A Tale of Two Purposes: Skyward Sword and Skyrim

I’m playing through two game simultaneously right now, The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword.  First a closer look at what those two titles are about, just so I don’t ramble on and lose those that have no idea what those games are.  

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, I’ll refer to it as Skyrim from here on out, is a fantasy Western RPG.  All that means is that you assume the role of a character and play through the game as that character.(RPG =  Role Playing Game)  This genre was once a very narrow description of games, today, RPG’s cannot be defined in a thousand words because of their variety and evolution.  So I’ll just say that Skyrim is a game where anything within the game’s universe is possible.  

It is set in a world of knights, kings, assassination, magic, demons, dragons, elves, orcs and anything else Tolkien has ever written about.  It isn’t based off of Tolkien by any means, but is certainly derived from the basis of fantasy that he set years ago.  You enter the world as a supposed criminal crossing the border into the land of Skyrim.

The game is a sequel(the fifth in a line of games) that explore this world and lore created years ago.  The way you play is completely up to you.  You can be a sneak-thief, you can be a mage, you can be a knight, you can be a conjurer that raises the dead to your defense, you can be a blacksmith, you can be an assassin: literally anything you want to, as long as it fits into the universe at hand, you can do.  You don’t even have to play the story, the world itself is filled with content outside of the story that actually drives the game.

The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, which I’ll refer to as Skyward Sword, is also a fantasy RPG, but it is pretty obviously eastern.(you’d have to see the game to understand, but just accept that if you were to play it, you would see imagery and lines of dialogue that make no sense to a western population, but within the eastern canon, make perfect sense i.e. cats with giant ears that fly)

Skyward Sword lacks everything open and free that Skyrim embraces.  There are a few side stories, but they are all fluff to the main event.  Within Skyward Sword, you will play as Link and Link will be the same person no matter who plays him.  He has a destiny and must complete his destiny to save the world and, in this case, his girl, Zelda.  Instead of a fully realized world with options and choices, it is much more linear, more like reading a book.

These two games represent a very interesting crux in the world of gaming right now.  They are both single player games(as opposed to multiplayer games where you play with other people) and they are both RPG’s, but they are as different as Pac-Man and Street Fighter.  The crux is this: are games better when they allow for choice and freedom or are they better when they tell a linear story and limit the freedom of the player.  Most people I know, or more specifically, most of the people I talk to about games, prefer the freedom of Skyrim.  

I’ve put about 20 hours into Skyrim and I’ve spent, literally, as little time as possible on the story, and I’ve enjoyed every minute of it.  I’ve killed dragons, forged armor or all kinds of types and styles, I’ve destroyed necromancer dungeons that were threatening small towns, but I have no idea what is happening in the story, meaning, there is little to no weight on the quests I’m involved in.  Bad things happen when I fail, but the world moves on.  

There is weight in the story.  On the other hand, in Skyward Sword, I’ve played through just over half of the story and have enjoyed every minute of it.  Each part of the world is filled with puzzles and tasks for me to overcome in order to find my childhood friend and love of my life, Zelda.  She was kidnapped and I have to find her.  There are temples where I find tools to help me in my quest and Zelda is persistently kept out of reach as I move forward.  The character of Link has shifted.  I once was looked down upon as just a boy, but now, I’ve proved myself as the hero, chosen by the gods and I am on a mission.  There is a strong cinematic story that arcs through this game.

The most interesting thing that I find between these two experiences is that I kind of wish they were combined:  Skyward Sword employs awesome motion controls that mimic my sword strikes exactly, the combat and story are some of the best I’ve ever experienced in game, but the world is narrow and limited when I compare it to Skyrim.  Skyrim is wonderfully realized a world.  You can literally get lost in this sixteen digital square miles and just live as a hunter-scavenger in the woods and mountains, but the story is less compelling and less important because of the huge world it is in.  The button pushing combat is weak when compared to Skyward Sword.

The beauty is that both are phenomenal, but they address different drives within my mind: open freedom vs concise storytelling.

Battlefield 3 and the Perils of an Open Beta

I am of the opinion that public or at least a large private multiplayer beta testing is border line required for the successful launch of a multiplayer game.  Now the definition of a successful launch is far from objective, but to me a successful launch does not include heavy tweaking to balance issues, reworking crashed servers, and a host of launch bugs that make the online experience more trouble than it is worth.  The high traffic with a huge cross section of people playing in public betas is a great opportunity for developers to learn and tweak before a games launch.

The Battlefield 3 Beta has been supremely effective at nailing down the necessary data for their designated servers.  What it hasn't done so well is advertise for the upcoming blockbuster.  I get the feeling from the blazing internet that people are unhappy with the performance issues in the Battlefield 3 Beta.  That may have been an understatement.  I've read about 10 blogs and articles concerning the issues(graphics, glitches, and host connection issues) and most of them seem to think that the upcoming entry into an established franchise is going to be complete rubbish based on this beta.  People are citing cancelled pre-orders and disappearing vehicles as proof that this game doesn't have what it takes to be a great game.

I'm not quite as militant, mainly because I didn't experience the same issues.  I played for about 4 hours and was booted from a game once, and never experienced any of the vehicle glitches.  The graphics were obviously rough around the edges(the character models weren't as crisp as I've seen in preview videos and there were some textures that popped in a little late, nothing life altering) and some of the animations seemed a little twitchy.  On the whole, however, I really enjoyed my time with Battlefield 3.  Rush Mode was as compelling as always, the ebb and flow of combat as attackers gained ground or the defenders pushed back felt good, and, even though I was on an XBox 360, I enjoyed the number of players in the matches.  I'd be lying if I said I didn't miss the much larger battles of the PC arena, but my PC was occupied at the time so I'll take what I can get.

There was a time that if a game was plagued with issues at release, it was dead in the water, but now with patches and updates, a lot of issues can be solved post release.  I don't think that this is a bad thing.  I'm glad that developers have the opportunity to rectify issues with their games post release, but it is a little irritating when the first impression isn't up to par and patches take time to prepare and release.  During that time, I just spent money on a product that is far from satisfactory.

I'm glad that DICE decided to run the beta.  This gives them the chance to prepare their servers, maybe tweak a little balance, and iron out any bugs that occur when their systems are stressed by high levels of traffic.  I would rather a developer let me try their game for free to help them solve issues than to fix them post launch, post payment received.  At the same time, I hate the bad press Battlefield 3 is getting because they gave us a free opportunity to try their game.

Bastion: Worth Remembering

I recently participated in a public play test for Red Storm Entertainment, an Ubisoft subsidiary.  One of the survey questions was: "What are you 3 favorite games?"  One 19 year old's response tilted my head a little.  He said, "I just put the last three I remembered clearly, because if I remembered them, they must have been good."  This fairly off-hand comment really made me think about the games I play vs. the games I remember.

Bastion highlighted as one of XBox Live's Summer of Arcade releases.  As a third person action/RPG/adventure/brawler, Bastion is a weird egg.  Its art style is perfectly tuned to the game's themes and mood.  Throw in a dynamic narration system with a killer soundtrack and I'm hooked.  The weapon customization, tons of passive abilities to manage, and achievements inside and outside of the game(what? achievements that actually mean something to the gameplay?) are all perks as far as I'm concerned.  Everything about this game oozes of the desire to be remembered.

The story isn't Oscar worthy, but it doesn't need to be.  The narrator tells it like it is, literally.  If you lean on certain weapons, he'll be sure to tell you all about the story behind those weapons.  You stand still for a while, he talks about your pensive mood.  If you want to get deeper into the story, feel free to read more and listen more to his rambling.  Bastion doesn't waste your time trudging through long dramatic cut scenes.  There are occasional panning view animations accompanied by the narrator's continued monologue, but they are brief.  Most of the story is told through his narration of your actions.  You'll hear about the history of the two people groups and why every living thing seems to be trying to kill you, but it is all happening during game play.  The story is perfectly unobtrusive while still being memorable.

The combat has a little something for everyone.  If you want to keep away from the action protected by distance and your powerful ranged weapons, so be it.  If you want to be a tank with the hammer and machete, feel free.  I found myself enjoying the Pike and Mortar combination that gave me a nice balance of speed and an unstoppable ranged attack.  Be sure to adjust your passive abilities(different spirits and liquors) to fit your needs.  Heck, if the game gets too easy, you can even petition the gods to make the game far more difficult with bonus rewards to your in game currency.

I don't think the game is perfect.  The "New Game Plus" mode is simply playing through the game again.  I wish there were more enemies or upgraded enemies the second go round, but this is a good chance to finish leveling up your weapons and character.  If you're not careful, you can cruise through the game.  I was nervous to turn on too many "gods" the first time through and it ended quite quickly.  The campaign itself is quite short.

For all of its negatives, however, Bastion is sure to set itself apart.  I'd recommend it to anyone.  There is simply nothing forgettable about this experience.

Let's Take Another Look: The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time is often lauded as one of the greatest games of all time.  In fact, arguments can be made for it being THE greatest game of all time as long as you're in the right group of people.    Personally, I have bought 3 copies of the game all on different systems and had the pleasure of playing the newest release of the game on Nintendo's 3DS.  Say what you will about remakes, cashing in on established titles and Nintendo being stuck in the past, but the most recent remake of Ocarina of Time is by far the best version of the game.

I'll address the minor issues first: the 3D effect is excellent, but doesn't add anything to the experience.  Also, having to play through the main quest(a 5th time for me) to unlock the Master Quest(which would have been only a 2nd time) is unnecessary in my opinion, but I can understand the thought for first time players.  Those are, literally, my only issues with the game.  To be fair, I had very few issues with the original release of the game.(curse you Water Temple)

I don't feel like taking the time to write a hyper detailed review on a game I first played in 1998.  Instead, I want to look at the improvements to the award winning formula.  First the graphics: with several updated textures and new character models, the game is quite a bit easier on the eyes.  Pair that with the 3D effect and it becomes a whole new visual experience.

Now game play: while the game play didn't see the same overhaul that the graphics received, the few key components made the experience far better.  The display was overhauled and moved to the lower screen on the 3DS.  This move in addition to an extra slot to which items can be assigned and a designated ocarina button make for a beautiful decluttering of the main screen and a more flexible item inventory.  You wouldn't think that having a single additional item to assign would make that much of a difference, but any veteran to the game will be elated to know that bouncing between iron boots, bow, bombs, ocarina, and the hookshot in the Water Temple no longer causes any pause menu frustration.  The whole experience benefits from this new scheme.

Gyroscopic aiming and looking is perfectly functional and can be used in conjunction with circle pad aiming to make for very dexterous accuracy.  I wouldn't call the gyroscope a great addition, but it works and doesn't detract.  You can always turn it off if you want.

I can say without question that this is the definitive version of this classic experience.  The improved visuals, tweaking, but not overhauling, the controls, decluttering the main screen, inclusion of the Master Quest and a  boss battle mode just make the package sweeter and extend the game play.  I actually found myself quite surprised that a boss battle mode hadn't been included in a previous release, it's quite satisfying to go back and fight some of the bosses.

I'm a Litte Bit Casual and I'm a Little Bit Hardcore

The battle lines of the internet are amazing. I used to get really angry when I would read posts or comments about how the Wii is only for kids and casual gamers and how hardcore gamers have to play certain types of games. Even though the two aren't mutually exclusive, there is a line between graphics that push the boundaries between life and game and graphics that push the given hardware to it's limits while maintaining the stylized aesthetic of the game world. Even though the two aren't opposed to each other, people like to pit games with bright flashy colors against games with more neutral palettes. Games like Super Mario Galaxy 2 facing off against Resistance 3... sounds pretty silly when I put it like that, but it is silly.

I own an Xbox 360 and Wii. In less than a year I intend on owning a Wii U. I play every genre of game imaginable; From Need for Speed to Marvel vs Capcom, Terraria to NBA Jam, Super Mario Galaxy 2 to Halo, Final Fantasy to Boom Blox, I play them all. Not all regularly, but they all make their way into my lineup of games. I've mentioned my lineup before. I like to have a little something for everyone. It makes me a better gamer and makes my house more hospitable to non gamers. It allows me to trick people into doing what I want to do, whether it be watch everyone play Dance Central(though I'm pretty good myself), work as a team in a 4 player co-op like Castle Crashers or New Super Mario Bros Wii, or pwn everyone in a pick up and play competitive game like Driift Mania(yeah, with 2 i's), Geometry Wars, or Tetris Party.

By any definition I can not be denied entrance to the "hardcore" camp of gamers, but at the same time I embrace the lighter, "casual" fare that existed just fine before Wii, but now has a place to call home. Sometimes I don't want to put that perfectly thrown grenade in the throat of another player; sometimes I don't want to grind to level 50 so that I can finally unlock that awesome piece of armor; sometimes I don't want to play a nerve racking round of Pac-Man Championship Edition DX; sometimes I just want to kick back and let my friends into my World of Goo or wrap myself up in Kirby's Epic Yarn. I'm not any less of a gamer because of my varied. I'm just a little be Casual and a little bit Hardcore.

Castle Crashers: an RPG For Everyone

I've become quite well known in my groups of friends for finding games that everyone likes. I actually go out of my way to find local mulitplayer games that my gamer friends and non-gamer friends alike can enjoy. I've often resorted to the Wii for these games. Things like World of Goo, New Super Mario Bros, Tetris Party, Dr. Mario, Boom Blox, Mario Kart, Geometry Wars, and NBA Jam. I search out the games that fit that transcend that metaphysical barrier between the "casual" and "hardcore"(I try to not use those terms, but it fits). One particular XBox 360 game seems to have taken the cake.

I've had Castle Crashers for a couple of years at this point, but I stumbled upon a sub-group of my friends that likes RPG's, so this was just perfect. I decided I could easily use one of my stronger characters and act as a buffer to keep them alive as they work through the game and we could have a good amount of fun. 2 weeks later I have a total of 12 people playing Castle Crashers at various times. It seems that I've found the perfect game. My wife plays, my friends' wives play, a Final Fantasy Veteran plays, a FPS fanatic plays, a PC gamer, a nanny, a photographer, everyone it seems will play this game and love it.

Well it got old being the strongest character while all these different groups are playing through the beginning levels. Then I realized the true genius of the simplicity of the leveling mechanic of Castle Crashers: it can be played so many different ways with so many different characters who all have different magics and characteristics. While at the same time, it is a simple 4 player brawler with a great sense of humor. I just want to keep playing... I want to level up every available character just for the heck of it. I now have 3 characters who are my main investment characters and they were all leveled up differently, one with all magic, one with all speed and one perfectly balanced between all stats.

It was just quite refreshing to rediscover this little gem. Thanks Behemoth, couldn't have done it without you...

Fighting Games: A Legacy

My first fighting game was Street Fighter II on Game Boy. Needless to say, some of the nuances of the genre were lost on a 5 year old, but even then, the importance of not letting your opponent hit back was more than clear. Juggling, ranged attacks, spacial awareness, memorization, adaptation, improvisational combos would all come to pass as I grew in age and wisdom.

Following Street Fighter II, I actually didn't really get into a fighting game again until Super Smash Bros. While it isn't a typical fighting game, the keys were there. While it didn't use the same skill set at Street Fighter, it still embodies all that makes fighting games great on a competitive level. Followed up by Melee and Brawl, I couldn't help but love the style of this fighting game.

After Melee, I was dragged into a new gaming scene: Tekken 5. The Jump into 3D was a fair shock. Now I can avoid those pesky ranged attacks by a simple side step! At the end of the day, however I was never as drawn into the 3D fighting as I was the 2D. There are probably several reasons, the main one being simply preference. I have nothing against the gameplay at all. The combos were just as satisfying and the combat just as smooth, I just prefer the 2D.

Since Tekken 5, fighting games disappeared from my typical lineup. I like to have a solid rotation of multiple genres in my gaming. I think it is good to have a lengthy RPG to be working through, one or two local multiplayer games for parties and game nights, one or two online multiplayer games for when I don't have anyone around, and then a platformer. Now fighters can fall into both of the multiplayer styles, but for whatever reason, I had games in those voids but no fighting games.

Well all that to say, I've returned to form with fighting games. Marvel vs. Capcom 3 currently resides in my Xbox 360. I love it. All the twitch of Street Fighter II, 2D visuals, and enough depth that I'll never run out of things to learn(unless I go on a binge, let's hope I don't do that again...) I can't keep up online, but I enjoy the single player arcade and I have a couple friends who love to play. It's good to be back.

My Family and the Games We Play

Having played video games since I was three(literally) and being a part of a family that has often played games(Trivial Pursuit, Taboo, Spades, Chess, Rummy, Catch Phrase, Volleyball, Football, Softball, Basketball, Cranium, Hand and Foot, Dominoes, Risk, Clue, Scrabble, and Monopoly were just some of the standby's throughout my life) I have very high respect for games and what they have to offer. Maybe it has just been ingrained in me since my first game of Othello; maybe playing the magic recorder in The Legend of Zelda just stuck with me. I don't know, all I know is that games of all size and style and difficulty have been a part of my life for as long as I can remember.

On top of that, I've always played games with people. It didn't matter if a video game was meant for just one person; Di(sister) and I have played through, together, several Mario's, several Zelda's, and a handful of other video games. To this day, I search far and wide for games that Rachel and I, and the rest of the family can play together. I've recently added Settlers of Catan, Polarity, Acquire, Tetris, Dr. Mario, and several others to our repertoire. All I'm saying is that we play games... as a group, as a family. Grandpa has gone to great lengths over the years to satisfy our needs for games(a basketball hoop and a small golf course that he built come to mind)

I realize that games have very little value on the surface. At some point, I have to remind myself that a game is simply the completion of objectives( or "playing") given a set of confinements(or "rules"). However, more important to the game, over rules, strategy or skill, are the players. I'm going to use three games as examples: Volleyball, Dominoes, and Crainium.

Volleyball is a skill based strategy sport. The rules offer a fair amount of variation depending on the size group playing and their skill level. Very rarely do the rules interfere with play. More often than not, especially in our circles, we make and mend the rules as the situation arises. Ultimately, the rules are simply a vehicle for determining points in this game. While the strategy is mildly simple, "hit the ball where no one is", there are many ways to go about doing that. The weight of a simple tap can be far greater than a huge spike in the right hands(or off the right hands, however you want to say it). The strategy is also changed depending on the players. This is one game where different skill levels affect how one plays. The greatest player must play to the skill level of their teammates. While some may view this as a negative, I think it allows for a great variation in the style and competitive level of play. It provides balance to the game and allows players of all skills to compete. Not all of us can be Trent "The Fairy" Vickers(cousin), the rest of us have to resort to trash talk and poor gamesmanship, like Kenny(uncle). However, because of the flexible rules and strategies of volleyball, these two very different players can play together in an equally competitive environment. Volleyball is a situation where the players determine rules and strategy and, therefore, makes a great group game allowing for many players of many skills.

There are many variations of Dominoes, however I'm going to pick out our typical "scoring style" dominoes to compare and contrast. Dominoes is a luck fueled skill game. The rules of Dominoes are incredibly simple. 1) Lead with highest double, 2) play matching tiles, 3) you can't play off of all sides of a double but the first. 4) Make multiples of 5 to score. That is pretty much it. However, where Volleyball has flexible rules that appeal to all skill sets, Scoring Dominoes has the rigid set of simple rules to ensure that all can play. The variations of this style of dominoes are fairly limited. The two strategies are mostly determined by luck of the draw. If you have the ability to score, you typically will, however if you can't, you then lean on blocking others so that you can go out before them. Obviously there are a couple variations determined by situation and the tiles played, but these are the basic outlines of how the game is played. The skill level of the players truly has little to do with the outcome, it is a result of luck and the players choices. The skill involved is a management of tiles assuring yourself of having plays balanced against scoring as often as possible. Dominoes is a situation where a simple, rigid rule set allows players of all skill levels to play and to play with anyone, though victory will usually go to the highest skilled players.

Crainium is a rules based personality game. This game best exemplifies the importance of people in games. The rules of Cranium are long and specific. They are based on situations and actually create several sub-games within the larger game. While the rules are too numerous to mention here, the idea is that each turn is turned into a mini game where one team competes against itself in a challenge to earn a roll of the die. Strategy is relegated to attempting to choose the challenges at which your team is more adept when you can, however, more often than not, it is determined by luck. This game emphasizes the same traits found in games like Catch Phrase, Taboo, Charades, or Guesstures. You have to know how to manipulate language, actions, and sounds to achieve the goals. Coming with this manipulation is the ability to relate to your team members. Often, a team of people who don't know each other well, will perform below a team of close friends. This is what makes this game people centric. It isn't that the game looses its fun when you play with people you don't know; the benefit is what you learn playing with new people. However, in competitive play(which our family tends to lean on) it is advantageous to have a good base of knowledge about your teammates and how they communicate.

I take the time to look at these three games not because I'm bored, but because I'm a geek and these are the things I think about. I love the ideas surrounding how and why people do things. Anthropology, psychology, meta-game, relationships are all things that fascinate me. I love pondering why I enjoy the things I enjoy vs. why others enjoy the things they enjoy. The whole idea here, is that the people make the games. Playing games with people is great because it brings people together that might not normally spend as much time together. Apparently games and families share traits. Only in family and games would you find a farmer, a county commissioner, a video game geek, a soldier, a soccer star, a Fairy, an Ice Flyer marketing manager, three teachers, an organist, a softball player, a diva, a server, a woodworker, and a professional camel rider throwing bones on a table eating frozen peanut butter pie and pound cake... simultaneously. It's a beautiful thing...

NBA Jam Revisited

I recently had the pleasure to play the NBA Jam on Sega Genesis and then play NBA Jam on Nintendo Wii. After putting about two hours into the original and then several play sessions into the new one, I can't help but be pleased with both. The original will always stay in my heart as one of the great competitive multiplayer games of past generations. Few moments rival dunking in you friends face, setting the net on fire. Well, few other than sinking that fade away three while they try to block with no avail since, well, you're on fire . . .

EA Sports has once again given me these simple pleasures along with a slew of new pleasures. Between the slightly tweaked gameplay, the classic look and feel of NBA Jam, and the new multiplayer suite, I'm enjoying NBA Jam on Wii far more than I should.

I'll go ahead and get this out of the way, but it is dated gameplay, cheap AI and repetitive mechanics. That doesn't stop me from enjoying it for 30-45 minutes at a time, especially with three friends next to me.

That said, give NBA Jam on any of the three consoles a try. It doesn't thrill in a Mass Effect, GTA, or even a FIFA 11 way, but it is a nice trip back to a simpler time. We love our simulations, but sometimes it is good to know that I can shove my opponent to the floor, take the ball and reduce the basket to smoke and ash.

I guess the question is if you should dust off your older system to play NBA Jam or actually drop the cash on the new one. I would argue that the new modes(particularly the free for all modes) add a whole new level to NBA Jam's multiplayer suite. Now, not only can you team up 2v2 with your friends, you can take them all on in games like 21(with put backs to reduce your opponent's score) or Domination.(make shots from places on the floor to "win" them for a time and gain points for having spots on the floor "won")

Remix Tour and Remix 2v2 Jam - These are less than impressive. I had much more fun just playing the normal Jam Season and normal 2v2. The inclusion of super powered bosses and power ups don't add much in the way of pure gameplay, they feel more gimmicky.

Another worth addition to NBA Jam is the spin move and crossover. These two additions, along with the standard steal, shove, and throwing elbows open up strategy a bit. Sometimes I don't want to pick up my dribble by throwing elbows, but it was my only option for getting a pesky defensive player off my back. Now, if they are coming in for a steal, a cross over will make them stumble(or fall depending on their stats). Then if they prefer the more aggressive shove, I have the option to spin off it and end up wide open for a drive or shot. My only complaint is that on the lower difficulties, the crossover and spin move are a bit too effective. They essentially make your teammate a flashy accessory for if you want some alley oops to mix it up. As you ramp up the difficulty, however, the moves balance out and make excellent additions to the core experience.

The best thing that NBA Jam has going for it is that it feels like the original experience without getting too tired. Multiplayer is a rush with enough variety to reach out players of different skill levels. If you have a lot of people over and want to have another multiplayer option without split screen, this is a great addition. If you just want the nostalgia, rent it and play through the single player modes.

Project Cafe and what that means

A quick look over the interwebs indicates that Nintendo has made some grievous errors in code naming their new system "Project Cafe" and most are skeptical(at best) of a controller with a screen. While none of us has any business questioning the most consistent company in gaming(25 years of competitive/dominate contributions to the world of video games, really? who has that kind of track record?), I'm going to put in my two cents. . .

Cafes have become a social gathering location as of 15 years ago. Nintendo has always been the beacon of social gaming. The only current system to support more than 4 controller inputs is the Wii and they've always encouraged people playing games together.(Pokemon, Super Smash Bros., New Super Mario Bros.) Nintendo pushing their social gaming/perpetual gaming/meta gaming agenda is no surprise. They tried with Pokemon to make individuals rely on each other to complete games. They tried to introduce Wii Remotes as vehicles for gamer profiles.(but never had the connection that Xbox Live and PSN had) They've supported multiple titles(Legend of Zelda: 4 Swords Adventure, Mario Tennis) that fostered a connection between portables and consoles. They pioneered "Street Pass" for the DS and 3DS, which creates a passive social interaction between portable gamers. All this to say that Nintendo is no stranger to social gaming on the spectrum of both portables and consoles. Is it too crazy to say that "Cafe" may just be an allusion to Nintendo's precedent of supporting social gaming?

As for the touch screen controller, I'm all in. The idea of playing a game on my console, then taking a portion of it with me to, say, build up a specific member of my party in an RPG or draw up plays in any sports game sounds pretty awesome. While I've never played a Facebook game, this is a kind of social, perpetual gaming I can get behind. I'd get credit and points and experience at home and on the go. I don't have enough down time away from my house to invest in a portable, but if it all funneled into the same save data, into the same game, into the same character: I'm in.

Price will always be and issue. I found myself quite surprised at Nintendo's willingness to put the 3DS at the $250.00 price point when that's where the Wii weighed in 5 years ago. I understand it; the 3DS is no joke. There is a lot of tech in that little box and I'm sure Nintendo is taking a bit of a hit on each one sold. But with the handheld precedent set at $250, where is this "Hardcore-centric" powerhouse with 1/2 of an HD-DS for a controller going to put us? We saw what happened to Sony with the $600.00 price tag, let us hope that Nintendo doesn't overcompensate.

This is all speculation . . .

. . . but I'm still excited

Life After Death: The Super Meat Boy Story

There is one feature of Super Meat Boy that separates it from its 2D Platforming Peers: the zero second respawn time after death. This singular feature turned what was a creative romp through the timeline of video games into a lightning storm of tense moments, trial and error, and murderous intent turned pure ecstasy. I draw a comparison to the Mario Bros. games of old; in the olden times, the long, long ago, death was to be feared. 1-UP's were the currency of the world. Sure you could jump above level 1-2 and just run to the end, but you miss out on about 3 extra lives from coins and shrooms. When the zero was next to the Mario face, you knew this was it. Die now and you must fight from the beginning.

This mindset of death actually punishing the players is making quite a resurgence. Games like Demon Souls may allow you any number of deaths, but they strip you of everything you hold dear in the process; even Minecraft puts a hefty price on taking too many arrows to the face. This return to the punishing styles of our 8-bit history is dramatically changing the gaming landscape.

Don't get me wrong, I love it. I love the sense of satisfaction from besting a game that forgives nothing. The beauty, however, of Super Meat Boy is that the satisfaction is different; it isn't better or worse than say, Mega Man's life counter, but it is distinct from it.

The things video games teach us are incredible. In this particular instance, death is a tool.(am I right?) In some games, death is a punishment for poor or inattentive play. In Super Meat Boy, death is only the beginning. Die once and you instantly learn what not to do next time. The learning curve is an exponential curve in Super Meat Boy. You can legitimately not die in the first chapter(difficult, but you can). However, by the time you reach "The End", you may very well die 10-25 times per level. Some levels demand much more than that.

This trial and error view of death may make the game seem easy early on, but that is only the tease before the trap. Super Meat Boy may give you infinite lives and no punishment for death, but it is still one of the hardest games I've played in the last several years.

A seemingly simple addition to a fairly simple game that makes all the difference.