Why I Don’t Fit into the New World of PC Gaming

After the Super Nintendo, I took a break from console gaming. I didn’t return until the Game Cube, and even then it wasn’t until Wind Waker. During this time (arguably my most active gaming period other than right now) I was a PC gamer. I played many games in many genres, from shooters to RPG’s. But after a while that changed. Now I don’t play anything on my computer. Not even Minesweeper. What happened?

The first point, and most difficult to overcome, is the financial investment. I don’t want to dwell on this point, since many have already explained the shortcomings of constant PC upgrades, but this was a very significant factor in my abandonment of PC gaming. My disposable income simply couldn’t bear the burden of new graphics cards. It still can’t.

As a tangent from the same source, I also found it frustrating to try and keep my knowledge up to snuff when it came to hardware. I’m no luddite, nor am I a technician. I reside somewhere in the middle ground. However, I found my brow furrowing whenever I looked at the tech specs for a particular game. I came from the generation of shareware and freeware, when your computer could play it if you had a drive that could fit the disc. I didn’t want to work to get my game going, I just wanted to play.

These factors are by no means absent in today’s marketplace, and they both influence my decision to avoid PC gaming. That being said, I’ve also upgraded to a 120GB hard drive for my 360. It’s still simpler to make sure your console is ready to go than your computer. But there are games that don’t have steep requirements. Why not play some of those games.

It seems to me that there are four markets for PC games. They are most definitely not dead, but they are far more specialized than they used to be. First is MMORPG’s. This segment is dominated by World of Warcraft, but the one that was most likely to catch me was Age of Conan. These games are distinct and attract a player-type unlike me. I really don’t get that much enjoyment from multiplayer games, and when you don’t like the first three letters in a six-letter acronym you don’t have much of a chance.

MMORPG’s transition nicely into the free-to-play or casual market. These areas look like fun, but for a “hardcore” player like me they don’t hold enough appeal. This reason coincides with why I don’t play many XBLA games. I hear all the great buzz around Peggle and I had a great time with the demo, but when push comes to shove I still have full retail games I’m not spending time with and which I consider more expansive experiences. I even thought about testing out Free Realms to see if perhaps I could enjoy a casual MMO, but I just can’t get myself involved in that when I still have Lost Odyssey in shrinkwrap on my shelf.

A third category, which isn’t as large as it used to be, is hardcore PC gaming. This portion is a bit of a copout catchall for anything that experiences some heavy development and you might find for $60 or $70 at retail. Many of these games (I’m looking at you Crisis) lead back to my original problem with the niche, but I also find that there just aren’t the games here that there used to be. I spent a lot of time playing Diablo II, but after I had dried out from my addiction I didn’t find a suitable replacement waiting for me. That’s when I turned my gaze towards consoles once again.

The last segment of PC gaming I see today is indie games. This one has the most potential for sucking me in. There are a lot of games out there with fantastic potential and many can be played on my computer. I’m thinking of games like The Path, Trine, and Zeno Clash. These games look really good, but since I’m not already a PC gamer I feel that in order to set up account(s) and/or acquire and install the games on my system, the work to play ratio is still a little off. I’m reminded of the early days of PC gaming, when the audience was fairly niche and you had to work your way in there. The difference now is that I don’t have to do all that work since consoles allow me to take the easy rout.

That final point is really what it all comes down to: ease of use. While I may not be immediately attracted to the bulk of games I see on PC, I’m also just not as motivated to invest time peripheraly to actually gaming. I have only so many minutes in the day to game, and I want to use that to actually game. This factor is another reason I’m not attracted to the PS3. I’ve heard people complain about installation times and such, which don’t entice me at all. I only install games to my 360 while I’m doing something else in the same room, and even that small commitment seems inconvenient. I just want to sit down and have some fun, and for that reason I just don’t seem to want to boot up my PC.

Finishing Off The Orange Box: Half-Life 2, Episodes 1 and 2

I promise this post will be my last gushing over Valve products for a while. Half-Life 2, Episode 1 and Half-Life 2, Episode 2 are fairly different from Half-Life 2 in construction, and I wanted to take the time to explain why. I’ll also take a quick moment to discuss achievements in The Orange Box as a whole, since I haven’t until now.

In a mechanical sense, the episodic content beyond the campaign of Half-Life 2 are similar to the original game. Valve didn’t change the graphics or controls much (though they added a persistent flashlight to the HUD in Episode 2). The game still primarily revolves around moving through the environment, solving interesting puzzles, and shootin’ stuff. There are, however, some significant improvements that are worth mentioning.

From a narrative standpoint, there’s almost no comparison. The narrative quality in Episode 1 was a bit of a shock at first. While I felt swept along in the world of Half-Life 2, I felt not only like a part of the world in Episode 1, but also like I had an idea that I was impacting the conflict around me. Throughout both episodes you’re almost always accompanied by an NPC. These NPC’s aren’t the brainless fodder who would accompany you in the main campaign either. They’re characters who have character. A novel idea, I know. For the most part your companion is Alex, and I must say that they nailed her character. Not only does she react with what’s going on in the right tone (fear, desperation, optimism, etc.), but she can stand on her own, or get out of your way, as the situation calls. Much better than a brainless medic who gets gunned down while you crouch behind cover. You also get more narrative from the cast, such as Alex’s father talking about leaving Black Messa after the first game. Valve was definitely building out the world they seemed to dabble in during the main games, which is odd since it happens in the episodes rather than the main campaigns. I would say that the effort and precision that goes into Valve’s level tuning is invested in the characters and narrative in Episode 1 and Episode 2, and I hope that future single-player experiences will have the same hallmarks.

The platforming is greatly reduced. I don’t know if that’s because the designers got their fill of it in the original title, or they realized that they could make smarter puzzles that don’t frustrate with the control set. I thought that was a huge bonus, and I found myself more likely to play longer stretches in the smaller episodes than the full title.

With these two significant improvements in the mix, the puzzles in the episodes are more engrossing that some of the stuff you’ve got to do in the main campaign. Sure, sometimes you’re sill dropping bridges and turning on elevators, but there are some new things you couldn’t do nearly as well before. Say, moving through an environment while Alex provides you with sniper cover. There’s some driving in Episode 2 which I have to admit still feels a little loose, but it’s not as weak as the buggy in the campaign. It also helps that you don’t have to drive and shoot at the same time here. A few new enemies are also introduced in Episode 2, but I didn’t really feel it needed it. In terms of building the world, and thinking of moving forward to future episodes, it makes sense to build the enemy set out like that.

I was really impressed with the content of Half-Life 2: Episode 1 and Half-Life 2: Episode 2. I actually enjoyed both of them more than the original campaign and would recommend them to anybody who liked Half-Life 2. I’m hoping we’ll see an Episode 3 sometime in the future, but at this point I think our best bet is for Valve to release Half-Life 3 some time in the future.

I want to take a minute to also touch on achievements in The Orange Box. Before Microsoft began breaking their achievement rules left and right, The Orange Box was a strange duck, to put it mildly. The 99 achievements, ranging from 2 to 40 gamerscore a piece, seem daunting at first glance. Having now played the games, though, I must say that Valve did a great job tweaking these achievements to suit the games on the disc. You get a pretty good chunk for just progressing through the game, and many others can be achieved with just a little extra effort. I felt that the value on the disc makes up for the amount of effort sometimes required for a measly five gamerscore. For those die-hard gamers who want a real challenge for every point, there are some achievements which are firmly out of reach for those who don’t invest considerable time, skill, and luck into possibly multiple playthroughs. I just wanted to tip my hat to Valve who did a great job with as imposing a task as assigning achievements to such a project.

Here’s hoping that we won’t have to wait too long before we get another taste of a great single-player experience from Valve.

Videogames for Everyone?

There’s no secret that Nintendo has established market dominance in this generation of videogame consoles. That dominance is due, in large part, to Nintendo’s efforts to broaden the scope of their consumers. Whether or not everyone who owns a Wii or DS is using it the same amount, the systems have sold and continue to sell games. This development has caused many new questions to be raised with respect to who is playing games and who’s money will determine the future of the market. While I’ve spoken to hardcore vs casual issue before from a purely financial perspective, I’m going to put down a few thoughts here about other factors.

First, I’d like to tackle the concept of the female gamer. Leigh Alexander posted a great video on the topic by Daniel Floyd which she helped compose. Not only is it funny, but the messages expressed therein are pretty solid. It’s best to watch the video rather than for me to attempt to create a synopsis. I agree that getting more women into gaming is a great idea, and the industry needs to acknowledge that the way to do that isn’t simply to make Halo easy to pick up and play, but rather to make games appeal to women. I don’t think anyone can really complain if more capital is being put into the system, especially since it may give us more innovative games such as Braid, Flower, and Mirror’s Edge.

I think that ties into another aspect of the changing demographics: casual gaming. I know a lot of people think that is a dirty term these days, but we need to recognize that there are some pretty distinct camps when it comes to how people game. I would consider myself part of the “hardcore” demographic. I read about games on a daily basis, play about an average of two hours a day, and know a good amount about most games before I get into stores. The same cannot be said for my girlfriend. My girlfriend played Super Mario Bros. back in the day, and she enjoys playing Rock Band and Zuma these days. What gets most of her attention, though, are free-to-play titles on the net. The reason? Near as I can tell gaming is disposable for her. She’ll go through a game in a day or two, and that doesn’t mean she’ll beat it. She just looses interest. I loaned her my old DS phat with a copy of The New Super Mario Bros. a while ago, and that seemed to catch for about a week, but after that she was done. And she’s not alone. There are a lot of people who game this way. They’re part of the reason that free-to-play is as predominant as it is. The argument I’ve made before (see above) is that these gamers won’t support the market financially in the long term, but they’re still people playing games, and perhaps one day they’ll start caring about release dates. It’s for this reason that game publishers are changing the types of games they’re producing to try and broaden the market.

These changes in demographics are causing quite a reaction amongst many gamers who see gaming as “theirs” (I went looking for examples, but failed to find anything quickly, you’ll have to take my word for it). Most “socially well adjusted” gamers deplore these comments as ignorant and immature. Who are these people attacking? How can the growth of our industry be bad? I think what people are missing is that to many “hardcore” gamers, gaming has always been a place they could escape the rest of the world. There’s a lot to be said for the appeal of a niche market, like videogames or D&D, as a way for people who are different to avoid feeling different from others. All of a sudden, however, this little niche which many gamers felt was their own, is opening up to their moms and the jocks they wanted to avoid in the first place. Of course they’re going to be protective, and I’m not sure we should give them too hard a time for it. I’m not advocating offensive language or attacks, but I think it’s okay for some people to be upset or disappointed because they feel like they don’t matter as much in the one area of their lives they felt like they did.

Where does this leave us though? We’re left with an industry struggling to find itself. I for one am confident that given enough time we will find an equilibrium which will suit all parties. Hardcore gamers received a buffet of awesome at this year’s E3. Publishers will realize soon enough that the iPhone and shovelware bubbles are going to pop and begin hedging their bets with a better proportioned spectrum of titles. And women gamers? My experience has been that given a decent foothold, women will find a way to make their own space in any area where they were a minority before. I just hope everyone can play nice until we get there.

Half-Life 2 Review

I was tempted to review Half-Life 2 with both episodes at the same time since the mechanics are fundamentally the same, but as I worked my through Episode 1 I found more and more I wanted to talk about in terms of just that segment. Therefore, here is my review of Half-Life 2, from The Orange Box, on it’s own.

The audio of the game is solid, as are the graphics. Some of the textures in the environments seem a little flat, but the modeling of the NPC’s is top notch. The environments are convincing in their design, but they tend to be fairly similar throughout. It’s worth noting that HL2 had been out for a while on the PC before coming to the 360, so while it might not look as good as games like Halo 3, it still holds it’s own.

Half-Life 2 bears all the telltale signs of a Valve game, right down to the perfectly tuned levels. You see, in HL2 you never feel like you’re unsure where to go. If you are, then you’re just not taking in the environment. There’s always something that will point you in the right direction. This kind of commitment to level design would seem like a no-brainer for any game, but it’s amazing how many times I get stuck somewhere just because the level wasn’t perfectly tuned.

In addition to basic pathfinding, Valve is really one of the best developers for making puzzles work in an FPS context. While there are the occasional push-button-to-open-gate puzzles, most would require a bit more thought. It’s not uncommon to have to think how the virtual environment can interact to provide you a way out, such as using a magnetic crane to move storage crates. These puzzles are also seldom re-hashed, so it feels fresh each time you come across a new challenge.

The NPC’s are better-than-average as well. Your interactions with NPC’s have always been key to the player experience in the Half-Life series, despite the fact that you don’t ever actually speak. At various points throughout the game you encounter seemingly random people who walk about and talk to one another as you would expect them to. These touches add to the overall environment and story.

The story is good, but unfortunately Valve sticks a little too much to the you-get-what-Freeman-sees mechanic in this department. I could tell there was rich story in behind the civil war that was going on, but I didn’t really get all the details. Instead you’re forced to move through the story with the most basic of details (these are the good guys, these are the bad). I still found it satisfying to progress through the game, but I think that a little more could have been done to flesh things out. Also, if you aren’t familiar with the story from the first Half-Life, don’t expect to be brought up to speed.

The overall pacing of the game is excellent as well. You’ll travel to new environments almost seamlessly, creating a natural progression to the game as a whole. Though you will have some puzzles that require you figure them out under the pressure of enemy swarms, usually you know when you have to solve a problem by the fact that you’re given the breathing room to sort it out.

With all this excellent construction, HL2 must be the best thing since sliced bread, no? Well, not quite. There were two points at which I really felt the game let me down. One was the lack of any sort of quest tracking. While the level design makes sure you don’t get lost, I did spend a lot of time moving forward without really knowing what it was I was looking for. I understand that it may seem immersive to leave you without a notepad to check, but just because Freeman is listening when others talk doesn’t mean that I caught the whole conversation, or that I understand how to translate those comments into “Go to x and do y“.

The other problem I have with HL2, which is a problem I had with the original Half-Life, is the platforming. I find it strange that many developers of the FPS genre feel the need to include platforming segments. I would often get frustrated when I didn’t quite know where my feet were or quite how far I could jump. When moving from one solid to another I could usually get the hang of things on my first or second try, but the multiple exercises which involved moving unstable parts of the environment around and then climbing/jumping off them really didn’t work well. It’s clear that Valve learned a lot between HL2 and Portal, since Portal works so damn well. I just wish that was patched in HL2 since it really detracted from my fun with the game.

This control problem also carried over to the vehicles. While I did like the use of the vehicular sequences, I found they controlled really loosely, making it hard to actually drive. Add in some wonky firing mechanics (aim the gun with one stick while you drive with another) and it just felt a little tossed in to an otherwise refined game.

Bottom Line:
Buy If: You want an FPS with a little less shooting and more thinking.
Rent If: You’re more into puzzling but willing to try some shooting too. A rent could give you the taste you need before buying or passing.
Pass If: If you think FPS means “twitch and shoot wave after wave of enemy”. This game has pacing, it’s not just a bloodbath.