I used to watch G4 back in college, when a roommate and I first discovered reruns of Starcade while flipping the channels. Though we enjoyed other shows, namely Icons and Cinematech, I was never quite sure what to think of X-Play. Here we had the extraordinarily geeky Adam Sessler, reviewing video games with the undeniably pretty Morgan Webb. The chemistry never quite worked out for me, but it remains the only show to survive G4’s merger with TechTV and, according to a somewhat dated source, one of the highest-rated shows on the channel.

But let off the leash on his own, you’ve got to admire Sessler’s aggressive ranting, as displayed in his weekly “Sessler’s Soapbox” Web video. This time, he goes after a recent New Yorker profile of Gears of War designer Cliff Bleszinski. Particularly, this passage:

It is unusual for any game company to allow an outsider access to its meetings, for fear of the game’s features being prematurely disclosed. While discussing Gears 2’s new “crowd” system, which will allow an unprecedented number of individually functioning enemies to flock across the battle space, Bleszinski mentioned how excited he was to open fire upon them with a certain weapon. Within minutes, I was pulled aside by a Microsoft representative and informed that this weapon’s existence would not be confirmed until later in the summer and could I please refrain from mentioning it. The gaming media is largely made up of obsessive enthusiasts, and the carefully planned release of information tantalizes them with the promise of insider knowledge. “How do you reach the core?” Jeff Bell, who used to oversee global marketing for Microsoft’s interactive-entertainment division, asked me. “How?” I asked. “Secrets,” he said, his eyes sparkling in the manner of a supervillain announcing his plan to poison the Eastern Seaboard’s water supply.

It’s best to listen to Sessler’s response in whole, but the highlight comes during his direct counterjab at the New Yorker.

And last I checked, the New Yorker’s been trying to make a name for itself with exclusive articles written by Seymour Hersch trying to talk about the Pentagon’s secret plan to invade Iran. Guess what, you guys engage in secrets too and you engage in those same kinds of exclusive content. I’ll be frank, that’s a little bit more pertinent to the existence of every American in this country then if there’s a new weapon that we haven’t talked about in Gears of War. And you know what? As a result, That’s why sometimes there’s a little bit of bargain-making when you go out and you do these interviews.

Anyway, Sessler’s rant, though an eloquent and exciting listen, gives the impression that Tom Bissel’s New Yorker article generally treats the gaming industry with a bit of condescension. I didn’t find that to be the case. If you can wipe aside that one paragraph that Sessler so despises — and which, I’ll admit, left a bitter taste in my mouth as well, probably because it’s true — the rest of the New Yorker Piece is pretty good, showing a side of Bleszinski and Epic that’s hidden from 1UP, Gamespot and Kotaku.

In fact, when the oft-feared Mainstream Media (said in deep, echoing voice) delves into video games for long-form magazine pieces, they usually handle the reporting and writing with a panache that, face it, you just don’t get with the enthusiasts. We “game journalists” fawn over CliffyB, but has anyone but Bissel bothered to talk to Bleszinski’s mother?

Gears of War, Media, Rants | 1 Comment »

Solitaire Addict functions in similar fashion to Windows Solitaire. The rules are the same, and the Vegas scoring method that makes the game such a time-waster are intact. There are, however, a few sinister differences.

Unbeknownst to the player, the initial set up of cards becomes more or less friendly depending on his or her current score. This allows the player to feel the high highs of success, the low lows of a negative score and the thrill of a key win just as the losses seem insurmountable.

Meanwhile, messages begin to pop up behind the game screen. They start off innocent enough — a generic friend inviting you out for a drink, a reminder from your bank that your online statement is available — but gradually become more serious as you ignore them. With any luck, the player will “get the joke,” but continue to play anyway, fueled by the game’s addictive nature. Before long, your employers want to know why you haven’t come in to work. Your bills have piled up. Your girlfriend wants to take a break.

Of course, the only way to win the game is to quit. If you open the program again, you’ll find an option to uninstall it completely. A message of congratulations accompanies this bold step. That is, if you can bring yourself to take it.

Random Game Idea | No Comments »

Tom Endo is the guy who says whether your story pitches to The Escapist live or die. gulp. But last week he moonlit as a feature writer for the “high brow” gaming e-mag, turning out a thought-tingling article on video games’ treatment of guns.

Endo argues that games have failed to capture the iconic myth of the gun in the way that movies have. It’s tough to nutshell the whole thing with block quotes, but here goes:

A single gun can provide all the power and tragedy that an arsenal of dozens ostensibly brings. The movie Dirty Harry, a love letter to the .44 Magnum, shows the fruition of this idea. As much as the movie is about a vigilante cop, it’s also about the iconic tool that allows him to wreak his idea of justice upon San Francisco. Harry Callahan and the .44 Magnum become one in the same. An AK-47 might offer a higher body count, but to imagine Harry wielding it is blasphemous, an affront to the Magnum’s status as the modern-day descendant of the Peacemaker.

…

Guns in videogames lack this focus. And if they have effectively acknowledged any larger cultural axioms, it is the dogma that bigger is better. The Doom favorite, the BFG, is the embodiment of this ideal.

The argument continues to say that foes in shooting games are the other part of the problem, functioning more as ducks in a virtual shooting gallery than opportunities for emotional impact.

The constant repetition of the skills a game demands lie at odds with the gun’s mechanical simplicity, put on full display in the showdown. In this situation, the gun’s power to end life is absolute. Emotional tension ends the moment you pull the trigger. Guns can change everything with one bullet and videogames’ refusal to address this reality weighs heavy on their ability to provide the deeper examinations of violence the medium demands.

That’s the meat of it, and I’ll be damned if this doesn’t resemble my argument against death-as-punishment in the same magazine’s pages, though Tom’s is better-reasoned and coming from the other side of the barrel. Not only are our protagonists dying too often, they’re killing too many people.

Not surprisingly, there’s the same backlash in the article’s forums. You’re hard pressed to find people agreeing with Endo outright, and plenty of commenters challenging his opinion. Fenixius writes:

Honestly, I don’t want to kill something. Otherwise I’d be a murderer instead of a gamer. I want to play with my friends, have fun, and kick their ass in a nonliteral fashion. That I achieve these joyous feelings by defeating my enemies isn’t a crime on behalf of game designers, in my opinion, since not only would any other weapon than a gun do just as well, but I never think even for a second that I’ve killed my opponent. I’ve merely defeated them in a contest. And that’s all I set out to do.

Let’s step back and say not all games should take up arms (pun!) the way Endo suggests — certainly not all movies do that either, Hard Boiled coming to mind in particular — but there’s certainly room to treat the firearm, and their victims, with a little more maturity.

Theory, Violence | No Comments »

It looks like I’ll get a chance to put some editorial fingerprints on The Game Reviews, which ironically turns every mention of its name into an awkward sentence.

Kidding aside, I’ll be an associate editor, cleaning up news, reviews and features for the benefit of all. I got started by editing Brittany Vincent’s essay on the statement, “Nobody ever shed a tear over a video game character’s death,” by Orlando Sentinel film critic Roger Moore.

Vincent’s piece is drenched in sarcasm, as you’ll see:

How could one feel for what is being displayed on a television screen? What individual in their right mind could tear up over the death of marine Paul Jackson in Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare in his last few moments of life? Soldiers die all the time. To become misty-eyed over such an insipid attempt at storytelling is completely outrageous. Saving Private Ryan is much more deserving of emotional distress. Because you know, you sit and watch.

Personally, I’m more for calling out video games’ shortcomings (thus far) rather than unequivocally rooting for the medium, but I suppose a good backlash is always in order when some dreaded outsider comes around, spitting his bile.

Have I shed any tears? Hmm, can’t recall. When I stare at the screen too long, anyway.

Newman, Games as Art | No Comments »

As evidenced here. ABC’s Good Morning America gets their hands on Wii Music.

No really, you have to look. It’s like a car wreck.

Humour, Media | No Comments »

I’ve been enlisted to occasionally cover games for Technologizer, a relatively new blog from former PC World editor-in-chief Harry McCracken, who at least in terms of journalistic integrity is The Man. Let’s hope it goes well.

You can already check out my first post, on a virtual Obama billboard ad that appeared in Burnout Paradise, by heading to the site. Things are starting to pick up for me on the freelance end, so I apologize if this blog gets neglected now and then. Hopefully that means more of the things I would write here are turning into paid gigs.

Newman | No Comments »

Apologies for the gap in posting.

In good news, FutureNerd has retained my services as a gaming blogger. The site evidently hit a lull during the summer and is now looking to revitalize itself with new writers, so head on over and show your support. I start posting tomorrow.

[UPDATE: First post!]

Of course, for every successful attempt at a freelance gig there are a couple dozen failed ones. I wrote a sample article for a gadget blog that I recon won’t be responding, and it’s amusing enough to post here:

Want to pay homage to a video game icon without dressing your living room in tacky yellow? Italian designer QAYOT offers a solution in “Poufman.” From a bird’s eye view, the seat and footrest combo look just like a certain four-bit pellet eater. (Admittedly, this post would fare better with a picture, but I’m a text-only guy in this forum, so you’ll have to follow the link.)

The furnishings come in black or red, built from a wooden base, stuffed with Polyurethane foam and covered in polyester fiber. No word on whether ghost-shaped window curtains will follow.

Newman, Media | 2 Comments »