GameZone's Andrew Clouther writes: "The argument has been circling around for some time now: are video games are art? As a lifetime gamer and gaming journalist, I have an obvious bias; my answer is a distinct and boisterous “yes.” When a single person or a team collaborates on something you can look at, hear, and interact with -- something that moves you and makes you think -- and can extract an emotional reaction out of you -- yea, that’s art. Here’s the thing about video games, though; it is the only form of media capable of performing all those aspects at once while adding a new, unique layer that no other form of media can touch upon."
Twinfinite: “War may never change, but the prices of rare games do!”
"And lastly, famous Boston Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling helped to create the action-RPG’s setting. What’s really fascinating, though, is that the game was partially financed by taxpayers from Rhode Island (which allegedly lost the state millions of dollars). Yikes!"
1. Now infamous Schilling
2. No allegedly, it did. And they couldn't pay it back.
3. What really lost the money wasn't the SP release but the MMO they were working on. This was supposed to be an introduction into the MMO world.
I hate counting limited editions for these lists. I mean, they're made to be rare and expensive. It's far more interesting to hear about the NCAAs (even if most people know that one already) and the El Chavos than some massive hit that came with a $200 statue at retail.
Me too. Here's the best I can do:
El Chavo Kart $90.14
NCAA Football 14 $87.72
Spiderman: Edge of Time $75.94
Spiderman Web of Shadows $75.09
Spiderman: Shattered Dimensions $67.76
Wow, El Chavo Kart is not at all what I expected by the name. 100% looks like a Sackboy Kart game.
It's so odd that so many Spider-Man games are seemingly given lower print runs, even if they're not the best games.
Most Xbox games don’t hold as much value compared to other systems. Kameo, Blue Dragon, Last Remnant , and a handful or 2 of other games that I kept.
One of the biggest TV and movie tropes in the last decade has been the multiverse, the idea of exploring multiple dimensions to uncover alternate versions of existing ideas. From both a business and creative perspective, it makes sense why established franchises are shaking things up in this way.
However, there aren't many video games latching on to this trend, as rendering multiple worlds in real-time is a difficult feat and the medium is relatively young in comparison to its contemporaries, making crossover opportunities more difficult. Still, there are a few great titles that manage enough to overcome these challenges, and here are some of the best examples.
While I love someone mentioning Planescape, not really multiverse. Planes and dimensions, yes. But, they are typically their own locations and are very rarely tied to another 'verse' let alone another plane. The only things that are directly tied are the ethereal and material planes. Otherwise, they are dimensions created of their own design and goals by the creator/owner and not comprised of 'their own version of another dimension'.
See what a side-by-side comparison of Clockwork Revolution vs Bioshock Infinite looks like.
I don't think so.. I think we very often get great games, but occasionally developers outdo themselves and when we get a new great game we often "forget" the previous great game. It's true that indie games often are the ones with the innovation, but personally I play several extremely great games each year with depth, excellent gameplay and a stunning presentation.
I believe he is speaking in broader terms. It isn't much about the technology and how developers use the techniques of genres to convey a different experience, rather the way games are "evolving" if you will, with every generation. Who could've guessed several generations back that we will have an AI partner on our journey that would feel like an actual person rather than a computer guided robot? (also, the feeling of being alone once she is actually gone... that's really something to think about).
As for the comparison with books and movies, well, that's a sore point for fans of either, since they have their own unique advantages as well as disadvantages (though you have to admit that moves and books have been around for quite a while and there hasn't been much innovation in their department... while games have evolved to the point of ridiculous in the last 2 decades). From the three, I'd say video games being the youngest, still have most to prove to the masses if there is a chance to ever be taken as a serious future media.
I believe games have matured quite over the past few years. However, there is still a ton of improvement and innovation to be had, especially in the interaction department.
We need more developers like Ken Levine. Enough said.
It's a very basic first person shooter of wave after wave of enemys and your average indie game has more artistic credibility. Yet another terrible pretencous article.
No they are the exception to the rule. Notice how after years of COD and FPS galore. You play a story driven, remarkably detailed universe and all of a sudden its the poster boy for success. In reality ALL games should be like this. But lots of specialized gamers like their yearly offerings.
We should always expect quality over quantity.
Every Madden should be like a breath of fresh air, every COD should be a masterpiece, every game we play should be this way.
But not when publishers want to exploit our pockets.
So it is sad that we only get to experience games like B-Shock every 5-8 years.
Says a lot about the state of gaming and more importantly gamers.