Destiny: Is this the future of gaming?

Destiny is a game recently released across various consoles and places the first person shooter genre into the role playing and MMO genres.

As much as I believe that as time goes by, we will see almost all genres adopt into an MMO-like standpoint, Destiny seems to do this in a rather shabby fashion. I detail some of the reasons below:

Question 1: Do you get rewarded?

Yes you do, with new gear and guns, however the amount of time you need to invest to get the greater gear can be considerable.

Question 2: How is the grind?

There is no question that the grind is certianly apparent in this game. Especially when trying to accrue vanguard marks (as opposed to crucibal marks). Vanguard marks mainly require you to play strikes, which are like dungeons in regular MMOs. However, because there are only a very short supply of strikes, this results in excruciatingly repetitive gameplay. On the  other hand, if you like competitive multiplayer, I would find the crucibal marks a lot easier to accrue.

Question 3: Is this truly next-gen?

Yes, it looks pretty, however with its repetitive gameplay, lack of different things to do, and rather long loading screens (even on the PS4 and Xbox One), this is not what is expected these days.

Overall, I have spent over thirty hours playing and have reached level 26 currently. So as much as I feel the gameplay is repetitive, ofcourse it is still rather addictive.

The Last Generation?

With the added functionality within the consoles to be devices that are more accustomed to fulfil multiple media needs, rather than just gaming. Plus with the graphics becoming ever more beautiful. Is there a limit to how many generations of console there can be before they merely start are just re-configure the same formula but only with a few minor differences? (A few examples come to mind).

I think this will surely be the way of the future, as everything has its limit. 

Although perhaps the hardware will not be the focus going forward. Perhaps this will be the last generation of consoles that will actually have a physical unit. With services like steam, I believe it may be much more likely that both Microsoft and Sony will release streaming services (perhaps powered by a relatively low priced device, or maybe none at all). Streaming will also mean the bulk of the power is held remotely, negating the need a high-powered console of your own.

It's a sad thought but I think its an inevitable one. The excitement about buying a new console may be a feeling that will soon be no more.

The Imminent Debate: Xbox One or Playstation 4?

We all know that we are on the brink (if not already fully in the midst) of a battle between the Xbox One and the Playstation 4. Details are still hazy at the moment but which one are you leaning towards at the moment? Lets see what the current state of play is for both consoles at this time.

Xbox One

- Each disc will hold its own licence. This means that it will be harder to use the same disc on another console or effectively buy a used game. The only option to take in this instance would be to make use of their Microsoft's 'transfer system'
- The system resembles a VCR in my opinion (good or bad?)
- The console must connect at least once a day in order for it to play games..
- Ballpark price of $500.00

Playstation 4

- At the current moment, details are much more limited.
- We don't know what the console looks like yet!
- Ballpark price of $450.00
- The Controller comes with a handy touch screen interface (i'm uncertian at this point how useful that will become)

 

Both are stating that the next generation is not all about the games (although they will be much more improved ofcourse) but it is about being an all-in-one entertainment centre; connecting the console with such things as television capability. Both consoles will also come with an Eye/Kinect device as standard, a nice little touch.

Personally, the Playstation 4 is winning this particular battle for me, although the details are still rather limited so you never know what may happen.

The Casual Gamer vs The Hardcore Gamer

When I say casual gamer, I don't particularly mean the gamer that plays games on easy, nor the gamer that only plays games every so often. I mean the gamer that plays casual games.

You know the ones, the oddly addicting ones, yet minimal skill or even attention is required for the most part. Games like FarmVille and Hay Day, amongst many others.

These games are becoming more and more popular and so more variations of the games themselves are joining the shelves. These micro-management, micro-transaction games seem to be opening up a whole new market to people who would otherwise not game at all.

My concern is simple. As there is so much money to be made in these games and they are a 'safe bet' (due to minimal development/creation costs) with maximum rewards. Does this foresee a bleak future for gaming as a whole?

From the onslaught of casual games a few years ago, we have also seen an onslaught of different factors being introduced to our mainstream (more hardcore) games. Things such as DLC and arcade games. The games themselves seem to be a little easier these days too.

The concern is, will the casual gaming market (with its high consumer volumes) have a negative effect on the core of the very gaming industry and 'dumb down' some of the games of the future. For the time being, it's great that gaming is spreading beyond the tight community it once was, but what does the future hold?

Xbox One: No 'always online' requirement.. for now.

So the Xbox One has been officially announced (from inside a tent) and it has brought with it some predictable expectations, but nothing too radical or game changing.

The main point to me was with the possibility of an 'always online' requirement. I'm glad they have taken the decision to not include this in their new console (maybe they had seen the roaring feedback following the release of SimCity and had changed their minds.. perhaps).

Personally however, isn't this merely postponing the inevitable? With the onslaught of DLC and continual game updates we receive whenever we don't play a game for a week or two. Plus the fact we can now buy full games online, without the need for a disc, it only seems like natural progression that 'always online' will one day be the norm. Whether this be your console, your mobile or perhaps even your touch screen coffee table..

It may not be a requirement now, but in the next generation it may well be. The Xbox Two and PS5 will likely adopt this, just as soon as the public comes around to the idea.

My Top 10 Games..

Ten games is quite hard to come up with. Games that come immediately to mind are:

1. Burnout Revenge (multiplayer was the best I've seen in a game to date, its just too bad it's not a popular game anymore.
2. Broken Sword.
3. Discworld
4. Super Mario: All Stars
5. Tomb Raider (although very much dated now.)
6. Half Life (series)
7. Rift
8. Simcity 4 (yet to play the new one)
9. Far Cry 3
10. Guild Wars 2 (subject to change)

From this, I feel I hold a lot of nostalgia for games gone by. What are yours?

Gamerscore or Trophies?

Which one is better. Do you like the thought of all of your achievements being held into an accumulative score, or do you prefer the random mix of bronze, silver and gold trophies which ultimately determine your current user level (I guess this is more similar to people who play MMOS or any game with an RPG development side to it).

Ultimately, as I dive between the two, I don't see that one is better than the other. I just see them as an additional element to each individual game that can make the game that little bit more addictive or replayable.

To consider trophies or a gamerscore as a reflection of your gaming prowess could be considered ignorant. You may completely dominate a certain genre of game, whilst not as much with another. Plus the fact that some achievements/trophies are insanely hard to get, or require you to invest a lot more time than you would ideally like to.

I think this system would work a lot better and mean a lot more to us if we actually saw real rewards from it (i.e: reach 20000 gamerscore or level 10 and we will give you *** store credit/points). This would create a whole new buzz around the system and make people, hopefully, invest more time in their games, rather than moving onto the next big thing.

Xbox vs PS3

The Xbox and PS3: Is there an overwhelming winner in the battle for console supremacy?

Personally, I think it ultimately comes down to which one you happen to like that tiny bit more at the time of purchase and it has nothing with regard to specifics. You may also happen to be a fan of one in particular from the start and that may be the sole reason you continue to stay loyal. Putting these aside, is there any real benefit from having one and not the other?

I'm currently having this debate as I own both consoles and am thinking about moving from the Xbox to the PS3. This is due to differing social circles and also the fact it's nice to have a change.

- Exclusivity. As much as a single game can affect your console preference, exclusivity is a minor concern for me. There are games which ofcourse are exclusive and remain that way for the duration of the series (i.e Gran Turismo, God of War), but the majority of games will now port over to the other console in due course. It just requires a little patience.

- Functionality. Both work in different ways, the PS3 has its scroll bar, whilst the Xbox has its tiles. Both work as they should with no issues. There is no plus from having one over the other. One thing I would note however is that the Xbox applies updates/downloads extremely quickly when comparing it to the speeds of the PS3. You may find yourself unable to play a PS3 game for an hour or more, merely because of a compulsory update that needs to be applied upon booting up.

- Graphics. Yes, yes. The PS3 trumps the Xbox ever so slightly, but its nothing that can't be overlooked at a glance.

With the PS4 and Xbox 720 just around the corner, the debate will likely become fearsome once again soon enough.

Is there any reason for debate. What ultimately made your decision?

Call Of Duty: What About Aliens?!

Call of Duty has been going for many many years now and there clearly isn't a financial, or any real reason to change a winning formula (rather than the imminent tweaks and little additions year on year).

I'm also aware that Call of Duty seems to like to keep itself within the possible (or at least the normal, bar the zombies addition of-course).

What would everyone's stance be on the Call of Duty franchise delving into a sci-fi feel. For instance, the inclusion of an alien invasion in one of their future games. Fighting am alien bombardment rather than merely just another country. A step too far perhaps?

Personally, I feel with all the maps and story lines, there is room for new originality. A company with such a large wallet, thanks to the success of this franchise, is a company that surely should be pioneering into new things. It should be one that is able to breed originality into the gaming industry. The smaller developers lack this as they cannot financially undertake such risk as its too consequential to their entire operation.

You may say that aliens is hardly a new and original concept in any regard. It's at least something new to try and something I think would be just as addictive, if not more so, with the Call of Duty mechanics running in the background.

PS4 Reveal.. With No Reveal..

So the PS4 was officially announced in a two hour conference where they went through various different aspects of the software, developers and its current possibilities. I guess it was no surprise that the console will be more focused on being a social gamer. With the ability to share direct from the controller and considering the onslaught of social media in recent years, this seems to be a natural progression.

The controller however was the only piece of hardware that was shown. Personally, one of the most intriguing aspects of the conference was to see what the console itself would look like. Yes, yes.. you may say it doesn't matter, who cares! Well I guess I shouldn't, but it feels that when you are revealing something, its important to see its face and know what it looks like in the flesh.

Why have they not revealed it? We're they running the demos from a metal shell of a console hid in the back because they currently don't have a final design? Unlikely.. considering the console has been in development for approximately five years.. I just find it very surprising.

Xbox 720 or PS4 (Names Subject To Change)

With the flurry of anticipation and speculation concerning the next-next gen of consoles. What are your thoughts and what would you like to see as standard in these consoles?

For instance, the PS4 controller is said to have a touch screen surface where the current start and select buttons are. Personally, I can't see is being of any use or any excitement to me, but you never know, is time next year I may never know how I played without it.. Somehow I doubt it.

Also, the Xbox 720 is going to be like having two PC's strapped together.. This certainly sounds powerful. Hopefully it won't be blighted by the same component issues from the original launch of the 360.

With a likely release date before Christmas 2013 and even more exciting, likely announcements before the end of February, it won't be long now under all the details come to light. Hopefully the price tag won't be too shabby either. Personally, picking between them both at the moment, I will stick to Xbox as its always been the better console in my opinion.