill it as an editorial and call it a day.
Basing an entire blog or site on the idea could work depending on how you present it. The thing about a written review is some people will just slide over the actual content and just look at the score. Plus, there are a million and one gaming review sites. You don't get many who actively bill themselves as not reviewing, that could be an advantage maybe?
Talking about Giant Bomb again, I find their GDC podcasts hugely interesting because they almost never talk about how good or bad a game is, but rather talk with developers about the state of gaming and game developing. It's super interesting to hear discussion about that, and it could potentially be equally interesting to read about it.
Talking about Giant Bomb again, I find their GDC podcasts hugely interesting because they almost never talk about how good or bad a game is, but rather talk with developers about the state of gaming and game developing. It's super interesting to hear discussion about that, and it could potentially be equally interesting to read about it.
The e3 2011 podcasts had a fair bit of this as well, probably because they had so many developers and industry people in to talk to them.
Talking about Giant Bomb again, I find their GDC podcasts hugely interesting because they almost never talk about how good or bad a game is, but rather talk with developers about the state of gaming and game developing. It's super interesting to hear discussion about that, and it could potentially be equally interesting to read about it.
The e3 2011 podcasts had a fair bit of this as well, probably because they had so many developers and industry people in to talk to them.
The quality of this stuff is always enhanced but how frank everyone is in the discussions. There have usually been some drinks passed around, and while you'll occasionally hear industry dudes talking about a PR rep standing off to the side, the discussions always seen extremely honest. Listening to or reading about content you know is honest and not tempered by PR nonsense is goddamn enlightening.
Posts
. . .
Heh.
Heh.
Speak of the Devil and he shall appear
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/150398/so-onlive-is-doing-a-thing-where-you-get-a-game-for-cheap
PopMatters' Moving Pixels blog - kind of an all encompassing look at video games and how they relate to culture at-large.
Joystiq - reviews n' shit
Ars Technica - more reviews n' shit
Giant Bomb - Patrick Klepek is the best actual games journalist. Continually finds fresh, interesting, original stories about a variety of topics related to videogames.
Eurogamer - Also has a great news team. If you've seen a story that has been repeated across multiple blogs, chances are good that it originated at Eurogamer.
Gamasutra - Awesome features on developers and development studios, great for getting an inside look at the games industry.
Okay, fair point, but that doesn't change the fact that they seem to claim that consoles would stagnate or outright kill gaming culture and that's why they love PC gaming. The issue here is that they could be all for PC gaming without seemingly being all against consoles. You had a problem with me saying totally unverifiable things about indie gaming earlier on? Totally correct, and I shouldn't have been. But they are producing just as much unverifiable claptrap as me.
You can say PC gaming is free. You can say console gaming is not. To attribute any sort of ultimate benefit towards game development or gaming in general on either one of these facts is a much longer debate than the shallow historical references tossed about in that article. It is, in short, kind of horseshit.
also, the indie games on the xbox have an incredibly low bar set to them. most of them range from unplayable to just bad. I kind of enjoy standards as they exist.
I don't think they said they DON'T love console gaming. I think they said they value PC gaming because publishing an indie game does not require getting approval from someone else, as console gaming does. I never got the impression that they are against consoles, they are simply acknowledging their view that PC gaming contributes to indie gaming more than consoles do.
I'm not saying that view is necessarily CORRECT nor that I necessarily AGREE with it, they are just stating THEIR interpretation of the situation.
'lo
Ever.
I wanted to buy the ghostbusters game, because well, ghostbusters. but god damn that games sucked. and was one of their best.
How are you?
Maybe I'm not understanding this, and I say so with sincerity rather than sarcasm, but that definitely sounds like anti-console sentiment to me.
Both have their place, and if RPS wants to focus on the PC side, sure! Sites like that are incredibly helpful in sorting out what's worth your time and what you can pass on. But there's a reason that these indie developers put up with the limitations they face with Live (it's money and exposure, those are the reasons).
I don't know what the point of this post is. I think by the time it gets posted the post I'm replying to will be way above it and I don't even know who I'm arguing with. WHATEVS.
anyone mind if i ask this one again
edit: oh but I pretty much agree with everything else geebs said. my issue is that they definitely seem to focus more on "pc good" and "console bad" than "both have their place in current gaming culture and we just happen to prefer PC gaming."
Most of the time, yup, unless it's one of those really amazing games that you need to know every teeny thing about.
What do you mean by its own merit? A good review will talk extensively about the qualities of the game and use that as an ultimate recommendation. Are the two so mutually exclusive?
Like spherical planetoids in Super Mario Galaxy or the realistic facial modeling and speaking from LA Noire.
I do!
but I'm a literature wonk and also a geek so it was a foregone conclusion that I'd be into that sort of thing
Basing an entire blog or site on the idea could work depending on how you present it. The thing about a written review is some people will just slide over the actual content and just look at the score. Plus, there are a million and one gaming review sites. You don't get many who actively bill themselves as not reviewing, that could be an advantage maybe?
The e3 2011 podcasts had a fair bit of this as well, probably because they had so many developers and industry people in to talk to them.
This is tangentially related to the overall theme here.
The quality of this stuff is always enhanced but how frank everyone is in the discussions. There have usually been some drinks passed around, and while you'll occasionally hear industry dudes talking about a PR rep standing off to the side, the discussions always seen extremely honest. Listening to or reading about content you know is honest and not tempered by PR nonsense is goddamn enlightening.
helicopters I can shoot down
oh god
even better
game devs pay attention this night to minor subforum SE++