Did you notice a stand-out video game that caught your interest during E3, 2013? In my opinion, there were lots of notable video games showcased during E3, 2013; however, there was one video game that really caught my eye.
The game that stood out at E3, 2013 among many, in my opinion, was Quantum Break by Remedy Entertainment and Microsoft Studios. The demo shown was packed with action gameplay and started off with a bang. Of course, during actual video gameplay, there may be slow-moving parts in the game to advance the plot along, but based on the trailer, these parts may be few and far between. I especially enjoyed watching the still-action motions and the graphics of objects as well as some of the characters suspended in space and time during gameplay.
To give you background info on this game -- Quantum Break will be an action, science fiction time travel type video game with main protaganists, Jack Joyce, Paul Serene and Beth Wilder. It is a single player video game, exclusive for the Xbox One. While Remedy Entertainment is keeping most of the storyline and the gameplay under wraps for now, it is known the plot involves an experiment in a lab that went awry -- giving the characters the ability to manipulate as well as travel through time. For authenticity, the company consulted with time travel experts to keep the gameplay in this video game as realistic as possible.
Similar to another video game, Defiance, Quantum Break will have a television show tied in with the game. The television show guides you on how to play the game and how you play the video game will, in turn, impact the show.
Quantum Break has a pending rating and will be available in 2014.
PlayStation 4 vs. Xbox One controller
Is it just me, or did you notice that both Sony and Microsoft did not spend much time, if any, talking about their video game system's controllers during their respective E3 press conferences on June 10, 2013? Maybe they did not want to repeat themselves since the controllers were mentioned at their previous press conferences. However, I, for one, would have liked to hear more indepth details about the new controllers and why they are (or are not) considered to be an improvement over the current ones.
The Xbox One and PS4 battle continues with the video game controllers
Of course, the meat of the new gaming systems is the consoles themselves; however, is it possible that a controller could sway you more toward buying either the PS4 or the Xbox One?.
Here's information to help you choose between the PS4 or the Xbox One controllers.
The PS4 controller is referred to as Dual Shock 4. Unfortunately, the current PS3 (Dual Shock 3) controller is not compatible with the PS4. The PS4 controller will have a touchpad, a headphone jack and a built in speaker. The controller will support motion detection via gyroscope sensors.
Additionally, the PS4 controller will feature a light bar that will display different colors to alert you regarding your status while playing a video game, i.e. low health, etc. The controller will have a motion sensor similar to the PS move. The existing PS move for the PS3 will be supported on the PS4.
The Xbox One's controller basically keeps it current design. The battery compartment is slimmer and the directional pad on the controller has a four way design. Each trigger will have independent rumble motors, called impulse triggers where the trigger will vibrate when performiing an action -- for example firing a weapon.
The best way to find out if you like either the PS4 or the Xbox One controller is to actually hold it and better yet -- to play your favorite video game with it.
Is a video game more enjoyable if you like the controller?
In just a few months you will be able to do just that with either the Xbox One or the PS4 controller when the next generation systems, Xbox One and the PS4 launch during the 2013 holiday season.
TellTale Games has released a suitably creepy trailer for their next episode of the Walking Dead adventure game, 400 Days. It takes a look at the characters you'll be meeting in the episode along with a glimpse of a few of the action scenes.
Dead Pixel Live goes down an alley in this episode. Derrick rants about how E3 reports have ignored the majority of the show and how news about WeTheForce, Hyperkin, USO, etc goes unreported. Hect and Tedakin join in as we discuss the Ouya and why Derrick will probably buy one
Another year of E3 reveals and while we're coming up on the first year anniversary of the XBOX ONE and PlayStation 4, many of these games look like XBOX 360 and PlayStation 3 titles. You can't really expect game developers to spend too much time and money producing launch titles that only a few hundred thousand people will buy. Almost all the year one titles for a new console are ports of the current-gen version.
The titles that really look like the next generation of console games are still a year away. The trailers look great, but are these really the games we'll be playing in 2015? Will they be delayed until 2016? It used to just be cinematics that were made to fool you. Now, they're showing "gameplay" that's running on the $1200 worth of 3D PC hardware.
Think about the Killzone 2, MotorStorm, and I Am Alone reveals. Remember Watchdogs, Assassin's Creed and Madden 25. What ever happened to Project Milo?
Here are 3 games from todays press conferences that I think look too good to be true.
As a wise man once said...
Booth Babes are a staple of game conventions, smiling and taking pictures with the attendees. For the three days of E3, they bravely face a horde of gamers while still managing to represent their choosen company/game in a positive light. But after hours of smelly, sweaty, grabby photographers, it's a miracle that these women (and men) are still able to put on a happy face. They are so professional that finding a photo of an unhappy booth babe is extremely rare. So rare in fact, that it's become a quest known as The AllGames Sad Booth Babe Photo Contest.
Find a picture of a gaming model, male or female, thats not overflowing with joy and post it in the AllGames Forum (link). The photo that most displays the true sadness of having to pose yet again for a gamer fumbling with their iPhone will win a bag full of great E3 swag.
In this special, live, simulcast Mom's Minute episode coverage of Sony's E3, 2013 press conference, Ms. H is joined by DerrickH and Oscar. No stone is left unturned as Ms. H leads lively discussions on the conference events, ranging from the perceptions of the host, the late start of the conference as well as its extended duration -- to the m...
While I had the chance to attend E3 this year, I stayed home. I didn't know what to expect from this next generation. I was pretty sure my hopes and concerns were all tied up in graphics and hardware, because no one really knew what we were supposed to expect from the next gen. What was too little? What was too big of a risk? We had a long wait, and it was almost guaranteed that whatever was paraded across that stage, short of personalized mech suits, would be a disappointment. I didn't want to contribute to that somber droning of press headlines. And I didn't want to be that one person who decided to be optimistic and look like a sellout, either. So this year, while I sat at home instead of in L.A., I found myself paying attention to other things in each presentation. I wasn't alone.
What I noticed first was the total neglect on Microsoft's part to feature games that showed women as a protagonist. We had one man of color, and one dragon. The basic theme here being that you're expected to play as a white man with brown hair and a five-o-clock shadow for 90% of games. Oh, but you can also decide to be a dragon, just not a woman. Microsoft is not the root of this issue, but they played a role, just as we all do. I'm not going to mention the Killer Instinct segment, because I already have a million words of an article in draft for that. I also want to touch on race and other representation issues, but this article is focusing on women, because each issue deserves in depth analysis.
So I'm coming back to my point, which is the representation of women in gaming. Later glimpses at games during press conferences included not only women protagonists, but women of color. This is praiseworthy, but it doesn't mean the struggle is over. For every Faith, there's a swarm of marketing and publishing executives who push out roughly thirty times as many male protagonists. Not to mention, there are far more white women than women of color as protagonists. When I bring this up, people have told me that I have to understand, it's a business move. Surely I understand, this isn't about women being fairly represented, this is about making money. Because don't I know, most gamers are men, and no man wants to play as a female character! Females sell more as sexual objects! MARKETING. BUSINESS. SYNERGY.
First, I want to say that there's a fundamental flaw with using business decisions as reasons to marginalize anyone. You wouldn't find it an okay reason for a business to deny appropriate safety standards that could harm people, and you wouldn't find it an okay reason for a business to violate environmental laws and cause harm to people. Harm is caused when people are excluded or poorly portrayed in forms of media, but there are no laws or standards put forth regarding people from under-represented groups in gaming. As a result, we tend to look the other way when it happens over and over again. Issues of racism and sexism extend beyond gaming, but by excusing them and allowing them to persist in our culture, we have become complicit in normalizing these behaviors. This isn't saying that because someone uses a gun to kill someone in a game, they will use a gun to kill someone in real life. Clearly physical violence on that level needs many more variables to occur. Gaming escalates ideas that are molded by the institutions of racism and sexism in our everyday lives. These ideas can then be exhibited in daily life, worn on t-shirts, and screamed on Xbox live with little to no recourse. This simple access to the abundance of negativity in gaming, and the fear or apathy of people to speak against it, is instilling the notion that the worst attitudes of gaming are simply the fabric of normal life.
Games with male-only lead options sell 75 percent better than games with female-only leads. So yes, some of the fear that exists on the publishing side is founded. But you also need to consider the fact that this is a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy, given that games with only female protagonists were merely given close to 40 percent of the marketing budget as the male only games. That's right, not even half. And they wonder why those sales are not as good? The game industry is stifling advancement by using outdated, "safe" formulas. When I hear people complain about the other ways that gaming companies play it safe- not enough diversity in shooters, too many sequels that play the same way, decreased difficulty levels in modern games, the dreaded DRM we saw Xbox One further embracing- I do NOT hear the argument, “It's good business. It's what makes game companies money, so deal with it.” And furthermore, if someone did reply like this, it shows that they are far from being “rational” about the issue, they are just being plain dismissive.
Now let's move to the next step of why people think games with women don't sell: because gamers are men. If we are to believe most game marketing and the bastions of game culture such as the former G4, we could further define that to include boys and young men. There is our key demographic. That is the typical portrayal of a “gamer.” And yet, according to my womandom, and also this article in US Today, which I guess is important, too... women CAN be gamers! In fact, there are more female gamers than male gamers under 17 (our established media demographic). 70 percent of women between 12 and 24 play games! In terms of total gamers, women make up 45 percent. So gaming numbers are pretty close to showing the actual population, both of which are NOT majorly comprised of white males. And yet we are still carrying on as if white males are the only people worth acknowledging, even knowing that men only make up 55 percent of gamers, and the US population only consists of roughly 30 percent white, non-Hispanic males.
So we now know that men are roughly half of the gaming population, but they still don't want to play as women, right? A study in Sweden showed that most of the men polled there had no issue playing as women. In fact, of the men questioned, 90 percent reported choosing to play a female character at some point, and a whopping 46 percent of them claimed to do so at least half of the time they play games. None of them had any negative views on more women in games, with 71 percent of them feeling more women protagonists who were not sexual objects was either “Good” or “Very Good” for gaming. Have YOU ever decided to not purchase a game because the protagonist was a woman? Was it because you couldn't relate, or you didn't want to be a woman? Is it because you only view women in a sexual light? Was it for other reasons, like the game just wasn't good, or maybe you never even heard of the game due to poor marketing? By holding the industry and gamers accountable for the portrayal of women in games, we help discredit the reasons that people support this discrimination.