ATI, What are you doing in Australia?

It's true Australia is a dump market. We just don't have a large enough population for companies to keep up us up-to-date with technology when it gets released. Instead we have, at least, a three month wait for the new technology to come out. What happened last year was that suppliers could not import enough high end product to satisfy demand. The manufacturers had created a bottleneck for supply of high end product. Retailers (such as ourselves) had to wait, sometimes longer than three months, to get product that our customers were asking for. Considering we live in the modern world and even Hollywood has cottoned on to the idea of world wide release dates why is it that we have to wait so long for new technology?

As far as I am concerned, ATI have dropped the ball. They were the market leaders in respect to high end video card technology. They had managed to edge NVIDIA just out of the equation with the 9800 and X800 series of cards. However, we have been living in a market vacuum over the last twelve months. It seems that ATI's marketing department has been getting ahead of their manufacturing area and proclaiming the new release of product before they can possibly deliver. Crossfire was promoted as early as February and March this year and is still yet to see official release in Australia. Even now DFI Lan Party are the only motherboard manufacturer to release a crossfire ready motherboard in Australia and the first overseas. What's more is that ATI have not seen a significant card release this year. Once again, their marketing department has beaten their manufacturing arm to the punch and pronounced the awesome power of the X1800XT but there is no sight of the card on the horizon for the Australian market. They have even made the bold claim that some computer nuts in Europe have managed to overclock the X1800XT up to 1 gig for the graphics processor and 2 gig for the RAM. Big deal. Why would I wait another two to three months for a card to come out when I can get a high end NVIDIA 7800GTX now? Why would consumers wait for any kind of brand loyalty when our country is at the arse end of the technology market anyway.

These practices just aren't acceptable in the modern marketplace. ATI should pull their finger out, because all that is going to happen is that they will fall behind NVIDIA in the development cycle. They are already losing sales because of their lack of high end product. Last year 90 per cent of the Desktops we sold were shipped with ATI cards. In the last six months we haven't sold a Desktop with an ATI card in it. Of all the desktops we've sold in the last two months, only one of them didn't ship with an SLI configeration. So what, we are only a small retailer. We build custom desktop PCs for gaming, what kind of indicator is that to overall sales? We are indicative of any business, just not on the scale of Harvey Norman or Dell. Our customers ask us for advice and we push them towards what would be the best technology for their budget at the time. The fact of the matter is that we don't even talk to customers about high end ATI cards any more. We can't tell a customer to wait three months for the X1800XT to come out because the customer doesn't want to wait three months to get their new computer.

It is a shame that we have to wait for so long for new technology to be released in this country when they tell us the world is so small now. Consumers in Australia should have the same choices as those overseas and at the same time. It is a shame when half of a duopoly drops the ball because all that leaves you with is one other choice. With a world and a marketplace which is meant to be so far advanced and the best for everyone when you are left with one choice then you have no choice at all.

The Choice Of PC Gamers Worldwide.

“Look for this seal on games optimized for NVIDIA GPUs for an easy install and play experience.”



At what point in time will gamers be divided on the software they buy because of the hardware which is in their PC? Considering the numbers of PC games sold has been coming down every year since 1999 game developers can’t afford to divide the PC gaming community even more by favouring particular hardware over their competition. But this is what we are seeing happening more and more in gaming and this is all about money.

NVIDIA and ATI pay game developers to have their logos displayed at the start of a game. This is a common occurrence with hardly any games released now from major developers not carrying some form of endorsement while their game boots. However, this has led several game titles to suffer on hardware from the opposing manufacturer. There are several distinct cases of this. The first involves Far Cry and the second Half Life 2. Obviously, game developers have to cover their overheads and make a return on their investment. With development times hitting up to four years these businesses (because, lets face it, that’s what they are) need to stay afloat. This extended development time means no income for them and a business, like everyone else, has bills to pay, wages to pay, expenses and the like. Gaining endorsements from the hardware developers also allows the game developers to utilize resources from personnel and hardware technicians from within NVIDIA and ATI. However, at what expense to the game play experience should this detriment any gamer on such a universal piece of hardware which is the PC?

Far Cry was one of the notable game releases which had to be heavily patched due to problems running on ATI cards. From hearsay in the industry ATI had to kick in a large sum of money for Crytek to patch the software to fix the compatibility issues the software had running on ATI cards. ATI users had to suffer until the 1.2 patch came out to fix many issues related to graphical ‘glitches’ in game. The other example is with Half Life 2 which was customized to run on ATI cards. From what I understand from reading hardware reviews from places such as driverheaven and Tom’s Hardware Guide is that you are better off running Half Life 2 on a single NVIDIA card rather than in SLI mode.

This is a trend which should concern gamers if it continues. I don’t want to have to own two different brands of graphics cards in order to run games at their best. Ultimately, if this becomes a more common practice within the PC gaming market then the only thing that software developers are going to do is to drive gamers to consoles. That way they don’t have to worry about the hardware. They can just put the DVD in the console and play.

And who really believes the line, “Plays better on ALIENWARE” anyway?

F.E.A.R. Review
(First Encounter Assault Recon)

(Contains Spoilers)

http://www.whatisfear.com/us/

I must say that First Person Shooters appear to dominate the market at the moment. It feels like every second game which is released is a shooter. Ultimately, with so much choice gamers can really take a good look at those games which are released and make a decision based on what they would believe to be a quality title. Let’s face it, if you have to spend $80 or $90 of your hard earned on a title every time it is released then you really want to be prudent about what you purchase. With this glut in the marketplace with FPSs there is a lot of repetition and second rate titles around. F.E.A.R. is a title which attempts to differ itself from other shooters by defining itself within the semi-horror genre has been growing in gaming over the last ten years. However, the horror genre is defined by far more frightening games than F.E.A.R. (Silent Hill to name just one and even Doom 3 had a better atmosphere). If you are buying F.E.A.R. hoping to have a title which will make you stain your shorts then you should think again about buying this game because it is a light weight horror title (if you could call it a horror at all). The good thing is that F.E.A.R. is a relatively solid shooter which will push your system with some of the best graphics and environments in a game released this year.

F.E.A.R. stands for First Encounter Assault Recon and is just another acronym which really means nothing. P.A.N.I.C.S. (the F.E.A.R.) parody is a far better use of an acronym (which stands for People Acting Normal In Crazy-arsed Situations and is definitely worth checking out). F.E.A.R. is an urban assault team which responds specifically to urban paranormal problems (a modern day version of Ghostbusters with a little bit more training and quite a few less laughs). The team is rallied because of a problem with a freak named Paxton Fettle who has an appetite for flesh and a desire for power (sounds like a politician really). To summarise the story you spend most of the game chasing this person down over a number of different levels. Considering this developer was responsible for Tron 2 I expected a little bit more from the game in the way of story. However, with some of the introductory scenes it is quite obvious what is going on in the game and what your relationship is within the story. The other thing I found was that through the use of telephone voicemail messages to tell the story rather than creating an ongoing process of realisation for the player the messages become frustrating, disjointed and ultimately a distraction to the general gameplay. Doom 3 and Tron 2 were far more effectively in using this as a narrative device.

There is something about the combat in F.E.A.R. which is very compelling. They have implemented a type of bullet time which is reminiscent of Max Payne and the Matrix. Once again you only have a limited use of this bullet time, however, you can get upgrades throughout the game to increase the time you have to use. It is not the bullet time which makes the combat. Combat in this game is very fast and the AI is excellent. It is good to go back and replay a set piece differently to see how the AI react. There is constant communication with the AI too. They talk to each other and give you an idea as to what they are doing. There is something satisfying about the weapons. The assault rifle and submachine gun have a very fast rate of fire and before you know it you’ve drained a clip. When your rounds hit the walls chunks come off like the awesome Lobby scene at the end of the Matrix. When you use bullet time the rounds which you fire have a wave affect which trails the bullet them and really does look awesome. You have to be careful through out the game as weapon choice and ammunition management are key factors in your success. You can only carry three weapons at any one time. Ammunition for some of the higher powered weapons is quite limited. So, you really have to choose the time and place in which you use them, or, trade them off for the submachine guns where ammunition is plentiful. Most of the set pieces in this game are excellent and my favourite is a scene where there is no combat. Towards the end of the game you go out on a street. As you walk up the street you see a large explosion a short distance away. Then you are hit with the shockwave from the detonation and then the wind. You try to walk against the wind (like the world famous mime), however, the wind is too strong and you find yourself moving backwards, eventually pinned against a fence until you pass out.

The sounds in game are excellent and if you are not in to a lot of swearing then you should give this game a miss. The voice acting is as good as it should be and the weapons sound authentic. Multiplayer is what may lift this game from being an above average first person shooter. The 1.2 patch has already contained an additional level for multiplay and the netcode has been somewhat improved since the multiplayer demo.

I didn’t want to write this review straight away. As far as I was concerned the jury was out with this game. I finished the game too quickly for my liking and I would have preferred a real horror experience rather than the light weight attempt at being scary that comes through in the game. The story in the game could have been fleshed out more and told in a far more conventional fashion rather than relying on the haphazard use of telephone messages. Needless to say they have left this game open for a sequel, so be prepared to shell out some more of your hard earned if they do what is common and release an expansion in the next six months. If you want a good laugh then check out P.A.N.I.C.S. It is by the guys who did the very successful Red Vs Blue and is an excellent continuation of their gaming satire.

Xtreme Gaming Network Score
Gameplay – 78%
Graphics – 90%
Multiplayer – 80%
Sound – 80%

Overall Score – 82% Rated!!!

I did not have sexual relations with that woman.

Not only did the words of Winston Churchill live on in infamy, but the words of Bill Clinton will live on in infamy. I did not have sexual relations with that woman will be a phrase that will live on longer than the memory of Bill Clinton. Spin is nothing new in life. It may be that we are all so attuned to the use of spin, or, misguided by political propaganda, that many people tend to just ignore when it happens. One of the things that happened to gaming this year was the use of spin by Rockstar games to cover their arses when they made a mistake. I can't remember another moment like this in gaming and, unfortunately, it seems to be something that was just digested by people and forgotten shortly after it happened. For that seems to be the way people cope with garbage in. I must say, from the start, that I am a fan of Rockstar. I think they are one of the software houses who are producing better than average quality games. I am a big fan of Max Payne and a fan of the Grand Theft Auto franchise, but I am not someone who simply forgets. I guess it is a sure sign that the industry in which we all participate in has become a part of that giant corporate beast when a marketing department feels the need to deceive the public with regards to a stupid mistake.

The whole controversy was sparked by a mod called "Hot Coffee" for Grand Theft Auto San Andreas. I'm sure I don't have to go into what the mod did, unless, of course, you have been living under a rock(star). Rockstar originally said that the modders had added the content in to the game rather than the mod unlocking content that was already in the code. "We are deeply concerned that the publicity surrounding these unauthorized modifications has caused the game to be misrepresented to the public and has detracted from the creative merits of this award winning product," said Mr. Eibeler. At the time that Rockstar made this statement they were telling the public, and more importantly, the gaming public a giant porky. Furthermore, they said that the mod was in violation of the End User License Agreement (and if this is the case then any mod for this game, including the multiplayer mod and other mods that have been released for it) would be illegal under the EULA. What we have here is a corporation which would not own up to its own indiscretion and decided to blame the gaming public for their own mistakes. What we have here is a definite case of a company trying to add spin to a situation to get themselves out of the responsibility of their own actions. It happens all the time, but as far as I know, had not happened in gaming. This, as far as I am concerned, is more about a system with no ethics or moral obligation to its customers. Where do they get off? Their immediate concern was to protect their share price with regards to the controversy which they had created by leaving the illicit code in the game.

"Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. (NASDAQ: TTWO) announced today that the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) has changed the rating of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas on all platforms from "Mature 17+" (M) to "Adults Only 18+" (AO) because of the so-called "hot coffee mod," an unauthorized third party modification that alters the retail version of the game. Take-Two cooperated fully with the ESRB's investigation." A Take-Two press release stated.

As far as I am concerned this is not about the illicit content. I don't really care that it is included in the game, but Rockstar have a moral obligation to their customers to ensure that the user gets what they paid for. The game has an M+ rating in Australia which means that it is suitable for the ages of 15 and over. However, that will not stop parents from purchasing the game for their children who are under 15. As far as I am concerned that is their choice. However, parents should be concerned that their children can unlock pornographic content in game when purchasing something in good faith. But, like the words of Bill Clinton, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman", Rockstar intended to spin their response to the general public before admitting that the code was included in game. If the code wasn't included in the game and was only included in the "Hot Coffee" mod then there would have been no need for the company to pull the game from the shelves and release a new version without the illicit content.

I think it is a sad state of affairs that gamers did not spend more time debating these spin based publicity tactics used by such a reputable software company. As far as I am concerned, it is the gamers who suffer more than anything else. As consumers we should demand that those companies which we make rich by purchasing their products operate with honesty and not utilize spin in order to pull the wool over our eyes. The other thing that annoys me about this is that Rockstar could not just say, "Well, we made a mistake. We are sorry buy we made a stupid error." This would have been the easiest way to deal with it. I make mistakes all the time, just as everyone does. That is a way of life. No one is perfect. Just as corporations are not. A little bit of honesty from the start would have made Rockstar stand out above others who utilize spin in order to control the public perceptions of a negative situation.

The Ratings System

I was going to go on a rant about the ratings system and how out of touch the policy makers were with the gaming public. I thought this was fair considering there had been a pretty strong push by gamers over the last three or four years to introduce an 'R' rated category for games. Then I read an article in the Herald Sun today that said they are going to recommend the introduction of an 'R' rating for games. Well, it's taken them long enough, but there goes my post on the blogg.

Then I started to think about what games I had been deprived of because of the rating system. I think it is a fair statement to say that those in control of the ratings really don't understand what goes on in a game. I seriously doubt they play them and I hardly think they even read anything about them.

I have this image of those people responsible for classifying games and movies sitting around a small cinema all day watching porn. In this scene they have a stack of DVDs that they have to rate. They flick through the pile of DVDs.
One of them holds up a title. He says, "Disney film."
Another says. "Give it a G rating."
They hold up the next title.
"Another bloody Pixar computer animated film."
"Give it a PG rating."
They get to the next one.
"This one is hard core porn with two way horse and goat action with steeming swingers."
"We'd better watch that one. It might have illicit content."
"We might have to watch it twice," another says, "just in case we miss something the first time."
I don't know, maybe it's me but that seems like the cushiest job. Which politician do you have to bonk to get that job?

Anyway, the point I'm getting to is what games have we really not been able to play in the last twelve months because of the rating system? Leisure Suit Larry Magna Cum Laude. I made the mistake of getting a friend who was travelling to the states get me a copy of this banned game. As far as I am concerned the ratings board did the Australian public a service by banning that game. Leisure Suit Larry played an important role in my youth. It probably taught me more about sex than my parents did. I didn't know what a prophylactic was before playing the game, but the remake of the game was a waste of space. It was just another software developer cashing in on an established game franchise without actually doing any work to make a game that was worth playing.

The only other two games I could think of which had been banned after being released were Manhunt and Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. There seems to be a theme here. Rockstar games seem to be going for the record of the most number of software titles banned in a country by the one developer. Definitely a title worth aiming for. Fortunately, I picked up a copy of both these games before they were banned. Manhunt didn't phase me much, but GTA: San Andreas I played through till the end and I will do again.

I had a look at some of the games we had in stock. I saw this ratings sticker which I found confusing and made me think that the ratings board really didn't understand what they were rating:



What is the deal with this? Is it Moderate Science Fiction with Violence. Are they commenting on the quality of the science fiction in game? Otherwise, if read literally, what is Moderate Science Fiction Violence? If you take someones head off in science fiction is it different than taking their head off in real life? Does shooting someone with a laser gun differ from shooting them with an M4 in game? Maybe it is time that we opened up the doors and got rid of the ratings board. They can stop watching porn and just let everything in to the country and let discerning adults decide on what they want to watch. As far as I am concerned if you are really interested in watching a movie with two way horse and goat action with steaming swingers then maybe the best job for you is on the ratings board.

The Way I Would Have Reviewed Half Life 2

(All sexist comments are tongue in cheek. If you don't understand what tongue in cheek means then don't read on. If you are feminist and want to criticize then read on and see what it is about)

So, with a game that pushes the boundaries so far and "redefines" a genre so should the review do the same (as per rating system utilized at the end of article).

Every bloke wants to get in to bed with the best looking lady/chick/broad/sheila (you make your choice). It doesn't matter much what's under the hood, as long as she is a stunner and she puts out. That's what blokes really care about. Last year Half Life 2 was the best looking girl to be released on the market. All of the guys wanted to sleep with her and she was an absolute stunner. The only problem was that there was not much under the hood at all. It's like that time when you wake up in the morning and you are proud of your endeavors and the first thing you want to do is to tell all your mates, but you don't want to start a relationship with her. She's not the kind of girl that you settle down with. A one nighter is all she's worth. This was Half Life 2. It seems to me that all the magazine reviews which I read of this game who pronounced it "Game of the Year" just wanted to get in to bed with Valve and couldn't care much of any real content to the game. They wanted to be the first to review this "epic" game. They wanted to be the first to call it "Game of the Year" and they wanted to be the first to play it through to the end. It was all about kudos for the magazine and not true reporting.

What was Half Life 2 anyway but a good looking piece of software? From what I read in game previews I was expecting a horrifying tale of repression about a future dystopia. Much like the novels, 1984 and Brave New World, which I read and loved. A game which picked up from the first installment and continued as an excellent cautionary tale as much as it was an excellent shooter. But this did not happen. The story telling in Half Life 2 was so understated that it did not exist at all. In fact, I would argue that there really was no story at all. Valve had created this beautiful place with interesting characters but nothing to tell you about these characters and their environment. I would have liked to have known more about Alyx besides the fact that dog had protected her since she was a child. I would have liked to know how the world was shaped since the event at Black Mesa which changed the world. I would have liked to know how City 17 had developed to become the dead end for everyone. But, sadly, these things were excluded from the game. I think this was a very poor error in judgment on behalf of Valve. These things which would have created substance to an excellent piece of software were missing. This was the most crucial aspect of any game. Even those shooters which have a cliched story behind the game engine (such as Far Cry) have some sort of story which ties you to the on screen action. The story itself is one of the key ingredients to any game because without them every game would be virtually the same. As far as I'm concerned there needs to be more under the gaming bonet than just pretty graphics.

The other thing which had reviewers reaching for a condom was the in game physics. Don't get me wrong, I am all for in game physics when they are consistent and relevant, but why not just call it another way to make things fall down? The vehicles in this game would defy normal physics during driving. Jumping over anything would see a vehicle fly more than fall. The only other way that the physics was utilized in game was so that I could construct a rudimentary bridge to travel over something. Awesome. I always wanted to be a makeshift engineer. Really, did this add anything to the game play? Anything at all? As far as I am concerned the physics was used to make you look over the very average AI in the game. Ever have your team mates block your entrance? or, just refuse to follow you? I had these problems in game. I couldn't build a rudimentary bridge to travel over them when they blocked the entrance to a door either. I just had to reload and hope they didn't do the same thing again.

So, I guess the question is, “What kind of game would you want to settle down with?” It seems that the MMOs are the ones which gamers are maintaining long term relationships with, but you have to pay for the privilege. World Of Warcraft will probably go down as the most popular game in history (although it will have to knock The Sims off this mantle first). The life of a shooter beyond single player is multiplayer and can be somewhat limited. Only some of the major release titles, such as Battlefield and CS, have maintained the gamer love beyond several months. Are we going to experience the death of the singleplayer for first person shooters? Maybe, if software developers want to extend the life of the genre they have to look at mixing it with others. Look at the success of Deus Ex and possibly the upcoming Hellgate London.

Sometimes you just make friends with a girl to get to her friends, let's face it, guys are that shallow and that is not necessarily a bad thing. Half Life 2 promises to bring a lot of new friends to the gaming community via its online dating service known as Steam. Counter Strike Source is already out. Day of Defeat Source has just been released. Lost Coast is finally out and there are the ever present reality of many (yes, many) Half Life 2 expansion packs. But are these friends really worth the time? Well, Counter Strike source is like the girlfriend you dated years ago, broke up with and have not spoken to since. Then she reappears on the scene, gets in touch with you and wants to get back together, but you don't want to go back to her. Day of Defeat Source is an older lady who has had some cosmetic surgery she looks good on the outside but on the inside she is aging very fast. Lost Coast is definitely a one night stand. As for the other Half Life 2 expansions to be released, they are just going to be like good looking, high priced prostitutes. Take your money, give you ten minutes of loving and then leave you with an empty wallet.

Anyway, should Half Life 2 have been game of the year? Maybe, if appearances are the most important thing to you. However, there were other, better games released. These games didn't have the anticipation factor which Half Life 2 bought with it, but anticipation isn't everything. Certainly, Far Cry which came out six months earlier and was more of a sleeper hit than Half Life 2 I believe, was far more deserving.

Half Life 2 Rating

Would you sleep with Half Life 2 - 99%
Would you listen to Half Life 2 after you wake up next to it in the morning - 20%
Would you start up a long term relationship with Half Life 2 - 1%

Overall - 40%

If you found this review to be superficial, then have a look at some of the reviews you read in magazines. Aren't they only just as superficial? Just not written in a sexist way.

Welcome to my blog ... the cynical gamer

The gaming industry is big business. Big money. Apparently, bigger than Hollywood (or, so I read). What happens in our capitalistic world when something becomes big business? They generally tend to forget about their customers. Corporations are dominated by market share and market profiling from the advertising agencies which service them rather than maintaining a real dialogue with their customers. Development times of titles are growing as the demands created by improving technology make game developers take greater amounts of time to publish titles. A frequest occurance for gamers is the shifting release dates of games. This has created the notion of "it will be published when it is finished" as opposed to set release dates for game titles. I only read this morning that Stalker: Shadow of Chernobyl has been pushed back until October 2006. Stalker is becoming the greatest game that will never be released. These things are enough to create some cynicism even in the most optomistic gamer.

It seems to me that gaming magazines have got their noses so far up the backsides of publishers and developers that honest, reporting and review of software titles is becoming a thing of the past. With the amount of money invested in the development of titles publishers want a guaranteed return on their investment. They don't want to spend four years in development and tens of millions of dollars for the game not to sell. Publishers rely on the reviews of magazines to sell their software. Magazines, in turn, are funded by the advertising of these publishers and rely on their advertising dollars to fund the publication and ensure ongoing profits of the magazine. It is a vicious cycle.

Furthermore, some game developers are saying that they would prefer to make a shorter game, but of higher quality, rather than publish games which are going to be an epic. This appears to be an undercurrent that is affecting the way game makers approach game creation at the moment. Obviously, the formula: (development time x money invested = minmum number of games sold for return on investment), affects the way publishers approach game development. Games (tm) quoted one of Nintendo's gurus, Shigeru Miyamoto, as saying, "There's not a lot I want to play right now ... A lot of games out there are just too long; if you're not interested in spending that time with them, you're not going to play." Miyamoto's idea of ideal gameplay time for a title would be "a ten hour completion cycle." Unfortunately, it appears that the days of games such as Morrowind (which boasted well over 100 hours of gameplay) are limited. Look at Half Life 2 as a case in point. The collector's edition cost $129.95 (Aus). What did you get for this extra $30 in price over the standard edition? A T Shirt and a couple of extra downloads from Steam. It was possible to complete Half Life 2 in ten to fifteen hours and has been finished in the done quick range (speeddemosarchive.com) in as little as 2 hours. (Mind you someone finished Morrowind in the done quick range in 7 mins). It seems to me that you get better value for money buying a DVD than you do a game at times. How does the five year development cycle of Half Life 2 relate to fifteen hours of game play?

The other thing that concerns me about this industry is a lack of diversity in the industry. It feels like every second game to be released is a First Person Shooter. The market is dominated by First Person Shooters, MMOs, Role Playing Games, the occasional Real Time Strategy and sports games. Singleplayer gaming experience is about telling a story, but even those stories that we have forced down our throats in games are somewhat cliched and recycled. Two games that I have just completed are FEAR and Quake IV. FEAR was hardly a horror game (maybe it would be scary if you are five) and Quake IV is hardly any different than Quake II. While I thoroughly enjoyed Far Cry as a game the story was enough to scoff at. Where are the real story tellers in video games? Where is the notion of unfettered creativity which we are told exists with programers and coders. I really do feel that fifteen years ago, in the days of the Commodore Amiga, game developers were more creative in how they developed games considering the restrictions of the hardware they had to work with. Now, with the possibility to create amazing and unreal worlds we are presented with a situation that not much is new in gaming. It is all old hat. Sports games are a good case in point. Electronic Arts has dominated the market in sports games for many years. It is probably due to many of these titles that EA can say that they are the biggest software developer in the world. But what have they really done to change the annual franchises which they publish every year? I don't think that NHL has changed since it was an awesome game on the Megadrive. Of course, the player names have changed but the gameplay has not. Most sports games are like this. Why would you want to purchase the same title every 12 months just to play the same game over and over.

It seems the gaming industry needs a good kick in the pants. The only way that this can be delivered is through independant game development. Two titles which I play at the moment which fall outside of the mainstream publishers are Live For Speed and FIA: GTR. Live For Speed would have to be one of the best racing sims around and can be purchased online for 12 quid. Why would you bother buying the arcadey V8 Supercars 2 for $89 when you can buy a true racing sim for a fourth of the price? Long live independent game development and may they "keep the bastards honest" (because you certainly can't keep them honest in politics).

Anyway, this is what the cynical gamer will be about. My thoughts on gaming, game reviews, previews and other stuff like that. I hope you enjoy it and feel free to post your comments and create discussion about the gaming industry.