BioWare and Mythic are merged? This is a good thing.

My initial kneejerk reaction is to say, "gg EA," and roll my eyes. However, reading into the matter and thinking upon it, it's actually a great move.

If you've played Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning (WAR), then you know that the game falls flat. It's not bad, but it's not exactly all that great either. It feels slow and clunky, especially compared to something as fast-paced as Guild Wars (which, I think, captures the perfect pace for a Player vs Player MMO). The art style and general presentation for the game is great. It looks and feels just like the Warhammer universe. As someone who has dabbled in Warhammer for over 2 years, I think I know the nuances of the style pretty well.

The problem with Warhammer Online comes in the gameplay category. It's just nothing to really keep you interested. The PvP scenarios seem generic and to lack any real strategic depth. I feel like I've done it before, and done it better, in other genres and in other MMOs. The pace, as I said before, seems sluggish, which is antithetical to what one would think of a vicious and brutal PvP-oriented MMO. People have trumpeted that WAR is so much better than World of Warcrafts' PvP. Really, though, that's like saying that eating shit is better than eating vomit covered shit. I'm sure it is, but it's still shit and not exactly something to rave about.

Now, getting into the nitty-gritty: What has happened? Why am I talking about how much I don't like WAR (and I really wanted to like the game)? Because Electronic Arts has decided to merge the much-beloved RPG developer, BioWare (Baldur's Gate 1&2, Mass Effect, Neverwinter Nights, Star Wars: Knights of The Old Republic), with Mythic Entertainment, developers of the aforementioned Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning.

There's several reasons why this is pretty big news. Firstly, BioWare recently opened a new studio in Austin, Texas (their only USA studio (they have 2 in Canada)) to work on the much anticipated Star Wars: The Old Republic MMO. This is BioWare's first MMO, though they do have netcode experience with Neverwinter Nights. BioWare was also bought out by EA, with numerous conditions made to keep BioWare semi-independent. Mythic has well-renowned MMO experience with Dark Age of Camelot and WAR. Both are PvP-based MMOs focusing primarily on Realm vs Realm combat, but that's not really important. What is important is that they have a lot of people who are quite good at doing netcode. Another important tidbit is that Mythic was bought by EA.

The most interesting thing about this somewhat bizarre move is this:

Creating what is effectively a massively multiplayer RPG development juggernaut, EA has tapped Muzyka to become Group General Manager of their new RPG/MMO Group, with fellow BioWare co-founder Greg Zeschuk acting as Group Creative Officer. With the departure of Mythic's Mark Jacobs, Mythic co-founder Rob Denton will step up as the General Manager of Mythic, reporting directly to Muzukya. BioWare's operations will remain unchanged.
- Source

WAR was touted to be a massive success, and it looked like it. Touted on a fantastic and rich IP (Warhammer) and focused on visceral PvP combat, it seemed like a great game. Even after release, many people touted is an excellent game. However, the hype didn't last. It became mundane and routine. The veneer of hype wore off and you were left with a fairly mediocre and somewhat by-the-numbers MMO. Individuals might agree or disagree with that assessment, and I do not claim to hold some certain truth, but the numbers don't lie. The numbers for WAR are bad. Not terrible, mind you, but not good enough. Especially considering how much time and money was put into WAR. When I did the free trial, I saw zero high capacity servers in North America. There was one in Oceania. There was one server that was medium capacity, but all the others were low capacity. And by "all the others" I mean the eight other servers. It's not like there's 30 servers out there. Even at a relatively modest amount of servers, WAR cannot fill them up. That is not good.

Essentially, this taking Ray and Greg (the founders and big-wigs of BioWare) and putting them in charge of Mythic's flagship, WAR. I can only assume in some kind of attempt to salvage the massive investment that EA put into that game. This allows not only for BioWare to borrow from Mythic in resource management and netcode programmers (BioWare also plundered the laid-off Star Wars Galaxies employees to work in their The Old Republic studio in Austin), but this also gives Mythic access to BioWare's fantastic art, sound, and storytelling resources.

Why would Mythic want BioWare's resources? Why wouldn't they! BioWare is the undisputed king of RPGs. Yes, you can point to Square-Enix and tout Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest, and that is certainly valid. However, BioWare is typically regarded in higher standing. This is not a put-down of Square-Enix, as I hold FF7 as one of the best RPGs of all time, but I would be lying if I said that I thought FF7 was better than Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn. BioWare's games are solid. Neverwinter Nights is still regarded as the pinnacle of a new trend in RPG gaming, allowing players to craft their own games using the provided toolset. Knights of The Old Republic is highly heralded as one of the best RPGs during the PS2/XBox generation, and helped push a lot of XBox sales. The Baldur's Gate series is regarded as fantastic and is routinely placed within the top 5 of any RPG fan's list. Mass Effect was received very well and highly regarded. To say that anticipation for Dragon Age is high is a massive understatement. BioWare is an RPG developer that has rarely done wrong and has the strong catalog of high-tier products to prove it.

While I think the merger of BioWare and Mythic is, at face value, quite odd, I also think it makes a lot of sense. Mythic's WAR is floundering, trying desperately to stay afloat. BioWare seems to be growing by leaps and bounds these days, and if anyone can help turn up the quality a notch on WAR, BioWare is an excellent choice. Not only does this allow the two developers to share their vibrantly rich resources, but it makes for a massive juggernaut in the RPG realm, both online and offline. It's never a good thing to see someone who was so integral as Mark Jacobs get canned, but I also cannot think of anyone who could give WAR the truly magnificent makeover that it needs and deserves than Ray Muzukya and Greg Zeschuk.

more...

Duke Nukem Foerever may be gone, but the hollowed out shell of 3D Realms will remain. To do nothing. Ever.

Seriously, what the shit is this? Okay, so 3D Realms has indeed canned Duke Nukem Forever due to lack of funding, but 3D Realms is still around? To do what? They couldn't even make Prey! It took 10 damn years and they still couldn't finish it so they handed it off to Human Head Studios. Valve spent 9 years doing Team Fortress 2, but in the end Valve actually did make the damn game! (and a mighty fine one at that!)

In light of recent press articles and statements by Take-Two (to the media and in a lawsuit), we want to set the record straight on some issues.

Despite rumors and statements to the contrary, 3D Realms (3DR) has not closed and is not closing. 3DR retains ownership of the Duke Nukem franchise. Due to lack of funding, however, we are saddened to confirm that we let the Duke Nukem Forever (DNF) development team go on May 6th, while we regroup as a company. While 3DR is a much smaller studio now, we will continue to operate as a company and continue to license and co-create games based upon the Duke Nukem franchise.

As some of you may know, Take-Two filed a lawsuit last week containing various accusations and claims against 3DR and the uncompleted DNF game. Take-Two never paid 3DR advances or any signing bonus or any other funds related to DNF, up until July 2008, at which time they paid $2.5m in connection with another agreement for an unannounced game. This is the sum total Take-Two has paid 3DR in connection with DNF. Take-Two claims that they paid $12m to GT Interactive/Infogrames to acquire the publishing rights for the DNF game. To be clear, 3DR was not a party to that transaction and did not receive any money from it. When the DNF game was originally signed with GT Interactive in 1998, GT paid 3DR a $400,000 signing bonus. Up until July 2008, this was the only publisher money we received for the DNF game. Meanwhile, 3DR put over $20m into the production of DNF.

Take-Two retains publishing rights for the DNF game, although 3DR retains certain rights to sell the game directly to the public. Late last year, 3DR began negotiations with Take-Two to provide funding to complete the DNF game. In the meantime, 3DR was hitting mutually-agreed milestones, despite not having a new agreement finalized. Take-Two was well aware that 3DR needed the funding to continue the DNF game development. Suddenly, after months of negotiations, Take-Two materially changed the parameters of the proposed funding agreement. 3DR informed Take-Two that it could not financially afford the changes Take-Two was suggesting and would be forced to release the team if an agreement was not reached. Take-Two made a last minute proposal to acquire the Duke Nukem franchise and the 3DR development team. Take-Two's proposal was unacceptable to 3DR for many reasons, including no upfront money, no guarantee minimum payment, and no guarantee to complete the DNF game. From 3DR's perspective, we viewed Take-Two as trying to acquire the Duke Nukem franchise in a "fire sale." Those negotiations fell through on May 4th, a deal never materialized, and the DNF team was sadly released a few days later.

Less than a week after the DNF team was released, Take-Two filed its lawsuit in New York, seeking immediate temporary injunctive relief. The court denied Take-Two's request for a temporary restraining order. While we cannot comment on the details of the ongoing lawsuit, we believe Take-Two's lawsuit is without merit and merely a bully tactic to obtain ownership of the Duke Nukem franchise. We will vigorously defend ourselves against this publisher.
- Source

Okay, so, 3DR spent $20 million making DNF, but they have no abandoned it. They still plan to make other games based on the Duke Nukem franchise, though. What the fuck kind of stupid shit is this? You ABANDONED a game that you spent $20 million on and spent 12 years making, but now you're going to focus instead on making newer, different games? I'm sorry, but something does not compute with that. Mainly, what fucking games are you going to make? iPhone apps?

Dude, do the honorable thing and just close shop. This is embarrassing and complete bullshit. You guys haven't made a game since 1997. Stop pretending like you have even a semblance of integrity or respect, because you don't. No publisher is goin to want to fund you. It's sad, yes, but it's time to move on.

more...

Apple in the game industry? Yeah, that'll go over well.

So, I saw this piece about how Apple should get into the gaming industry, and the whole thing is juts one giant collage of dumbfuckery. Apple does some things well. The iPod was great. Not because it's better hardware, but because it capitalized on its simple interface. When people want to listen to music in their car or while jogging, they don't want to navigate a lot of menus and stuff. They want to find their music quickly, easily, and be done with it.

Anyways, here's a direct rebuttal and reasons why Apple should not get into the gaming industry. I really do love this shit, playing the devil's advocate against those that really don't know what the fuck they're talking about when it comes ot game development.

Reports are swirling that Apple is considering a move into the gaming market via an acquisition of Electronic Arts (EA). And while those are currently just rumors, what is confirmed is that Apple has recently poached Microsoft's former head of Xbox strategy, Richard Teversham.

Okay, let's look at what Taversham did.

The exiting Microsoft executive, Richard Teversham, most recently ran Microsoft's Xbox business unit in Europe. He worked at Microsoft for 15 years and was senior director of business, insights and strategy for the Xbox business group. Teversham told MCV he will work in some type of "education-related role" at the Apple European office.
- Source

Wow, that's fucking awesome. If I was going to start up a games division I would totally be looking for bean counters first and foremost. Forget that Taversham said he was going into some educational area for Apple's EU division. Even if he were working on a gaming-related division at Apple, he would most likely be pushed into Apple's iPhone department. Considering he's a business guy, aka number crunching, he'd be a good person to look at pricing and sales volume. Not for, you know, the actually important shit like hardware and development-related issues.

1. Apple Is Due: Some of the Cupertino crew's competitors are already well established in the gaming market with their own consoles. Microsoft has the Xbox and Sony has the PlayStation. While Apple has spent much of the last decade remaking the mobile music industry, the time could now be right for a foray into gaming. The brand has exploded in popularity since the release of the iPod in October 2001 (the Microsoft Xbox, as a point of reference, was released in November 2001), and it's not hard to imagine fanboys lining up to purchase an Apple-branded gaming device.

Good fucking grief this is stupid. Okay, let's look at Apple's market share in the PC market. It's between 10%-13%. That's it. Now, if you look at Apple's MP3 market share, it's somewhere in the 40% range, which is good. However, a game console isn't a fucking MP3 player and people aren't going to buy a several hundred dollar console just because. There has to be games and there has to be decent hardware. No one wants to invest in a fucking paperweight console. Ask Atari how well jumping into the game console industry with their Jaguar did. Oh wait, Atari is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy.

2. iTunes Store: Apple already has a well-established and viable way of distributing games to customers via the Internet. Downloading a song or movie through the iTunes Store is becoming a standard skill for many people. An Apple gaming console, then, could function similarly to the Apple TV or Xbox Live store. Droves of people already have accounts, so if Apple can distribute games directly to the console via iTunes, customers wouldn't even need to leave the house to get their game on.

Are you fucking retarded? Do you have any fucking clue as to how big games are? And I don't mean "big" as in popularity, but as in filesize. Try 3-6 GB. To understand that, in "music" size, you're talking 1,000 to 2,000 songs. For one game. Not to mention that people would need to have the proper bandwidth for that, which most do not. The average connection in the USA is about 512 Kb. Which is not KB (KiloyBytes). It's less than that. (one KiloByte = 8 Kilobits)

Also, how well has Apple TV done? Oh, that's right, it fucking tanked because it sucked shit. It was horribly inferior to other products out there and it lacked numerous crucial features. Face it, the only thing Apple has going for it is its iPod.

3. The iPhone And iPod Touch: Apple's mainstay portable devices are already beginning to establish themselves as gaming platforms. A quick look through the Apple App Store reveals a plethora of games that range in price from free to a few dollars. EA, for example, just released "Need For Speed Undercover" for the iPhone, retailing at $10. Apple customers are already playing games on the iPhone and iPod Touch, so why not tie those devices to a gaming console?

Because shitty iPhone games do not equal real games? How well has N4S:U done on the iPhone? Because it got horrible reviews and was widely panned by gaming critics. Most of the Apple iPhone games are pure shit. They are half-assed, bullshit clones of games from the 80's. If you really think playing games on an iPhone is at all comparable to playing on a console, then you're absolutely insane and don't have a clue what you're talking about.

4. Synching Between Console And iPhone: This seems like a no-brainer. iPhone users already sync their smartphones to a laptop for updates and purchases, so why not do the same with a gaming console? Games could be developed with special add-ons designed specifically for the iPhone or iPod touch. That way when a gamer has to leave the house, these side missions can be synched onto the iPhone, expanding Apple's gaming reach. Instead of riding the subway and listening to music or surfing the Web, users could continue to play the game they started back at home.

WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE iPHONE NOT BEING A FUCKING GAMING CONSOLE!? Do you have any idea how shitty an iPhone game would look on a regular 480x720 resolution TV screen, let alone a 720p one? It would look horrible! The hardware and control limitations between a console and a portable device like the iPhone are so vast that making the assumption that the two could in any way be linked is more than just asinine, it is borderline brain dead. Even if you try to make the link between the iPhone's motion control sand the Wii, it still doesn't fit. The Wii has a much richer control set feature than the iPhone.

This is seriously one of the most idiotic things I've ever heard. It would be like saying that an Etch-A-Sketch could potentially be used to write programming languages. It is so far fetched and unrealistic that it's baffling that anyone would even come up with it, let alone publish an article saying this.

5. Better Talent: An Apple-branded console would attract top-notch talent to develop games for the platform. Just look at the success the company has had with independent developers creating applications for the App Store. Face it, not every game needs to be another installment of the "Call Of Duty" series. Assuming the iTunes Store is used to distribute the games, the process of getting a product listed there should be similar to the existing policy -- perhaps even a little less draconian. For bigger releases, companies such as EA would be facing a tough crowd of Apple fans who would expect nothing but the highest quality in the games on the platform. That would challenge publishers to bring on smarter talent and create better games, further enriching the gaming community.

Holy fucking... Okay, how much money does Apple have? Not much. Really, not much. It's true, whether you want to believe it or not. They don't have shit compared to Microsoft or Sony. Even Microsoft has decided to stop having in-house developers. Sony has an incredibly small handful. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is Polyphony Digital, the makers of Gran Turismo. I don't think this writer understands how much money it takes to make a game, let alone start a whole new development softhouse. Here's a hint: AAA titles typically have budgets between $10-$30 million. That's just for the games. That doesn't include starting up the studios and everything else.

The process that developers go through with the iPhone app store is nothing like what goes on with major developers. The app store process works like this. Some guys makes something, submits it to Apple, Aple approves it or not, and then it's placed for sale or rejected. Major developers require licensing, SDKs, marketing, contractual obligations that actually mean something, and they don't want to sign on for some normalized bullshit that's the same with everyone. Do you think EA gets the same kind of contract that Atari gets? Hell no they don't!

The best part is the complete about-face this article does. So, not every game needs be Call Of Duty (I'm assuming they're referring to CoD4:MW, and not CoD:W@W, which sucked shit), but then says that Apple would require "top talent" that would "further enrich" the gaming industry. So, which one is it? Has he even bothered to look at most of the apps that sell on the iPhone? They're fart apps and stupid bullshit like that. Wow, talk about enrichment. Maybe I can get a "Pull My Finger" game on a console. That's be fucking sweet.

Really, all of this is just pure bullshit. This article has no idea what the fuck goes into gaming, and I didn't even start to bring out a lot of the other hurdles, namely development costs. The PS3 is still losing money on every console sold. MS is just now breaking into the black, and their console is already starting to age. If Apple were to try to get into the game console market, they'd have to be prepared to throw in a few billion dollars and be willing to lose it all.

Not only is the market already highly competitive, but where would Apple carve their niche? The kids market? Yeah fucking right. Nintendo has that on lockdown. The hardcore market? Sony and MS are already very aggressively waging a war in that market, good look trying to topple either one of them.

Finally, Apple would need to develop an SDK, get hardware manufacturers to work on specialty chipsets, amd be able to court third party developers to actually develop for their system. It's not as easy as "build it and they will come" which this article seems to think is the case. Developers already have a hard enough time trying to develop modern games for 4 systems (360, Wii, PS3, and PC), and adding a fifth isn't going to make things any easier. Not only that, but what kind of middleware will Apple sue? OpenGL like OSX? Because OPenGL vs DirectX is why you already see so few games for Mac.

This entire piece is nothing more than a pipe-dream, and not even a well though out one, at that. It has no basis in reality and doesn't even offer up a plan to the slightest bit of scrutiny. If Apple really thinks any of these reasons are why they should get into the gaming business, Apple better be prepared to go bankrupt, again, and pray that Microsoft will bail them out of such bankruptcy, again.

more...

Robotic arms controlled by human brain.

This is so fucking cool.

A wheelchair-mounted robotic arm controlled by thought alone has been created by scientists at the University of South Florida.

The device could give people with amytrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) or full body paralysis the ability to perform simple day to day functions that would otherwise be impossible.

"We aren't reading people's thoughts," said Redwan Alqasemi, a scientist at the University of South Florida who, along with Rajiv Dubey and Emanuel Donchin of USF, helped develop the software and hardware. "This is the first time a person with severe disabilities like ALS can perform daily activities for themselves."

Over time, patients with ALS slowly lose control over their muscle movement, losing the ability to move their arms, legs and eventually all muscles except those around the eye. Patients with ALS have fully functional brains, but have no way to express their thoughts.

EEG scans offer one way for patients with ALS to communicate with the outside world. By fitting patients with a head cap equipped with electrodes and filled with an electrically conductive gel, scientists can monitor particular kinds of electrical impulses coursing through the brain.

In this case, the scientists monitor a particular brain wave called P300, so-called because it lasts about one-third of a second. Reading P300 waves is basically like reading a person's thoughts, but only in the most coarse kind of way.

For the wheelchair-mounted robotic arm, the person in the wheelchair looks at directional arrows flashing across a small screen. When the arrow points in the direction that they want to go, their brain lights up on the EEG, and the wheelchair or robotic arm moves accordingly.

This doesn't happen at the speed of thought, however. Turning the wheelchair or moving the robotic arm takes about seven seconds as the arrows cycle across the screen. The wheel chair or arm continues in that direction until it receives a new command.

The wheelchair or arm could move faster, but it might not move as accurately, said Alaqsemi. The next step for the USF scientists is to refine the model's hardware and software, to increase speed and reliability while cutting down on weight.

"Every pound you take off the robotic arm is another pound of payload that can be lifted," said Alqasemi.

Right now the robotic arm can lift about four pounds, about the weight of a gallon of milk. In the next version Alqasemi hopes to double the payload.

Lifting a door handle or moving a gallon of milk may seem like simple tasks, but according to Jonathan Wolpaw, who builds brain computer interfaces at the Wadsworth Center in New York, using thought-controlled devices is harder than simply just thinking.

"Our normal muscle movements require practiced skill and control," said Walpaw. "Controlling brain activity is also a skill that requires practice."

Reading P300 brain waves is a good system, argues Walpaw, because it doesn't take a lot of practice to train the brain. With only one WMRA built so far and no current plans to commercialize the design, not many people will get the chance for their brain to learn the new skill. But when commercial models appear in several years, even slow brain computer interfaces could make the impossible, possible.

"It would allow patients with severe disabilities the ability to control their own environment and have some form of independent mobility," said William Heetderks, Director of the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering. "It would be very valuable to these individuals."
- Source

more...

Netflix to offer streaming-only subscription plan.

While I like the idea, I wonder about how feasible it is. America is woefully low-tech for such goals. We don't have a solid fiber-optics network to provide such massive bandwidth that so many entrepreneurs want to use for business models. Streaming TV sounds nice, but it's going to take a huge toll on ISPs. And don't plan on doing any online gaming or browsing while downloading these movies. It will most likely take 30 minutes to an hour plus to download a movie, and that's using up all of your bandwidth. Also, there is only a very small percentage of Netflix's movies that even available for streaming. The good news is, this plan may help to boost the volume of available streaming movies.

Netflix Chief Financial Officer Barry McCarthy said on Wednesday it plans to offer its online streaming service on a stand-alone basis.

"We're likely to do that in the foreseeable future," McCarthy said at the Jefferies 5th annual Internet and Media conference in New York.

Netflix customers currently pay a fixed monthly subscription fee for access to the company's popular by-mail DVD service, with about 100,000 titles, as well as its online streaming service, with more than 12,000 titles available for viewing.

Netflix recently said it had hit 10 million subscribers, and said last month its stronger-than-expected quarterly results were propelled by growth in its Web video streaming service.

The Watch Instantly streaming service was first available only on personal computers, but is now offered through various devices, including the Roku set-top boxes, Microsoft Corp's Xbox, and LG Electronics Inc products.

McCarthy stressed the company still remains focused on providing a bundled offering, but said he understands that some viewers will find a stand-alone streaming service to be compelling, particularly as more compatible devices become prevalent.
- Source

more...

Express your inner Neo-Nazi with iTunes.

You ever wanted to just rock out and scream "white is right!" along with your favorite tunes? Wish there was an easier way to get your racist-jam fix than having to drudge your way on out to your favorite, obscure supremacy music store? Well, worry no more. You can get all the white power you need right on iTunes.

You're unlikely to find CDs by groups like Skrewdriver and Brutal Attack sold alongside the latest hits from Rihanna and the Jonas Brothers at your local retailer.

But the white-power punk bands' ballads are just a click away online.

With song titles like "Skinhead Superstar" and "White Warriors," white-power bands and other hate-music recording artists have found a home in places like Apple's iTunes and Amazon.com.

And with nothing more than a credit card, users can purchase — among other offerings — CDs by the proudly racist country singer Johnny Rebel, with songs such as the catchy little ditty "Coon Town."

Critics of hate music are appalled to see lyrics such as Skrewdriver's:

Are we gonna sit and let them come?
Have they got the White man on the run?
Multi-racial society is a mess
We ain't gonna take much more of this
What do we need?

or Johnny Rebel's:

Roses are red and violets are blue,
And n——-s are black.
You know thats true.
But they dont mind, cause What the heck?!
You gotta be black to get a welfare check!

But there is a market for it — which leads to the question of whether online music retailers should screen what they sell, or if it should be up to the buyer to decide what's suitable.

"There's always somebody out there who thinks something is politically incorrect," said Jeff Schoep, head of the National Socialist Movement and its affiliated record label, NSM88 Records. "But this is America. We have freedom of speech and expression. If people want to express political messages in song, they should be able to do that."

Schoep, who said his label has seen a recent "uptick" in sales despite a worsening economy, said the songs distributed by his label are no different from those of more popular acts like Rage Against the Machine.

"If you're going to be able to carry that hard-core Marxist stuff, what is the problem with someone saying, 'White pride, worldwide?'" Schoep asked.

"You can't have a double standard. If pro-white voices can't be heard, what about rap artists who say it's time to kill cops and drag them through the streets?"

Patti Smyth, a spokeswoman for Amazon.com, said the offensive tracks were offered by unidentified third-party companies.

She declined to elaborate and did not return repeated requests for comment on any plans to limit sales of objectionable music.

Apple declined comment.

Nora Flanagan, a spokeswoman for the activist group Turn It Down, which lobbies against objectionable music, said the companies have every right — and a social obligation — to remove the songs from being sold on their sites.

Citing a "tag system" on the retail sites that links them to mainstream bands like U2 and Motorhead, she said the purveyors of hate music have benefitted greatly from their online exposure.

"The racist right is really taking advantage of the room Amazon is giving them," Flanagan said. "We're not talking about a First Amendment issue here. They're a business and they have a right not to sell whatever they want. It's a business decision they're making ...

"It's absolutely their right to sell it," she said, "but it could be their choice not to — if they wanted to take a stand on it."

Schoep, who claims pro-white music is "going more mainstream," said removing bands like Skrewdriver and Brutal Attack would be "un-American" and would amount to outright censorship.

"The minute they start censoring, then we're not living in America anymore," he told FOXNews.com. "If people don't like it, don't listen to it, or don't buy it. But some people out there want it."

Chris Kennedy, director of the Cato Institute's Project on Criminal Justice, said the term censorship is "thrown around" too loosely.

"Censorship should only be applied when the government tries to censor someone," he said. "Otherwise, we're just talking about the choices that entrepreneurs and businesses make in a free society. When [companies] decide they're not going to accept their product, that's not censorship — that's just choices that they make."
- Source

At first, I thought this hard to believe. So, I checked both the iTunes store and Amazon. Amazon's claim that they do not directly sell racist music, like Skrewdriver's, is complete bullshit. You can even get Amazon to gift wrap it for you. And it's there on Apple's iTunes store, too. Shit, you can even find Skrewdriver at Microsoft's Zune site. Nice to know that you no longer have to go to your out-of-the-way Neo-Nazi record store to get this shit, you can just download it from your favorite mainstream music provider.

more...

Square-Enix coming to Steam.

I'm not sure exactly what this means, as Square-Enix hasn't exactly brought many titles to the PC. Maybe this means that more will be coming to the PC, though?

Adding to their ever-expanding list of publishers, Valve today announced a deal with Square Enix to bring their PC games to download service Steam.

Beginning April 9, The Last Remnant will be available for purchase via Steam. After the action role-playing game hits the service Square will continue to add to its roster of games on Steam. Prices will be announced down the line.

"We are excited to offer the millions of Steam customers online access to Square Enix titles beginning with our major action RPG, THE LAST REMNANT," said John Yamamoto, president and chief executive officer of Square Enix Inc. and Square Enix Ltd. "Square Enix is committed to delivering the best quality titles to PC gamers and distribution on Steam is one of the many steps we are taking to increase accessibility for fans in North America and PAL territories."

"Square Enix is a fantastic addition to the Steam lineup," said Jason Holtman, director of business development at Valve. "We are thrilled that Square Enix chose to bring its diverse portfolio of titles to Steam and know that our customers will be ecstatic to hear this news."

Seriously Microsoft, just ditch Games For Windows Live and go with Steam already. It's inevitable.
- Source

I couldn't agree with that last statement more. There is no need for Games For Windows Live. It took them forever to make it even slightly worthwhile, and even then it's still not very good. Paying for a Gold subscription was a joke at the very onset, and it took MS forever to realize that and reverse their decision. The only thing that I do like about GFWL is the interface. It's much more polished looking than Steam's interface, which is kind of baffling. I mean, all Steam needs is some people to get cracking on making some decent skins in Photoshop. It's not hard to do, and their current skins look like fucking Win98 shit. Other than that, Steam has GFWL so beat that it almost makes me want to call the cops. There is honestly nothing that GFWL delivers that Steam does not have. Honestly, MS, just give up the ghost and accept that Steam has you completely whipped.

more...

Google throws in on EU Microsoft anti-trust suit.

Personally, I think this is massive bullshit. No one uses Opera because it fucking sucks. Seriously, it fucking sucks donkey balls. A lot of people use Internet Explorer because it's a robust browser. It's not as bad as many claim it is, but I personally don't use. I'm a big fan of Firefox. I tried Google's Chrome browser, and I found it very "meh." Sure, it's usable, but it's not quite as rich as Firefox 3. Safari, is okay, but I would never recommend it due to its lack of phishing filters. Maybe the upcoming Safari 4 will include phishing filters, but I'm not entirely sure. Besides, after dealing with the massive amount of bloat that iTunes is, I'm not sure I'm willing to give Apple much a chance on Windows apps.

I still don't really get what the fuss is about. How in the fucking hell does Google think they're instantly get massive market penetration when they roll out a mediocre browser that is already being hotly competed by Firefox and Internet Explorer? And Opera needs to shut the fuck up and sit down. They haven't been relevant since the days of Prodigy.

Google Inc. has added its voice to the case against Microsoft Corp. as the European Commission probes antitrust charges related to the software giant's Internet Explorer browser.

"Google believes that the browser market is still largely uncompetitive, which holds back innovation for users," Sundar Pichai, Google vice president product manager, wrote in a blog post on Tuesday.

Google (GOOG, Fortune 500) introduced the Chrome browser last year, which has taken little market share.

The Internet company joins the Mozilla foundation, producer of the Firefox Web browser, and Norway's Opera, a privately held company. Google adds the voice of a significant and well-financed player in the case against Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500).

In January, European regulators brought formal charges against Microsoft for abusing its dominant market position by bundling its Internet Explorer Web browser with its Windows operating system, which is used in 95% of the world's personal computers.

If the preliminary views expressed in the EC's Statement of Objections are confirmed, Microsoft could be subject to a fine and an order requiring it to cease bundling its browser and operating system.

In 2007, European Union courts upheld the European Commission's finding that Microsoft violated antitrust law by bundling its Windows Media player with the Windows operating system. It also found Microsoft used illegal tactics against RealNetworks (RNWK) real player.

The company has been fined more than $2 billion for its violations and for failing to carry out remedies imposed by the Commission.

In 2000, a U.S. judge decided that Microsoft had broken the law after it combined its Internet Explorer browser and the Windows operating system.
- Source

So, can someone tell me why Apple isn't getting in hot shit? They don't bundle any non-Apple apps with their OS, just like MS doesn't bundle any non-MS apps with theirs. And if MS were to bundle non-MS apps, you would just hear more people whine and complain that installation takes too long, there's too many menus, it's too complicated, too bloated, etc, etc.

Again, if we're going to be fair about this, if MS is to be forced to include 3rd party apps with their OS install, so should Apple.

more...

Bioshock-esque case mod is huge! And awesome!

Apparently this thing is over 8 feet tall. That's a bit bigger than I'd want to ever have my computer case be, but if I was running a server rack I'd totally case it in this thing. It looks like something out of Bioshock with its abundant use of copper coils and old-timey gauges. And if all that by itself isn't cool enough, it has a bunch of green LEDs to glow in the dark!

Despite being a bit impractical due to its huge size, this case mod is still abso-freaking-lutely amazing.

Pics after the jump.

more...

Gabe Newell's DICE keynote address.

Ah Gabe Newell. Smart man. I'm not a 100% fan of Valve, I never really liked Half Life all that much and didn't really care that much for Half Life 2 either. I do like Steam, though. It's a great service, definitely the best Digital Distribution Service (DDS) out there, and it's wonderful feature list just keeps expanding. (a web browser while playing games? oh hell yeah!) I also highly applaud Valve's long-term patching and free DLC support for their games like Team Fortress 2.

Back to the topic on hand, Gabe Newell was scheduled to give a keynote address at this year's Design Innovate Communicate Entertain (DICE) conference in Las Vegas. The address was entitled, "Entertainment as a Service" and dealt with a lot of great elements regarding piracy, which has been a very big issue with the widespread availability of high-speed internet access.

Keep in mind this was done by G4 as a moment-by-moment posting, so that's why it may seem kind of odd and unprofessional.

Gabe beileves the old way of entertainment: Indirect customer relationships, product orientation. The new way of entertainment now: Direct customer relationships, service orientation. Valve aims to touch its customers in some way every three weeks, not every three years when a new game is shipped.

Through this perspective, Gabe and Valve have observed the following:

• 30-year old songs with a little service (Rock Band, Guitar Hero) generate huge profits
  
• Pirates are ahead not just on price, but on service
  
• DRM appears to increase, not decrease piracy
  
• Privacy and transparency
  
• Shrinking distance to customer empowers content creators

Gabe doesn't believe that pirates are really seeking to get things for free. They are people that spend thousands on their PC's and Internet service. He believes that pirates are beating companies on service. He cites TV shows not available in certain parts of the world. Pirates have TV shows up on the Web minutes after they have aired.

DRM decreases service value for customers. It also makes pirated copies of games look more appealing. Anecdotal evidence appears to suggest that DRM is increasing and not decreasing piracy.

As far as privacy goes, Gabe believes that people are willing to give up system and personal information if they feel it's being used to get a better service. Steam's hardware survey is an example of this. Rather than spying on users for nefarious reasons, Gabe believes things like its hardware survey helps with better sales of products and service. As long as companies are transparent, he feels that customers will accept this.

As far as the shrinking distance between Valve and its customers, Valve didn't find any service in existence so it made its own: Steam.

Steam stats time:

• 20 million people connected
  
• All major PC publishers on board
  
• 350+ of the best PC games
  
• Worldwide in 21 languages
  
• 100% Year-over-year growth since 2004

There are competitors, but they are all trying to do the same thing. These include services like Games for Windows Live, Direct2Drive, iPhone App Store, Stardock Impulse. Gabe was very modest , not mentioning that Steam is wildly more successful than any of the other services. But that's why he's giving the keynote. No need to brag.

From a customer's perspective, they want things like portability of content and files, anti-cheating, auto-updating & version control, new games, old games, indie games, 24/7 availability, and community tools. Yep, Steam has all of those. I still think the groups need an upgrade, but they are definitely functional enough to get the job done.

From a business perspective, developers and publishers want piracy protection, keeping customers current with the latest version, direct communication to customers for marketing and promotion, instant sales and promotional performance data, and being able to take advantage of new business models like DLC, subscriptions, and micro-transactions.

With Team Fortress 2, Valve shipped the game as a service and not a product. Valve uses "updates" to create more value for its customers. Updates can be bug fixes, new achievements, maps, and unlocks. There have been 63 updates to Team Fortress 2 since its release. This is also why the PC version is so much better than the Xbox 360 version.

Gabe now speaks about how important Web content creators and blog writers are for the future of games. It brings a tear to my eye! They'll be able to help market products with authority and knowledge.

Gabe brings up an excellent point that successful entertainment companies will realize that fans of properties like the property, not the specific product. They are Harry Potter fans, not just fans of the books. The team that's making the TF2 character videos (which are awesome!) are going to be working on comics.

He's now going showing the Sniper short film. Yay, I get to laugh all over again!

"It works because the people that built that [video] are the same people that built the game."

Valve has been using its existing customers to gain new customers. "There's no way to go into Circuit City to pick on the dead" and get a free weekend. Ouch, Gabe. Ouch.

Valve has seen a great turnaround rate on guest passes. Friends invite their friends to play a game they already own. Game invites that also walk a gamer through a purchase process are also effective.

Time to look at the sales of Team Fortress 2 to see the impact of the updates on revenue. Holy s#!%. The sales spike by huge amounts everytime there's a sale or major update. Steam sales went up 106% after a free update. Player minutes went up by 105%. Gifting has thrown a 71% sales increase. Surprisingly, sales from retail stores also went up by 28%. Finally, it saw 75% increase in new users. Knock knock. Who's there? Steam. Steam who? Steam is so successful it hurts.

Price changes in the retail world don't allow for much freedom. Steam and other services offer flexability. In fact, users apparently respond to pricing discounts within five minutes.

Valve was afraid that too many price changes would "confuse and anger" customers. It isn't the case.

Last weekend, Valve decided to do an experiment with Left 4 Dead. Last weekend's sale resulted in a 3000% increase over relatively flat numbers. It sold more last weekend than when it launched the game. WOW. That is unheard of in this industry. Valve beat its launch sales. Also, it snagged a 1600% increase in new customers to Steam over the baseline.

Worried retailers, fear not. The weekend sale didn't canabalize sales from retail. In fact, they remained constant. Well, constant isn't a 3000% increase, but it's still pretty good, right?

Looking at a third-party game, it saw increases of 36,000% with a weekend sale. Oh. Em. Gee. Okay, Gabe is starting to convince me that PC at retail is going to die very soon.

Oh, more data. I'm such a data nerd. Here's some data!

During the Holiday sales:

• 10% sale = 35% increase in sales (real dollars, not units shipped)
  
• 25% sale = 245% increase in sales
  
• 50% sale = 320% increase in sales
  
• 75% sale = 1470% increase in sales

At 75% off, they are making 15% more money than they were at full price.
- Source

more...

Quake Live open beta coming soon.

How soon? Real soon. Like, Feb 24th soon.

In case you don't know, Quake Live is basically just Quake 3: Arena that runs in a browser. Well, sort of. You have to download the client, and it uses your browser as an interface to launch the matches. Since it's basically just Quake 3, it should be able to run great on just about any machine, even some of the old clunkers out there. Still, you may want to check the specs just to make sure.

I've been in the closed beta for a few weeks now, and it's pretty fun. It's weird because I keep having flashbacks to old Quake 3 maps. While the maps for Quake Live are similar, they are also slightly different. The jump pads look different and the layouts are tweaked a bit. Overall, though, it plays just like good old Quake 3.

Quake Live is completely free and the open beta is just what it means. A beta that is open to the public. Servers that I saw were available in Virginia, Washington state, Texas, New York, Chicago, and California. Which is good, because it means that you'll be able to find servers with good pings pretty much no matter where you live. So, go ahead, create an account and get fragging!

QAUKE LIVE


nothing after the jump

more...

UPDATE: Facebook turns about-face on ToU changes.

Seems that facebook has changed its mind about their addition. This wasn't done altruistically, either. It was done after a lot of pissed off people got, well, really pissed off. And who could blame them. Despite saying that they would never ever, ever do anything shady with anyone's content, they eventually felt it necessary to revers their update.

After the jump are the stages of anger, pleading, and finally reconciliation.

ANGER

Tens of thousands of Facebook users are protesting new policies that they say grant the social-networking site the ability to control their information forever, even after they cancel their accounts.

Facebook's new terms of use, updated Feb. 4, largely went unnoticed until the popular consumer rights advocacy blog Consumerist.com pointed out the changes Sunday.

That prompted a clarification from Facebook's founder, Mark Zuckerberg, although the new terms remain in force. Zuckerberg told users in a blog post Monday that "on Facebook, people own their information and control who they share it with."
- Source

PLEADING

Just trust us.

That's what Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg told the estimated 175 million users of his social-networking Web site Monday afternoon after the company had stepped into yet another bad-publicity mess of its own creation.

Basically, Zuckerberg told Facebook devotees that he'd never, ever do anything bad with their posted content — even though the user agreement says he's perfectly entitled to do so.

"The trust you place in us as a safe place to share information is the most important part of what makes Facebook work," he wrote in a reassuring-sounding message on the official Facebook blog. "Our goal is to build great products and to communicate clearly to help people share more information in this trusted environment."
- Source

RECONCILIATION

Under fire from tens of thousands of users, the social networking site Facebook said early Wednesday it is reverting to its old policy on user information -- for now.

The site posted a brief message on users' home pages that said it was returning to its previous "Terms of Use" policy "while we resolve the issues that people have raised."
- Source

more...

Best security idea ever? I think so. And internet justice is sweet.

In a bit of a twisted tale from the Consumerist blog (which I have recently become enamored with (in case you can't tell from the other stories posted)), a man lost his iPhone. "So what?" you might say. Well, what happened afterwards is the most genius low-tech security method I've ever known. And a wonderful tale of internet justice and retribution.

Do you know this guy? [ed. photos removed] He seems to be in the possession of the iPhone that Dino's dad lost. Before losing the phone, his dad set up a rule where any email sent from the phone blind-cc'ed his personal email address, which we think is a pretty brilliant low-tech security solution for tracking down a lost/stolen phone or laptop.

Was hoping you could give me some advice. My dad (64) lost his iphone today. He went to the At&T store and had the service stopped and got a SIM card to put into his old cell phone.

Well he checked his aol account tonight and saw pictures of some guy holding an iphone up and taking pics in the mirror. My dad had it set up that he was BCC on emails sent out on the iphone.

We emailed the the recipient of the emails to ask who was in these pictures and that we would like the phone back. He hasn't responded back yet.

What should we do? I think in the morning my dad will file a report with the police. I tried googling the email address ([redacted]@hotmail.com) and no luck with that. Do you have any other advice we should do to get back the phone?
I posted the pics on flickr. If this is seen widely on the Internet do you think it would shame the guy into give us back the phone?

- Dino A.
Paramus , NJ

If he found the phone and didn't immediately bother looking through it for a way to contact the owner, we imagine he plans on keeping it. If it was stolen, we're pretty certain shame will not help. But who knows?

One guy whose Sidekick got stolen was able to track down the culprits because they took pictures of themselves on it. He set up a site posting the pictures and an ad-hoc internet manhunt formed and eventually they caught the guy.

On the off chance this was all a good-natured mixup (or he bought it used and didn't know it was stolen/lost), we'll post your story.

You might want to email him again with a detailed description of what was on the phone, as well as any identifying marks and likely places where it was lost or stolen, so that he knows you're not a scammer yourself.

Oh, and before anyone does or says anything too douche-y about the guy in the photos, remember that we really don't know how he came about it.

- Source

Turns out the Consumerist fanbase was able to find the guy who stole the phone with a mere 55 minutes.

Wow, that was impressive! In less than one hour after we posted about Dino's dad's lost iPhone, Consumerist readers were able to locate his Facebook and Hi5 accounts, track down his name and home address, and even get him to respond via email—something Dino and his dad weren't able to do yesterday. Dino just wrote us and said "Michael Smith/Emerson" contacted him and promised to return the phone tomorrow.

OMG you guys are the best. Guess what? The guy called and will give my dad his phone back tomorrow. He saw this blog and asked to take down the pictures. Thank you very much for your help. The power of the internet is amazing. I will take down his pics on Flickr. I am glad this guy is doing the right thing and returning lost property. Thank you very much Consumerist! You have made my dad's day.

Dino adds, "He said he found it in a parking lot, which is probably what happened... possibly fell off a belt holster my dad uses." But here's something that's more interesting, especially in light of the kid's "I was going to return it" defense:

My dad also had a sticker on the back of the phone with his home phone number on it. But looks like the kid removed it before he took the self pics (something that someone who was going to return a phone from the get go wouldn't have done).

Anyway thanks again for your help, i was telling my dad he's famous now. But i'll let you know once my dad get the phone back tomorrow.
- Source

The iPhone was eventually returned and internet justice has done its work. Take that bad guys!

more...

Beware! What you post on Facebook. It doesn't belong to you anymore.

I don't use Facebook, hell I barely use MySapce. I just don't care enough about the whole "cyber social networking" thing enough. I don't have a brand or anything that I want to try to sell or promote. Even this blog is purely for me, and I don't make any money in any shape or fashion, hence why there's no advertisements. I do, however, have a few works of mine in my MySpace picture gallery and news of Facebook's updated ToS (Terms of Use) makes me wonder if perhaps I should consider removing that content.

Facebook's terms of service (TOS) used to say that when you closed an account on their network, any rights they claimed to the original content you uploaded would expire. Not anymore.

Now, anything you upload to Facebook can be used by Facebook in any way they deem fit, forever, no matter what you do later. Want to close your account? Good for you, but Facebook still has the right to do whatever it wants with your old content. They can even sublicense it if they want.

You hereby grant Facebook an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to (a) use, copy, publish, stream, store, retain, publicly perform or display, transmit, scan, reformat, modify, edit, frame, translate, excerpt, adapt, create derivative works and distribute (through multiple tiers), any User Content you (i) Post on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof subject only to your privacy settings or (ii) enable a user to Post, including by offering a Share Link on your website and (b) to use your name, likeness and image for any purpose, including commercial or advertising, each of (a) and (b) on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof.

That language is the same as in the old TOS, but there was an important couple of lines at the end of that section that have been removed:

You may remove your User Content from the Site at any time. If you choose to remove your User Content, the license granted above will automatically expire, however you acknowledge that the Company may retain archived copies of your User Content.

Furthermore, the "Termination" section near the end of the TOs states:

The following sections will survive any termination of your use of the Facebook Service: Prohibited Conduct, User Content, Your Privacy Practices, Gift Credits, Ownership; Proprietary Rights, Licenses, Submissions, User Disputes; Complaints, Indemnity, General Disclaimers, Limitation on Liability, Termination and Changes to the Facebook Service, Arbitration, Governing Law; Venue and Jurisdiction and Other.

Make sure you never upload anything you don't feel comfortable giving away forever, because it's Facebook's now.

Oh, you also
agree to arbitration, naturally. Have fun with that.
- Source

What does this mean? Let's say I upload some really snazzy graphics that I've done that are completely my own IP. Facebook can take those images and use them in an advertisement. Or they can use them in a layout scheme, or they can use it for... well, anything really. And do I get any payment or even acknowledgment for my works being used? No. No, I don't. To take it further, let's say you're a band. You have some tunes on Facebook to promote yourself. Facebook can use your music in a commercial and is not required to give you anything.

Facebook's ToS has, apparently, always been like this. However, the kicker is, the new ToS makes it so that even if you delete your content, FAcebook owns it. And they own it forever.

more...

Apple wants to fine and jail iPhone jailbreakers.

Jailbreaking. It might conjure the image of Andy Dufresne tunneling out of Shawshank Prison, arising victoriously in the pouring rain as lightning thunders above, but it has a much different meaning when applied to phones. What it means is, if you want to install a third party application, use a different wallpaper, and/or add a ringtone, you must break through Apple's protection scheme.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has delivered a petition to congress asking for a law to protect those that "jailbreak" their phones. Apple, in its usual "any color as long as it's black" approach has filed an objection. Not only do they not want you to be able to install whatever you want, they also want fines of "up to $2,500" per act, meaning that adding a wallpaper, ringtone, and two third party apps could net you up to $10,000 in fines. Not to be outdone by itself, Apple has also recommended that jail time of up five years for those that break those phones for financial gain. Meaning that if someone charged money for a third party app or a program that enabled jailbreaking iPhones, they could be sentenced to real prison time, where jailbreaking isn't quite as easy and can result in actual death.

The big question, of course, is who really owns your damned phone? Apple says that bypassing their software restrictions messes with the "chain of trust" they've set up and screws up their "ecosystem." The EFF counters that if you apply Apple's argument to another industry, it falls apart:

One need only transpose Apple's arguments to the world of automobiles to recognize their absurdity. Sure, GM might tell us that, for our own safety, all servicing should be done by an authorized GM dealer using only genuine GM parts. Toyota might say that swapping your engine could reduce the reliability of your car. And Mazda could say that those who throw a supercharger on their Miatas frequently exceed the legal speed limit.

On a more serious note, they point out:

But the courts have long recognized that copying software while reverse engineering is a fair use when done for purposes of fostering interoperability with independently created software, a body of law that Apple conveniently fails to mention.

The EFF has set up a "Free Your Phone" website where you can follow the case as it moves before the Library of Congress: www.freeyourphone.org.
- Source

Now, I know I'm hard on Apple, probably a little bit unfairly at times. That's because I expect a company that holds itself as so much better for the consumer to, you know, actually stand by its words. It's also because Apple has a long history of bullshit, such as claiming that it owns the copyright to the mouse, that it owns the rights to the "trash bin" concept in software, and Jobs' long-time stance against unapproved third party applications for the Mac and charging for their SDK. In fact, it was the stance of the latter that catapulted Windows into being the dominant OS that it is today. Good job, Steve!

Within all due credit, I love the ease of use and the functionality of OS X, although I do find its platform to be rather shallow at times and not particularly useful for mass data storage and retrieval. I love its embedded Post Script and its wonderful capability of handling fonts. So, I guess it would be fair to say that I love OS X, but hate Apple. And this recent move by them only seeks to cement the views of so many detractors.

more...

Half Life 2: Escape From City-17. A short movie.

This is pretty impressive. Even more so considering it was done for a measly $500. It's only a little over 5 minutes long, but is rather remarkable in its quality.







^ HL2: Escape From City-17 (a fan-made short movie) ^

nothing after the jump

more...

FEAR 2 demo is fucking sweet.

It is.

Downloaded the demo on Steam. You can also get the demo from the linked website. It's coming to PS3 and 360, so console people will get to enjoy FEAR 2 the same time as us PC folks. Sorry Wii people, this is not for you.

Anyways, the motion blur plus hi-res textures made my card chunder a bit, but the game looks fantastic. Even on medium settings it looks impressive. Much like the original FEAR and Crytek's Farcry and Crysis, the sequel looks to show what a game engine is capable of.

Personally, I love this stuff. And not just FEAR (it was a fucking awesome game) and FEAR 2, but the whole engine war and the uncanny valley. CoD4 was a phenomenal game, and not just because of its story, but also because of its engine. The depth of field blurring that was used was some of the more realistic I've seen. Gears of War 2 implemented depth of field blur as well, though I think it functions a bit poorly. The use of motion blur in FEAR 2 adds such a great deal of realism to the visual effects that at times the game looks almost eerily life-like. Which is made even more unnerving when you're wandering the corridors of an elementary school as desks and chairs move by themselves, the cries of a woman sobbing rings through your ears, and you can hear your heart pounding loudly through your speakers.

Story-wise, its the same-old. It's Suspense/Horror/Survival. Alma's back and she's fucking up shop. The funny thing is, your teammates... well, I don't wanna ruin it. It's pretty funny and leaves you shouting, "what the hell do you think you're doing!? Don't do that!" The gunplay is still incredible. You can shoot people in half and blow off limbs. The particle effects are amazing. The lighting is moody, creepy, sparse, and your flashlight helps a lot less than in the first FEAR. Plenty of gore spatter on the walls,floors, ceilings. Found a dismember head in a toilet. The music actually seems a lot creepier, as if that was possible. Slow-mo is still ass-tons of fun and is actually needed now. The mech combat was incredibly fun, but felt a bit overpowered. Kind of how the Death From Above mission felt in CoD4.

My only complaint about the demo would be that its too damn short.

more...

Dawn of War II multiplayer beta access.

If you're into RTS games, you should know about Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War. If you're a fan of Games Workshop, especially the Warhammer 40k franchise, either you've played this or missed out on one of the best tabletop to video game translations ever to be based on a GW license.

Anyways, the multiplayer beta for Dawn of War II is out on Steam right now. But there's a catch. You must have purchased Dawn of War: SoulStorm (the final expansion for DoW). The good news is that you can buy SoulStorm for a whopping 75% off. At $7.50, it is simply a steal. Throw in the DoW Platinum Edition and you got the whole set.

Unfortunately, neither DoW, DoW II, nor Steam are Mac compatible, so you'll have to load Windows through BootCamp. I don't think you can use Crossover, either. DoW requires DirectX 9 and (I think) Crossover only emulates up to DirectX 8. So, it's Windows or bust.

I downloaded the beta just last night and haven't gotten a chance to play it yet. I'll post up my impressions after I get done purging the unclean.

"A good soldier obeys without question. A good officer commands without doubt."

Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War II 'Multiplayer' trailer HD

^ DoW II multiplayer trailer ^

Warhammer 40k: Dawn of War 2 'Space Marines Multiplayer' trailer

^ DoW II SPace Marines multiplayer

Warhammer 40k: Dawn of War 2 'Enemies' trailer HD

^ DoW II "Enemies" trailer ^

Warhammer 40k: Dawn of War 2 'Space Marines' trailer HD

^ DoW II "Space Marines" trailer ^

more...

Robocop realer than you think.

Remember that scene in Robocop 2 where they showed the test footage of all the Robocop prototypes that didn't make it? Well, remember how they kept going crazy and attacking the scientists or killing themselves? Turns out similar incidents are no longer just a piece of fiction.

P.W. Singer, author of Wired For War, was on NPR's Fresh Air today, and he detailed just such an account. During one test, a machine equipped with an automatic machine gun turned on and, while being shown to the VIPs, automated and began aiming at the gun at the VIPs. Fortunately, it wasn't loaded. However, in South Africa, a similar such machine was being shown. These onlookers were not so lucky. The machine automated and began opening fire, killing nine people.

Other interesting tidbits Mr Singer brings up is a scientist who said that he doesn't see any legal or ethical problems with using machines in war, unless the machine repeatedly keeps killing the wrong people. In which case it is a recall issue, and still not a legal or ethical issue.

Overall, the whole piece was incredibly intriguing and should appeal to a wide range of interests. You can listen to the stream by going here and clicking the "Listen Now" link at the top left of the article. I believe the player requires Adobe Flash.

more...

KoTOR MMO! Yes! 11A6MK87LLP30VDF54-E!

YES!

^^ hit the link ^^

NOW

vv and/or watch below vv

nothing after the jump

more...