Nintendo's Successful Failure

I've praised Nintendo before for their seemingly great emphasis on putting the "game" in video game, but they personally have somewhat of a problem themselves. While their systems may not have the best hardware or the highest overall popularity among older teens and young adults, one thing we can't deny them is how great they have mastered and stood true to their franchises. Mostly every Zelda, Mario, Kirby, and Metroid has been good if not great since each series' introduction. I say that last sentence with a heaping mound of salt of course, because not only will your gaming experience vary per person, but there hasn't been a fair share of controversy on a select few of these games, especially some of the few changes that they do make between games.

I won't say I hate Nintendo, because it is quite the contrary. However, I think most if not all of their game franchises is in the same boat that I talked about before as Pokémon where there are new elements and whatnot, but the core is beginning to get stale.

Take Mario for example. Everybody knows his name and everybody knows his game(s). As Nintendo's leading star, nearly all his games are regarded as fun and enjoyable to run through, and they are. However, the "collect 100-or-so-odd stars" mechanic is getting a little old. While seeing all the new levels they come out with is entertaining and trying to navigate them all perfectly is cool, having the same overall goal for each recurring game makes it feel like its more of the same. Luckily, at least for me personally, the new additions to each game are enough to satisfy me to want to play, but as soon as I finish the main story (which might also need a little change; Bowser kidnapping Peach is even more overused), I'm not finding a lot of reason to finish other than unlockable, ridiculously hard secret levels.

Still, I guess the star collecting and the princess kidnapping are hallmarks of the Mario franchise, so I suppose it's not the greatest example in the world.

A more common example would probably be the Legend of Zelda franchise. Your quest and generic role is usually the same in every game, which includes both flavors of handheld and console alike. Start off as a common village boy, then somehow it's determined you are the hero and are given your trademark green tunic and hat, then you eventually find the Master Sword, then you kill Ganon. Again, there are various elements and new things that are added to make the game feel original, but the underlying context is basically the same. As a certain internet-famous game critic once wrote, we are basically being resold Ocarina of Time every single time with new items, NPCs, maybe a new setting, and that's about it.

I may sound like I'm being harsh on these wonderful game franchises, and I don't like pointing out the flaws in the games I really like, just like any fanboy doesn't (except many of those don't have a brain to explain themselves). I suppose I'm just part of a niche of gamers who are stuck in a sort of limbo where we love continuously each game because it stays true to the roots of what made the games great, but we realize at the same time that the general formulae are remaining the same and we are concerned at just how long it can last before it falls over and dies. 

It's like going to eat at McDonalds when you think their burgers and fries are tasty, but you're fully aware of all the controversy surrounding fast food and the health risks that repeating eaters are known for. You don't have an answer for it, but the good keeps you coming back regardless of what you know about the bad.

Wow...I think I just figured out why World of Warcraft is plaguing me so...

Handheld Home Front

So...there's another Playstation handheld device coming out in the next week here in North America, dubbed the Playstation Vita (read: VEE-TUH)

Now, I know what you're thinking. First, deja vu right? Didn't this happen before? Second, will history repeat itself? Will the Vita fail as the PSP did, emphasizing graphics and features over a sizable load of popular launch titles, ultimately leading to its downfall? Third, why don't you post more often Cláymore? You should really remember your blog more often.

Answers:
1. Yes, it did.
2. As of right now, it seems likely.
3. School sucks, but you sort of need it.

What? You want longer answers? Okay fine.

Making a new device that wouldn't repeat the mistakes of the slowly-yet-painfully dying PSP seemed likely honestly, as Sony saw the possible profits in the handheld market judging on the dominating Nintendo and the ever-intrusive-but-still-awesome Apple and their app store from heaven.

While I applaud the creation of new devices to turn more people into gamers and diversify the culture a little more, I'm finding Sony's target audience for these handhelds confusing. Are they supposed to be for everybody? For people who want to be cool? For school D-bags that want something to throw at the nerds for target practice? According to the most recent (and thankfully dead) PSP commercials, it seemed like the second choice with the Kevin Butler-like kid that everybody now hates (and don't pretend you don't. He was ANNOYING AS HELL.)

Yeah...no. If the Nintendo DS and the iPhone are for "kids", then the PSP is for rim-hat-wearing tools that are completely ignorant of the big picture.

Thankfully, the ad campaign so far doesn't seem to be like this. So far I've only noticed a running deal Sony has going with Taco Bell where you can possibly win a Vita by buying a $5 box meal. It's creative, but fast food? Well okay then...(Note: I like Taco Bell.)

Still, according to the now almost 2 months of sales in Japan, the PS Vita is currently selling LESS than it's predecessor per week, yet Sony doesn't seem very concerned. Granted that it has yet to come out in America as of right now, but still, that's a little bit worrisome in my opinion.

Having some friendly competition in the handheld gaming scene is all fine, and I like that Sony is at least trying to improve on what they had before that clearly sucked, but right now it doesn't appear as if they know what they are doing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the "gameplay over graphics" thing repeated itself enough times by now? Hell, even the company that runs on that ideology screwed it up at first with the 3DS, and it took a sizable price drop and the launch of better titles to get it up and running.

You'd think that the second go-around wouldn't be another learning experience, but I suppose we will just have to wait and see.

The World's Best Hat Simulator

Sandviches are tasty, aren't they? Filled with tasty cheese, lettuce, your choice of lunch meat, all between two delicious slices of bread.

What? You were expecting something else? I thought I'd make my post this time about sandviches. I don't know what you're talking about.

Team Fortress 2 is a first-person shooter available for PC, PS3 and Xbox 360 (The only version that matters is the PC one. Let's be honest.) It is FREE TO PLAY, read that again, and downloadable off of Steam. Yes, that Steam. You used to have to pay $20 dollars for this game, but recently the game went free-to-play due to the overwhelmingly popular in-game item shop.

Aside from the ungodly amount of memes and hilarious in-jokes related to this game, if you haven't heard about it by now, then you need to smack yourself, because not only is this one of the few first-person shooters that I'll play actively, but Team Fortress 2 is a fountain of endless fun and replayability. It is all multiplayer though, and depending on which server you select at first, the difficulty curve is a little steep, but even losing in this game is fun. How many other games can you say that for?

There are 9 different characters you can play as with playstyles for everyone ranging from the outrageously fast but fragile Scout, the turret-building Engineer, the long-range Sniper, or the wonderfully grief-tastic Spy. You select the red or blue team depending on whether you want to play defense or offense respectively, and the two teams are pitted against each other on one of many maps with one of several objectives depending on the server you chose. These include Territory Control, Capture the "Enemy Intelligence" (i.e. flag), Payload (push the cart to the end of the track), King of the Hill, and several others.

I mentioned an in-game item shop earlier, and it doesn't disappoint. You can buy different weapons that affect your class, different Use items (like the Sandvich :P), and any amount of hats from the towering mountain of choices. A running joke, as you can see by the title, is that too much emphasis is put on the store and hats by players, which does have merit, but then again, they're too cool to take the concern seriously, so who the hell cares. No money to buy hats? That's okay. There is an in-game crafting system where you can craft almost ANYTHING available in the store, and you can get items as random drops while playing as well. The items you don't keep can be broken down into parts to use for the crafting.

All in all, Team Fortress 2 is a hilariously fun game, even for those of you that don't like first-person shooters all that much like myself. With a laundry list of servers and endless possibilities for games, you will never get bored. Go here to download it, and best of luck on the battlefield.

Which character is my favorite? Easy. *ahem* Gentlemen...