The Older Gamers Forums - Blogs - Hello! I am Error. by daranthered

Are Video Games Getting Easier?

daranthered — Sun, 03 Apr 2011 09:14:59 GMT

Question. Have you ever gone back and played the games you did when you were growing up? How did you find them? For me, the answer can be summed up in one word: Hard.

Finding and playing the games from the 70's, 80's and 90's isn't difficult. Emulators and Apps abound. My preferred method has been for years, to play them on my old Gameboy Advanced, which imported many old titles from the NES, SNES, and SEGA systems. Some of my favorites are Altered Beast, Mario 3, and Castelvania.

When I go back and play these games, I'm struck by how difficult they are to play. I think, paradoxically, it's because they're simpler. Because there wasn't as yet as much ability in graphics and story in gaming, the concentration was on sheer difficulty. If you don't believe me, go back and the Original Sonic the Hedgehog. Or Pac-Man. That game's a bloody nightmare after three levels.

A large part of the difficulty I have in playing these is the two-dimensional nature of them. My brain is used to being able to side step, strafe and sidle up to my quarry in games like Halo, Fallout 3 or Dragon Age. Reduce the number of possible options to a few route responses to given situations, and the mind of a modern gamer freezes. I can now manage a head-shot while jumping off a cliff, but I can no longer properly time a jump over a mushroom with feet.

The old games aren't about thinking, they're about acting. I never realized until years later that my ability to play through Mario 3 on one life was as much muscle memory as anything else.

It's a bit humbling to go back to those games you mastered as a kid, and find that all you uber skills at Warcraft avail you not in the halls of Castlevania. But there's also a plus side. There's a whole library of games out there to master again. Gannon needs to be dealt with.

Go Forth: The Princess is still in another castle. And Cutsmen is still the lamest idea for a hard level boss ever.

Good Video Game Novels

daranthered — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 03:25:05 GMT

A friend and I had a discussion the other day about the worst books we had ever read that were based on video games. Mine was The Ruins of Dantooine. His was a Sonic the Hedgehog novel he had had the misfortune of reading in middle school. Amidst the reminiscences of these truly awful books, I made the assertion that most video game books were bad, which brought my friend up short. The majority, he said, of game books he'd read were actually pretty good. When I stopped and thought, I realized he was right. Most of the game books I'd read were pretty good. It was just that the bad ones were really bad. In the spirit of rehabilitating this disparaged genre, I'm going to list a few of my favorite video game books, in the hopes that someone picks up some one these books when they otherwise wouldn't have

My first is the Hellgate:London books, written by Mel Odom. It was a gliltchy and badly scripted game, but the novels smoothed out a lot of the story problems, and made the characters really rather likable. The only real downside to the novels were the number of spelling mistakes in the series, which was a result of poor editing and proof reading. Other than that I devoured each of the three books in one sitting, and I'm considering rereading them more than a year later.

My second choice is the Resident Evil series, by S.D. Perry. She's done a number of tie-in books over the years for franchise like Aliens and Star Trek, but my favorite are her works in the Resident Evil world. She gave the characters from the games more dimension than they have when you play them, and likeable characters was never a problem for the series. The books takes you from the first game through Code Veronica, with every other book being an original story. Those originals are the books that really shine.

The Halo books, particularly by Eric S. Nylund, are some of the best adaptations ever made. One of the smartest moves Microsoft ever made was to have their story bible guy write the novelization, so the lore of the games and books meshed. The result has been a series of books which really pull the reader into the world of Halo, and act as a kind of appendices; answering questions players may have had about the back story of the games.

My favorite game adaptation is without doubt is, Baldur's Gate by Phillip Athans. In the interests of disclosure, I loved the game so much, it might have colored my perception of the book. But I'm told by objective sources that it is in fact a good book. There's a grim sort of Conan the Barbarian flavor that makes this a great Sword and Sorcery read in its own right. I like Phil Athand from hos Forgotten Realms books, and this is really one more of those.

My last pick is one I have not yet read. In asking friends what their favorite game books are, one series came up several times. One I have not yet read: the Doom series. These three books, written by Dafydd ab Hugh, and Brad Linaweaver are very early example of tie in novels, and apparently very well done.

There are many other novel adaptations out there; some I would recommend, some I would not. I know many people who think highly of the Warcraft books, but I've never been able to get into them. Same goes for Starcraft. I think that, like any genre, there's a bit of good and bad. I won't be so quick to judge in the future. Unless it's movie novelizations. Those all suck.

The Age of Empires

daranthered — Sun, 27 Mar 2011 06:17:47 GMT

I saw this the other day, and was glad.

It's hard for me to express just how much I love the Age of Empires franchise. When I bought my first "just for me" PC more than a decade ago, I couldn't leave the store without a copy of the original Age of Empires. I installed it even before I did Office, and I certainly spent more time using it than I did Office.

It was the first game I ever played PvP. I still have the archaic Ethernet hub I bought just for that purpose. My best friend and I spent hours throwing waves of ballistae, and throngs of priests at each other. And don't forget the War Elephants. I still wonder at how dumb a spear hurler has to be to hear "WOLOLO," and think to himself; "That's a very convincing theological argument. I'm joining your side!"

When Age of Kings came out, it got even worse. For someone like me, who loves Medieval History, and loses all concept of time while playing an RTS, it was like someone saying. "Here's your regular Meth, but now we've added crack. Because, we know what our customers like." The closest I ever came to liking the French was when I was playing as the Franks in AoK. I also remember arguments about the correct pronunciation of Trebuchet. The French again! Curse them.

The Star Wars game based on the Age of Kings engine took all of my free time for months. It was a classic chocolate and peanut butter moment. It was one of those rarest of things; A good Star Wars game. This series has my favorite cheat code character -Simon the Killer Ewok. There's nothing quite like the feeling of commanding an army of ravenous (in my mind, at least) cannibal Ewoks to destroy a Gungan base.

I've never had a bad experience with an Age of Empires game. I bought the collectors editions of AoE III, and Age of Mythology. Those, along with Warcraft III, are the only games I've ever judged worthy of that extra expense.

When, this last week, they finally previewed Age of Empires Online on XPlay, I was optimistic. If the franchise could survive the kiss of Star Wars, after all, it could survive the transition to an online format. And I'm still optimistic, but now rather more cautiously. The graphics are more cartoonish than in previous iterations, and the Free-to-Play mechanics weren't explained to my liking. But for all of that, it still looked like Age of Empires. I am also very happy with the two starter civilizations: Greek, and Egyptians.

In any case, whatever my reservations, I'll play it. The previous games alone make it worth the $49.99 of a standard new release. And this is Free! My hope is this is a harkening back to what made the franchise great, not Microsoft's version of Farmville.

Oh Christmas List, Oh Christmas List.

daranthered — Sat, 18 Dec 2010 04:02:01 GMT

I like to think that I know the true meaning of Christmas. I like to think that I grew out of my "gimme, gimme, gimme" phase before I was in my twenties. I enjoy hot chocolate on snowy days, Christmas lights, singing carols (not personally, my voice is horrible), and the relatively stable nature of my faith at this time of year.

There is a part of me, however, that can't help but look at the bounty that industrial civilization has brought us and say; "I want that."

The following are some of the choicest bits I've found, most especially those things that relate to games. But also a few generally Geeky items as well. maybe the following will give some of you an idea of what to put on your lists, or perhaps help find something for that hard to shop for gamer in your life.

The first thing that caught my eye this year is the Nintendo Monopoly* set. Monopoly is fun, and I can just imagine the arguments now:
"I want to be Samus, you can be Link's sword."
"You got to be Samus last time, you can be Kirby."
"Nobody wants to be Kirby."

*One rule of Geek thumb here: make sure the person you're buying this for does not already have an over abundance of licensed monopoly games. The year Star Wars Monopoly came out, I got six of them.

The next item has been out for a while, but has been indispensable to me as a way of staving off boredom. Command and Conquer: The First Decade, collects every C&C game from the original, through C&C Generals: Zero Hour. These games are still challenging despite their age, and I can't emphasize enough how satisfying it is to while away an hour or two frying the Allies with your Tesla Coils. Also, it's nice and cheap.

Something the whole family can enjoy is Lego Harry Potter: Years: 1-4. There has yet to be a bad Lego game. There have, however, been some very bad Harry Potter games. So, if you want something that's fun, Harry Potter, and good, this is the pretty much what you're stuck with. When it comes to platform, pick your poison. I played the Wii version, but I'll probably buy this one for Xbox 360, for the slightly better graphics quality, and my carpel tunnel syndrome.

While I'm on the subject; I love LEGO. From the number of videos posted in the forums of wondrous LEGO creations, I know many of you do as well. Something that's definitely on my Christmas list this years is LEGO Architecture: Falling Water. This part of a series of famous building that you can buy as a kit. I just can't think of anything as marvelously pretentious as having a Frank Lloyd Wright building made entirely out of LEGO on my desk.

Well, that's about it from me. I hope I gave you some ideas for gifts, or avenues in which to find gifts. Merry Christmas, and happy gaming.

How to Lose at Video Games Without Really Trying

daranthered — Sun, 12 Dec 2010 17:58:09 GMT

By most standards I'm a pretty good loser. As a tactical thinker a generally treat a loss as feedback that helps to refine my strategy. Though I'm not one of those people who picks up a game and runs straight through it, I usually take comfort in the fact that after a few runs through, I'm pretty hard to beat.

Sometimes I am reminded that my attitude is by no means the prevalent view among gamers, especially amongst the younger generation. it seems like you can't play an MMO, or an FPS these days without having to listen to at least one tirade how it's all your fault, or the team's fault, or everyone but that young voice's fault that you wiped, or didn't win the map. I could say this is because young people today are ill-mannered compared to when we were that age, but I don't think this is so. While we didn't have headset communication when I was in my teens, I remember numerous boardgames, table-top role playing games, and collectible card games that ended in grousing, a few that ended in thrown objects. Young people are still just learning how to behave, it's part of growing up.

What I really have a problem with is when I hear older voices coming through the line with a string of profanity, cursing a blue streak because a random group of people could not function as a cohesive unit given thirty second of prior talk time. While this is idiotic behavior in randomly assigned groups, it's just inexplicable in groups of people who know each other. If you're working on your 40 man, or your strategy for a map on any given FPS, it's counterproductive to get mad at your teammates for making mistakes, much less for losing to a better team through no real fault of their own. Some of the attitudes I see from veteran game players would get that person kicked out of the NFL. The NFL!

Games are not automatic win machines. They exist to set up problems that we then have to use our brains to solve. More people should enjoy the process of solving those problems. Just as in life, it's not about getting there, it's about what you do on the way

The Kids These Days with Their Fast-Paced MMOs

daranthered — Sun, 21 Nov 2010 04:57:32 GMT

Like many of you who will read this, I enjoy MMORPGs. I've been playing them off and on (mostly on) since the late 90's. I started with Asheron's Call, took a detour through Everquest, City of Heroes, Star Wars Galaxies, and I have found a comfortable existence in Lord of the Rings Online, and World of Warcraft, with the odd attempt now and then to give myself a seizure in Perfect World. While some of you may count this a thin resume, I feel that it gives me a certain pedigree in the world of online gaming. At least I know which way is North on my HUD. So, why is it that my first priority in playing a new MMO is getting totally lost?

The answer is, at least I think it is, that I'm an adventurer. If you put me in a sandbox, my first instinct is almost always to wonder off and get lost among the dunes. You see, I just don't have that drive, killer instinct if you will, to power level through a game; boar's blood barely dried upon my axe before the Wargs start to fall beneath it.

No, I'm more like: "Oh, what's that over there?" waddle, waddle, waddle, "Why, upon closer inspection this is a slightly different tree than the one looking at earlier. Oh, what's that over there?" waddle, waddle, waddle, "Oh, it's an elite mob who is twenty levels higher than me, I've wondered out of the newbie zone, maybe I should have been killing things, rather than looking at pixelated trees." Sadly, this is not a fictional account.

I am easily distracted, this is not something that generally hinders me in my daily life, but when I'm playing video games, it's in my off hours, and I tend to want to indulge in my vices, and one of my vices is to be very flighty. It makes playing MMOs with friends difficult. Oddly, many of them want to get to a high level and take part in end game content, like raiding and the like. I don't get that. I mean, I like doing that stuff eventually, but I'm far more content to fish, or bake, or craft, or just wonder around and look at all the funny animations and detail the designers put into the game. It makes hanging out with the "sever first" crowded a little difficult.

Part of my problem with the whole rush to the end mentality is, I'm paying for this game, I want to wring every last drop of entertainment value that I can out of it. I'm reading every book on every table, going down every dead end in every instance, climbing to the top of every mountain, even if uninhabited by Man or Troll. I'm going to swim all the way around Kalimdor (they don't have an achievement for that, trust me, I know), decipher all the runes in Thorin's Hall. The game designers put huge amounts of work into the details of these worlds, and I really think they're awesome, the idea of rushing past them as fast as some folks do, well it makes me sad.

To my fellow heroes of the virtual realm, I offer this advice. Stop and view the roses; you may not be able to smell them, but they are beautifully rendered.

Why Hand Held Games Make Me Feel Old

daranthered — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 18:38:10 GMT

About two weeks back, I was going to meet some friends to see a movie. I, and another friend, arrived early, and as so often happens these days, out came the iPhone.

We played Battleship on my friend's iPhone. I mention this to illustrate two points; the first is that I rock at Battleship, I won four games to zip, and secondly, to show just how far portable gaming has come in my lifetime.

I still have my original Gameboy, and as of last night when I resurrected it with four AA batteries, it still functions. Ditto for my Gameboy Color, and GBA. Heck, my Game.com can still wheeze to life. As a kid, and as a young adult, I loved portable game systems. I have since I first got my Donkey Kong II multi screen, back in the late '80's (Which also still works).

Lately though, I haven't been a consumer of the newer hand held systems, I just don't see the point. I know that the Nintendo DS has some great games, and every time there's a new Medieval game, I feel a pang of regret that I don't own a PSP, but overall I don't feel the lack.

This might be explained away because anyone who owns an iPhone, or any other smart phone, can download a proverbial infinite universe of games. But I don't have a smart phone. For reasons having to do with my inability to keep track of anything smaller than a breadbox about my person, I carry a very bare bones phone system.

Phone games are too ubiquitous in any case. There's too many. In many ways I pine for the early days of the Gameboy, when you could name a game to any other owner, and have a reasonable chance of the person knowing what you were talking about. I miss that camaraderie (And yes, I've played Angry Birds), that just doesn't exist among the largely utilitarian phone owning public.

Looking back, it occurs to me that I never really took my portable devices anywhere as a child, anyway. Which also explains why I still have those, while a seemingly endless parade of cell phones have gone before me. In the late '80's and early '90's portable technology was cool because it was small, and small computers were novel. They just simply aren't anymore.

I loved my old hand helds, heck since the GBA had so many NES and SNES games ported on to it, I still use it for playing classic Zelda, Altered Beast, and Mario 3., it's just easier than getting my original NES out, which if you read my first blog post, is a forty-five minute drive to my mother's house.

So, for me, hand held games are essentially me, sitting in my living room playing games that were made when Culture Club was on the charts on my aging game machines, muttering to myself about these young whippersnappers who take for granted being able to carry thirty games around one device in their pockets...with no cartridges!

And that's why hand held games make me feel old.

First Thoughts and Introduction

daranthered — Fri, 05 Nov 2010 01:52:23 GMT

Since this is my first post, I thought that I would spend it with something akin to a mission statement, a Raison d'�tre of what I'm going to be talking about here, why I'm a Togger, and why I'm a gamer in the first place. I've written about some of this before, but its worth restating here, and I hope it will be an understanding and receptive audience.

�When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I thought as a child, I acted as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.� I often think of this passage from 1st. Corinthians (I know, I'm quoting the Bible, please bear with me.), if your parents were anything like mine, you got this type of thing quoted at you as you continued to play video games well into your college years. I often replied that, as I got older, I didn't put these �childish� things away because they had grown more precious to me.

Of course, I'm now currently arguing with my Mother because I want to get my NES back, and she's playing through Duck Tales again, but that just goes to show you how time can change perceptions.

I am one of the first generations to grow up with video games from the time I was born. Many people I know grew up playing games. They bought their own Nintendo at 12, or enjoyed marathon Risk games with their parents. There are many stories on the internet about kids who were playing D&D, and Magic: The Gathering, during recess in Middle School. From the time they were small, they were part of a culture of gaming. They found their peers and place in playing games. These people comprise most Gamers today.

That wasn't me. I spent my younger years home schooled, and without any real attachments to people outside my immediate family. I had a Nintendo, but that was about it. Most people form their High School peer groups by the time they get there. I hadn't. I was an outsider, an unknown. I didn't fit in to any established group. Most of the friends I collected through the next few years were people in a similar situation. Unlike most groups, we had developed interests and hobbies along different lines from one another, and while we shared some things, in some ways we were very different.

But we all played games. I never played Risk until I was 15. I learned to play from a friend who had played since he was 8. I would never have bought a first person shooter if it hadn't been for a friend who just had to show me Doom. I spent a wonderful afternoon, in my Sophomore year, sitting at a friends computer gleefully setting Sims on fire, until the whole city was swallowed by the ocean. Countless hours spent playing Decipher's Star Wars Collectible Card Game. I am lousy at Chess, but have had some of the best conversations of my life while losing to a friend.

Unlike most people, the friends I made in High School, are still the friends I have today. I'm not saying they're my only friends, just my good friends. We still play games. Together we've discovered Magic, and D&D, the PlayStation, Xbox, and Wii. We've played Halo into the early morning, and mocked the guy trying to read us the rules for Risk: Godstorm.

As technology has made it possible for people to play online, they world has opened up to anyone with a computer, and at the same time become quite a bit smaller. People may develop friendships without ever really meeting one another. Some people argue that these friendships lack a certain depth, that they are somehow superficial. Anyone who has played MMO's with a dedicated group knows that's not true. The social dynamics that exist in any group apply to people online. If that's a good thing or not, I leave up to you; but my opinion is that I value my online friends.

That's it for my first post. I'm going to try and post something at least once a week. I'll also try and make it something more than what we say on the forums. I more developed argument or thought. I'm going to try and limit myself, at least initially, to the subject of gamers, and gamer culture. That's all for now, thanks for reading.