XBOX Live - Michael J Kumer, PSN - KingOfOldSkool85
1UP - KingOfOldSkool, IGN - KingOfOldSkool, Myspace.com/MichaelKumer
Yahoo! Fantasy Sports - MichaelKumer, KingOfOldSkool03, MikeKumer
******************************************************************************
I usually keep my thoughts to my blog entries for the most part, as my post count will rarely ever see a huge increase due to me not having much patience when it comes to dealing with the nonsense that ignorant fanboys in forums love to spew out( "fanboy" is indeed an overused cliche nowadays..), not to mention not really being interested in wasting time dealing with egomaniacal forum mods that feel the large portions of their lives they waste trolling forums bestow them some sort of god-like powers(lets just say I've lost quite a few levels thanks forum moderation over the years..). I'm also not going to say that I actually give a sh*t what the masses think of, well.. anything.. but I always appreciate intelligent feedback that is presented in a civilized manner regardless of whether you agree with my ideals or not.. which will probably be quite often. Enjoy my rambling. ******************************************************************************

• 26Sep 08

  Some parting game industry related prognostication..

  Due to my inevitable game-induced hibernation over the next few months (courtesy of an immense amount of personally anticipated titles hitting store shelves) among other things, my activity on GS will probably take a hit for a while.. but I've decided to peer into my crystal ball and make some game industry related predictions one more time before doing so.

  

  Now.. anyone who knows me well already is aware of this particular little tidbit. To sum it up.. I would be the last person in the world to win a lottery of any sorts.. I readily admit that I can't pick winners for sh*t the majority of the time for some odd reason. BUT.. when it comes to predicting undesirable outcomes.. I am eerily dead on more than I would like to admit. Basically, I'm one of those people who tend be right quite a bit.. only just about things I "don't" want to be right about . What I am alluding to is the fact that I'm getting some negative vibes off the current gen's success.. more specifically.. the "way" systems are becoming successful this console generation. When all is said and done.. I strongly believe that many gamers will look back at this current crop of consoles and see the beginnings of some nasty habits that the industry will be afflicted with for quite some time into the future.

  

  I certainly hope gamers enjoy that nice little pic of this gen's lineup.. because they're not going to see anything different for quite some time. The first little habit are platforms lingering on the market for prolonged periods of time without a full fledged successor(accessories like Nintendo's motion sensor upgrade is already a possible starting point to said fear). I know many long time gamers are used to the 5 year cycles for consoles.. but something is telling me that this is a generation unlike any other that has preceded it. Let's face it.. the technological ceiling is drawing closer.. and with so much invested in these platforms I doubt any of the big three are willing to risk their installed user base on marginally better hardware just yet. Anyways, even more so than that, I believe that due in large part to online functionality becoming more integrated within the current gaming experience than at any other point in the history of the industry.. console makers will feel more inclined to enhance the playing experience on their console through upgraded online features before heavily investing and taking on big risks with another system anytime soon. This ideal is a segway into my next two predictions for the gaming future.

  

  Anyone who pays mild attention to my occasional rambling will already know my disdain for the ever increasing collective ego of the modern gamer. Now.. seeking individualism and being proud of one's accomplishments is one thing, something I have some respect for, BUT what has actually reared it's ugly head throughout the video game fanbase as of late is something entirely more sinister and narcissistic.. modern game features such as gamerscores have been something that companies like M$ have used to their advantage in an effort to exploit the modern gamers ego. Even Nintendo's Mii's have been used as a major tool of success in an effort to allow gamers to immerse themselves within the games they play thus increasing the likelihood of continued use. Like I have also stated many time's before.. it should never be mistaken that I am against such gimmicks like gamerscores and avatars.. I still am a fan of the ideal overall, but as with many other promising things in this world, good things are not always utilized for pleasant means.

  

  What I find ironic though is this.. I firmly believe believe the aforementioned culture that both Microsoft and Nintendo have nurtured to benefit their own platforms over the last couple years is something that could quite possibly benefit Sony the most in the long run. How? Gamerscores and avatars have their perks and have been very successful in drawing in fans.. but Sony's Playstation Home feature is both those things and could be so much more IF(and I do stress if) done correctly. For those not familiar with Home, basically between being able to have far advanced customization options with avatars(far more than Nintendo's Mii's and M$'s Mii rip-offs).. having personal spaces that can be decorated with unlocked trophies among other things, and being able to walk into MMO-like lobby's to lounge with friends.. it could very well be the PS3 needed all along to separate itself from the competition. Wouldn't it be amusing if at the end of the day.. the PS3 didn't gain some serious long term momentum from a single piece of hardware or a single game.. but an upgraded free online network? Such a scenario is indeed a possibility.. which is one of the major reasons why this generation is indeed a new frontier. I guess gamers will have to wait and see how big of an impact Home will actually have when Sony moves it past it's current beta stage and debuts it this fall.. and could quite possibly be the one convincing argument for all developers to make trophy support in PS3 games a priority in order to further promote their product within the new community.

  On to my next online related topic.. DLC and the slow and painful deterioration of the "single player" campaign. Like the aforementioned gamerscore.. downloadable content is a novel idea that was born with good intentions.. but as as some may already know.. the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Good intentions such as those will continue to become yet another avenue for developers to exploit gamers more often than not. In the current industry environment.. what forces developers to pour any additional time and resources into adding additional length and replay value when a title first hits the market? Thanks to online access and DLC.. absolutely nothing. There are a decreasing amount of instances of were developers have to do "anything" more than "just enough". And in their minds why should they? They can continue to nickel and dime gamers with those DLC packs.. why make the single player campaign longer? Players can just use other players online for a longer gaming experience.. replay value? You mean beyond some cheap achievements used as an often lazy and cheap excuse to lull gamers into recycling the same experience repeatedly? Not likely. Let's face it folks.. the modern gamer is slowly but surely being trained to believe that "replay value" is just a mix of a some gamerscore points and moderately priced DLC tacked on to bloated amount of money they already plunked down for the game. Of course.. there are the rare occurrences of some pleasant bonuses from developers. Obviously, the Bike update to Burnout Paradise was a good "free" update, but sadly.. it is more an exception than the norm.. something I just don't see changing anytime soon.

  

  Lastly.. my final ramblings focus on the systems of the next generation.. or moreso the mindsets the big three will have heading into their release. The beginning of this current console generation sparked a battle on two fronts.. the importance of the order when systems are released.. and the "minimalist" versus the "beast" system. Needless to say.. the spending habits of current gamers have decided the victor on "both" battlefields rather quickly.

  I suggest those gamers that were up in arms over the lack of any major leaps in technology between this current crop of consoles and the last get their pitch forks ready in time for systems released in the near future.. because thanks in large part to the Wii and 360's success with their market strategy.. the chances of a ambitious and noticeably more powerful system being released in the next gen is an almost virtual impossibility. Microsoft and especially Nintendo will not stray away from their current strategy.. and even Sony who tried to pioneer consoles becoming more future-proof have already admitted that Nintendo's approach is "more profitable". What does that all add up to? Like I just alluded to.. I will be absolutely SHOCKED if the three companies differ greatly in market strategies with the next couple of console iterations. Bottomline.. the vast majority of gamers have spoken through their spending habits.. they mostly prefer the the quicker systems to the market.. and the "cheapest". Basically, if you were in stores first and are "cheaper than the other guy" you already have a leg up.. regardless of what you off in either hardware or software terms. The consumers with the majority of the spending power such as parents of gamers have for the most part proven that they barely "understand" the viable differences between the current crop of system let alone actually "appreciate" any of it. As they see it.. a system like the Wii for example.. gets plenty of positive media exposure.. and is even unintimidating to the point were "elderly" folk will mess around with. You know.. probably most of the same elderly folk that still think camera flashes will steal you soul.. but most of all, regardless of which is the better deal.. regardless of which is the better system.. "which is the cheapest?" they ask.

  

  Nevermind the undeniable "facts" that the Wii is unacceptably lazy in terms of the leap it took from the Gamecube.. forget the fact that it has by far the WORST third party gaming catalog and that even it's quality first party titles are terribly partial to casual gamers.. and especially forget the fact 95% of it's supposedly "motion sensored" enhanced gameplay is rendered nothing more than having the actual in-game functionality of a glorified point and click powerpoint presentation. It's gets the best media buzz.. its hard to find on store shelves.. its the cheapest.. so it must be the best buy.. right? What other choice is there for the ignorant consumer? It's either the media darling Wii.. or the XBOX360 with it's almost Barrack Obama-like standing among media and critics.. you know.. even though it has a shady past and conducts questionable practices.. they have a bright smile and are rather charismatic so it must be the "in thing" to go with it type of atmosphere. Certainly the Darth Vader of consoles in the PS3 isn't a possibility.. right?

  Anyways.. toning down the sarcasm for a bit . An example of how having a higher-end but more expensive console just isn't going to work as well as Sony wants is mostly thanks to the fact that in today's market many consumers still do not have a complete understanding of why certain pieces of hardware are priced the way they are. Aside from the complaint of a supposed lack of games for the PS3.. the biggest complaint has obviously always been it's price. Although I appreciated Sony's attempt to make consoles even more technologically relevant.. I'll be the first one to admit that Sony simply overestimated many modern gamers desire for higher end systems.. more specifically consumer's desire to pay higher amounts for such hardware than they are used to(basically.. most gamers nowadays want more powerful systems but are too cheap to pay fair price for it). More often than not comparing a cheaper model of the XBOX360 to a $400 PS3 is almost comparing apples to oranges.. in both cases consumers are "getting what they paid for". Paying $199 to $299 for an XBOX360 isn't a bad deal at all.. but quite simply isn''t the "deal" the PS3 is even at a $400 price point. Focusing for amoment in a a strictly monetary oriented frame of mind.. a stand alone Blu-Ray drive is $300 at the cheapest, a Wi-Fi adapter is $99 for the XBOX360, $50 bucks for a year of XBOX Live gold, and $20 for a rechargeable battery pack for the controller.. the contents of a $400 PS3 covers that ENTIRE list even before including cost of the hardware to actually play games. Nevermind the fact that if a gamer wanted to upgrade hard drives.. a 160gb PS3 compatible hard drive starts at around $100 while a 120gb hard drive for the 360 is already at the $150+ pricepoint. Like I said.. gamers "are" indeed getting what they pay for, both are good buys, but spending less on a 360 still adds up to "getting" less in terms of hardware value. It's one thing to wish for a cheaper PS3, but anyone who unfairly laments Sony for it not be in the $300 and below range just does not have the proper perspective.

  

  What is all my jargon related to the price of hardware leading to? The fact that I am absolutely certain that this is the last time gamers will have to be worried about this problem next time around.. because the trend born in this generation that will have the longest lasting effect is the overall price AND hardware downscaling of the game console. Sony will not repeat the mistake twice.. and even though I am a fan of the PS3 I have a sinking feeling that they will do an about face in the next generation in order to better fall in line with the higher profit strategies of Microsoft and Nintendo.. all the while those two companies continuing their habits of boring and flawed hardware designs. The market itself has dictated what is the most successful.. increasingly powerful hardware that garners higher pricetags is not in the cards again anytime soon. Why should there be? All these systems have indeed gotten away with convincing gamers that they are utilizing "revolutionary" features without actually doing anything revolutionary AT ALL. Console makers don't have to worry about proper system designs.. the XBOX360 was the most unreliable console in history.. but people kept buying it anyways.. didn't they? Their greed to ignore faulty design problems to rush the 360 onto the market before the PS3 gave them enough time to brainwash enough people into sticking with their platform. I mean.. I was floored by the increasing number of fanboys who mindlessly try to shrug off the red ring of death.. some even accusing gamers who complain about their failed systems of being "whiners" for having their $300-$400 investment fail.. I've even witnessed some gamers make the argument that people should "not" make such a big deal about not having their system for 2-3 months a year because of repairs citing that they "should be playing it that much anyways".. God's honest truth. It has been so expected it almost seems as if "death, taxes, and RRoD" are the real inevitabilites nowadays.

  All of the aforementioned nasty little habits will have long term effects on the industry that will affect Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo alike.. marginal system upgrades, unrevolutionary features touted as otherwise, rushed systems.. THAT is the immediate future of gaming. When the current crop of consoles is bled dry.. the stampede to rush out the next batch begins.. to hell with noticeably better hardware to justify plunking down more money.. no need to fix design flaws.. as long as the system has some novel gimmicks, a gamerscore-like feature to massage those gaming ego's, and is on the market before the "other guy".. nothing else matters.. because the market has dictated so. In the end.. gaming is still good nowadays.. all three systems have perks. I just simply hope that the nefarious shadow cast by the increasing brightness of the industry's success does not overtake it all.

  • Posted Sep 26, 2008 4:42 pm PT
  • Category: Editorial
  • 10 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 13Sep 08

  Some anti-M$ stories take longer to surface on certain game sites I suppose..

  It seems quite amusing how some stories find the front page of "certain" game sites news sections rather quickly while a choice amount of others seem to take an extended period of time(if at all) to reach that same level coverage. So.. let me get this straight.. a story the likes of a recent surge in XBOX360 sales since it's price drop find its way to a "certain" game sites news section within hours of other sites reporting the story.. while I don't know.. a story such as the recent M$ firing of a company whistleblower of the RRoD drama seems to be rather slow in getting attention.

  

  Any staunch xbots like the pic of my "third" XBOX360? hmm.. I digress.. anyways call it a coincidence if you want that such occurences seem to happen with such predictable frequency, but as far as I see it.. if a certain "other company" that currently does not have the good graces of an army of ignorant and hard headed xbots, Best Buy & Gamestop employees, and dense game site editors in their corner.. conducted themselves in an equally sinister manor and were embroiled in a similar PR nightmare they would have long been painted as evil incarnate by now I assure you.

  Click here for an article about how Microsoft employee Robert Delaware was fired for leaking details about M$'s RRoD shenanigans to journalist Dean Takahashi. Please.. no one give me the M$ defense of Delaware being fired over his breach of company confidentiality bullsh*t.. if anyone is willing to attempt to write off this entire drama with that defense, they should quickly have some of that Bill Gates sh*t wiped off their noses.. not to mention seriously considering reprioritizing their principals..

  • Posted Sep 13, 2008 1:52 pm PT
  • Category: Editorial
  • 11 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 28May 08

  More than just hardware is becoming outdated in the modern game industry..

  The PS3 version of Bioshock is yet another example of how 3rd party game developer's policies in regards to the releasing of their games is quickly changing from they used to be in prior generations. Probably the most glaring reason for "permanent" 3rd party exclusivity's becoming rarer is how expensive game development is rapidly becoming. Simply put.. most titles released as of late are far too much of a production to bottleneck availability to gamers. Bottomline, regardless of any given developers feeling towards any given platform.. platform favortism pales in comparison to how much is on the line when that developer needs to recoup the massive costs of developing a major title. Lastly, while some may look at a PS3 port of Bioshock being unimportant.. they may fail to realize the longterm implications of the matter.. more specifically, the fact that future sequels will most likely be multiplatform. So I sincerely hope M$ fanboys enjoyed last fall's release of Bioshock and Mass Effect(specifically those who found joy in the PS3 losing exlcusivity with Assassin's Creed, Devil May Cry 4 and GTA IV).. because between this revelation and EA purchasing Bioware.. Bioshock 2 and Mass Effect 2 appearing simultaneously on both the PS3 and the 360 seems inevitable.

  

  A major example of financially driven multiplatform availability is obviously Rockstar and GTA IV.. in the last generation Rockstar very well could have followed its usual policy and started off with GTA IV being exclusive to a Sony platform.. but GTA IV's immense development costs(the most expensive in history) made such an occurence a bad business decision. M$ fanboys for the most part took GTA IV's multiplatform status as a jab at the PS3.. but in reality it was more of a jab at console exclusivity as a whole than any one system.. even in a reverse situation GTA IV was destined to be multiplatfrom regardless of what console it was initially meant for. In the end like I have been alluding to.. gamers are starting to realize that more than the PS3 is starting to feel the loss of those major exclusives.. and a combination of now "two" higher end game consoles being stable moneymakers on the market teamed with escalating costs.. it seems as if console makers need to rely on more elaborate market strategies to get ahead than those utilized in the past.. for it seems the brief amount of time the XBOX360 enjoyed with major 3rd part titles such as Oblivion, Dead Rising, and Lost Planet soley on it's plaform leading up to and shortly after the PS3 launch was indeed a short lived commodity.

  • Posted May 28, 2008 8:30 pm PT
  • Category: Editorial
  • 10 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg

See Previous Blog Posts