Mark Isaacson vs The Virtual World

What if: Indie Developers Went Hollywood...

2011-11-19T08:07:00.000-08:00

I had a thought, large enough to use this blog again. The thought involved the recent demise of the Mega Man franchise, more importantly the lack of interest by Capcom to build the brand having cancelled two major titles in the series. My idea was, what if the big named publishers gave a major franchise to an indie developer? What results could occur?

Say, for example, if the ever talented Queensland team of Halfbrick Studios were given Mega Man? Take the clean and crisp stylings of Jetpack Joyride, Raskulls and Monster Dash and add a sprinkling of old school platforming, and I have no doubt in my mind that the Fruit Ninja creators could pull it off. I'd almost immediately suggest Sega to ask Halfbrick to work on the ever troubled Sonic franchise too, what with their love of fast paced characters and vibrant colours.

That made me think of other ideas for forgotten and troubled franchises. How about Id Software, who's troubled Rage hasn't exactly pulled off the same results as Doom and Quake before it. Perhaps if they called upon the services of Hard Reset developers Flying Wild Hog to build us a new Doom? Or better yet, how about a proper sequel to the Duke?

The 3DS could do with some added variety. Maybe someone like Cut the Rope creators ZeptoLab could remix Dr Mario or Puzzle League in 3D. And remember Sim City? I'd be more than happy to see a return to form of my favourite franchise under the guidance of Game Dev Story's Kairosoft. Here's one out of left field, a new 2D Castlevania by Playdead of Limbo fame. Maybe Lima Sky could revitalise Bubble Bobble.

And I couldn't possible pass up the opportunity to suggest the big one. Angry Birds' Rovio using their skills as creators of devilish puzzling birds on the next Final Fantasy. Just imagine throwing chocobos at giant dragons and taking them down with one perfectly placed shot.

Okay, maybe not that last one, but you get the idea. There's so many great ideas out there that have become big names out of barely there budgets, it negates any argument that could be made that we've run out of ideas for video games, and that sequels are taking up all the sales. Indie is where it's at, and if publishers are serious about brand image, they couldn't go far wrong with bringing in an outside source to spruce things up a bit.

Besides, who wouldn't want a new Mega Man?!

Avengers Almost Assembled!

2011-08-07T02:33:00.000-07:00

I'm back, and just in time to finally get some good old, Isaacson style (i.e. crazy) feedback on the last piece of the ultimate puzzle that is The Avengers. In other words, business as usual, here, now, thank you ... how are you?

*cringe*

So anyway, Captain America. What did I think? Probably not the strongest of the Marvel movies so far (that honour still sits with Iron Man, with Thor sitting just off the top). Don't look upon that as a 'it's crap' response though, far from it. Cap is a traditional action movie, right down to the good vs evil routine that has served so well in the past, but seemingly lost amongst the murk of teenage angst, slow motion bullet effects and *eek* vampire sparkles! This is old school, fitting since it's set during World War II, but old school none the less.

I will be honest though, I had more fun watching Evans play the tough guy role while in the weakling skin than Cap himself. The effects aren't perfect, but believable in giving him the persona of a barely there kid with dreams of making a difference, and it's these early scenes that set Cap apart from the rest of the franchise. Unlike Stark or Thor, Rogers is 'just a kid from Brooklyn', everything he does is improvised with guts and determination, not just powers and abilities. He's a real person who understands the power of emotion, hopefully that's something they continue to play up, especially with future entanglements with Tony Stark.

Speaking of, I was surprised how much they used Tony's father in this one, possibly to set up that angle of 'you knew my father?', but probably more to preserve where Robert Jnr.'s character got his unusual roots from. I do like that rounded character arc, come to think of it, instead of the older one who seemed to be more interested in building the future then suddenly becoming a loving father in a video clip.

The other roles don't seem to serve any more a purpose than to push Rogers along, which is a shame since almost every scene Tommy Lee Jones was in he stole it. I wonder if we may see more of him in other ways though, perhaps to help Cap get over his angst of leaving his own time behind.

There's a few things I didn't like, sadly, mostly to do with Bucky. The ever present sidekick he was in the comics gets little more than a passing 'like a brother' role here, effective at first but it should have been much more. What's worse, they've now killed the character off! Unless he somehow survives the events of this film, that means there won't be much in the way of the Ultimates story arc that had Rogers visiting his old buddy, who's almost 90 and married with many grandchildren, which helps to ground him before he joins the Avengers. It could have been a very moving moment to the next blockbuster, alas not to be.

I also have to agree, kinda, with some others that have said Hugo Weaving was better with the mask on. The snarls and stares seemed more effective in his real skin than the prosthetic. Perhaps they'll clean it up with some CGI next time, as in Voldermort style, to allow for some more emotion.

Finally, the end sequence may have fit better as an after credits sequence, cut a little shorter to fit the Avengers trailer. It felt forced compared to where the movie could have ended, the little boy running away with a makeshift shield. I don't know, I guess I'm a little torn on it all, probably because the editing just didn't feel right (that, and I was kinda hoping Tony Stark led the excavation, allowing for a cameo or two more than what we got. Again, much like Ultimates.)

Overall, I did enjoy it. Maybe a little over the top at times, but as a fan of what Marvel has come up with so far, it worked rather well. And as I said, this is rather typical action movie with clear goals for each character. Ironically, that's a breath of fresh air considering the over the top or drawn out dramatics of the more recent Hollywood fair (Potter, X-Men and Apes not included) that try to throw more into the mix than it can handle. Captain America is clear cut, one for the fans, and a lot of fun.

Now for a little guessing game. Since the veritable feast that is the team up movie is less than a year away, time to ponder what's really going on. Marvel have mentioned they'll be adding a few short movies to the DVD releases of Thor and Captain America, featuring everyone's favourite Agent Coulson, aiming to link up even further the events of the past few movies. It's been suggested that the events of The Incredible Hulk (underrated) are after the last few flicks, leading it directly into Avengers. Remember Stark's cameo, and wondered why it hasn't been mentioned since? That's why.

So the opening sequences could possibly be bringing Hulk in, using Iron Man for aid. That's probably the best way to go, Hulk hasn't been in the audience's radar anywhere near as much as the other characters, and with a new actor playing the role, that setup needs to happen rather early.

Thor, too, has a story of sorts to take care of early on, i.e. how does he get back to Earth?! Possible spoiler, the fate of Red Skull could hold the key to that (speaking of, he's obviously not dead so, you know, obvious Cap 2 revenge story). Plus, how long will it take for him to be aware of Loki?

Cap will probably have some 'adjustment' sequences, beyond punching a bag to death, though I really do hope there's some meat to that piece. All that leaves is Iron Man himself. Since Iron Man 3 will be the next movie out of this world in 2013, there could be a suggestion of Stark's alcohol problem either during the movie or as a teaser at the end. That, or maybe a suggestion of who the next villain may be.

The obvious choices, brining it full circle, would be Ezekiel Stane along with The Mandarin, or one of the two. As much as Mandarin is a powerful villain in the comics, it's probably best his role serves a purpose in much the same way Ra's Al Ghul did in Batman Begins, otherwise it may become a little silly (at least within the world they've created for this version of the character, never mind what the other Avenger movies have brought up). Hence why Stane would be a good move, grounded in tech but out for blood, possibly to take over Stark Industries itself in his father's name. A good mix of the recent comic series would play out well on the big screen, in which Stane tries to out-do Stark and becomes a terrorist of sorts, allowing anyone the chance to use Stark Tech, but for a price.

I guess that's in the hands of the Gods, or Marvel, whoever comes first. I'm positive Joss and co. will get the job done next year. The teaser looks good, all the parts have been set up well, and as much as there's every chance they may botch it because of the mass number of characters, I'm rather confidant that won't happen. It's my most anticipated event of 2012, for sure, but I won't go in overhyped like I was with Spider-Man 3. Let's hope THAT doesn't happen again...

Linking the X-Men

2011-06-13T09:48:00.000-07:00

I've seen First Class twice now, and while it's my current favourite flick of the year (being the X-Men fan that I am), I'm more interested in where the series will turn next. Specifically, I'm trying to piece together a better idea of where each character fits within continuity and how they can better link the First Class era to the modern X-Men era. Ignoring Wolverine of course. Completely.

So here's a few theories. Suggestions if you will. Though I may be close, or not even close at all, I'd like to suggest that if anyone from Fox Studios needs my advice for the script I'd be happy to lend a hand ...

The beauty that surrounds the very first X-Men movie is that it doesn't give an exact time frame of when it happens. The not too distant future is all we have to go on, and that could easily be right now, compared to the date the movie was 'actually' released. The cuban missile crisis, a key element to the First Class plot, occurred in 1962. If we put the original movie into context with that, it's a 40 year gap. That means that the movie's key characters, Professor X and Magneto, are both in their seventies (or late sixties) within this canon. So that makes sense.

Then again, that leaves a lot of years to catch up on. The obvious question now is, does Magneto and Xavier team up again? It's rather clear at the end of FC that they are on opposite sides, but the original trilogy suggests that they maintain a friendship of some kind long after the events in Cuba. In their late 40's, for example, they meet a young Jean Grey. Earlier than that, supposedly, they create Cerebro 2.0.

I can think of one solution to the above problems, a higher being out to destroy all. Someone powerful enough that both sides of the mutant problem must co-exist in order to fight back. It's a story angle that was slightly used in X2, but by that time Magneto is a fully fledged bad guy, there's no turning back for him. As an earlier self, he could struggle to grasp his full capacity of who he wants to be. He wants equality for all mutants despite the threat that they now pose.

Mutants are still a secret to society at this point, only the highest government authority are aware they exist, so there's elements to play such secrets close to the chest. Magneto could begin his underground movement to convince X of the plight. What could turn his thoughts around is a mutant so powerful it threatens all, leaving him with no choice but to unite Mutantkind. That can easily lead to a truce, in turn the discovery of Jean and the creation of Cerberus to find more mutants to defend Earth against the threat.

It's mentioned in X-Men that Storm, Cyclops and Jean (and please, call her Marvel Girl) are X's first students. Clearly that isn't true now, although you could argue that they are the first students of an open, available school. It still may take some time before Xavier opens the institution, it's also possible that very few students initially appear within the compound. Others may leave without seeing things through. Therefore, Xavier could be suggesting that these three are the first X-Men to graduate from the school, becoming leaders in their own right. Banshee, Havoc and Beast all part ways at some point, so that would be a decent way to tie things up.

For a while I did consider the possibility of Havoc being Cyclops' father, but it's more likely a role reversal from the comics, where instead of being his younger brother, Havoc could be Cyclops' older brother, one that hasn't been seen by the family for some time. That would explain how Cyclops gets involved with the school, a family reunion of sorts (again, ignoring Wolverine's plot).

As for Storm, if you check out First Class again and take a closer look at the sequences involving Cerebro, a young Storm appears in cameo form for a split second. She could easily fit within the movie canon as one of the first recruits, finally allowing a chance to explain her African roots (a severely lacking subplot not explored in the original trilogy aside from a bad accent.)

As for other mutants to bring into the fold for the next movie (and Fox would be silly not to), I'd first suggest not to deviate too far from the more realistic portrayal of mutants in a human world. Unlike the Marvel Avengers movies which are working closely to recreate Asgard and possible alien threats, I'd keep the X-Men movies grounded and avoid such things as time travel. That would negate something silly (though cool) as Cable. I say silly since it's far beyond any concept the current movies have portrayed. Apocalypse, too, should be avoided.

No, what I'd like to see are characters with abilities that can exist within the realms of the current movies without becoming too far fetched, and beyond what will happen time line wise with Jean. I'd also prefer female characters with a different kind of edge to them, darker in spirit and tougher in ability. Marrow would be a perfect fit, something out of left field but in a vein not far from Wolverine in physical ability. Psylocke would also be a welcome addition, perhaps as a bad guy turned good for once.

Since Darwin made it into this movie, on the strength of who he is as a mutant and not on being a fan favourite, why not add Petra or Sway. Their abilities would be unique in movie cannon, earth manipulation and time control respectively.

Meanwhile, there's always been a suggestion that Mystique is Nightcrawlers' mother (it's common knowledge in the comics), so that too can now be confirmed movie wise if she and the red skinned teleporter Azazel get it on in the next movie, which would mean giving him a bigger role. Perhaps there's some in fighting between Mysty and Emma Frost for Magneto's affections as well, leading to the living diamond's departure.

And there's a character I'd love to see more of. Frost is a modern bad-ass in Astonishing X-Men, it would be just as piss poor as the Cyclops trilogy arc if they ignore her abilities further in another movie or two. Round her off as someone with her own agenda, maybe replace the actress with someone who can hold her own in a decent fight sequence. Or, allow her to create a splinter group as tension mounts with Magneto's new regime.

This is all speculation, honest hope of a geek who loves his mutants. I'm already aware that certain story arcs I love, such as Gambit and Rogue, will never come to pass on the big screen. But at least now, with a somewhat fresh perspective and a cast young enough to play the parts for some time (if they choose), there's plenty of stories that can be told to bridge the long gap.

I think, of all the series out there, X-Men is the only one that can retain a level of excellence over time because of its vast character lists and unique perspective on the world. Yeah, they kind buggered things up there for a while, but three movies from five ain't a bad record.

Just, please, don't go overboard. We're just now getting over Wolverine thanks to this, so don't bugger it up again!

Wii U Mii Hee Bee Gee Beez

2011-06-08T06:26:00.000-07:00

Okay. So the Nintendo presentation and the subsequent introduction of the Wii U may not have been as big as we all hoped, but there's still much to discuss, and a lot more to be excited about.

First, though, here are the many gripes I've heard so far:

* It's all about the gimmicks again.
* No games. Nothing. How do we know what it will do?
* Nintendo want the best of both worlds, and they're not even close.
* The name sucks.
* Seriously, the name sucks.

I can understand all those gripes. There's high hopes with this console, and from the opening stanza there's a lot more questions than answers, and what answers we have so far are short, sharp and not very likeable in most cases. But there's a major problem here that many seem to be forgetting, a key fact that's been overlooked at this point ... this isn't a launch, it's barely a reveal. Nintendo's Wii U is so far away from release, this is nothing but a tech demo.

And that's why I have confidence.

So there's no big Nintendo games to look at yet ... so? There's NOTHING to look at yet. The only thing Nintendo are showing off at E3 this year is the controller and what it can do in terms of advancing the Wii's motion control in a new way. Everything else is filler, a majority of it won't see the light of day beyond this week. Even all the games announced for the console are. Why? Because no-one's designed, developed or written anything yet. But here's where it gets interesting.

Have a look at some of the names attached to the console right now. Arkham City, Darksiders, Smash Brothers, Pikmin, Tekken, Assassin's Creed, Ninja Gaiden. Are they all hardcore games? To a point, but that's not what I'm talking about. Whatever's under the hood of the WiiU, it's powerful enough to get these games on board. How well they'll look compared to a PS3 or 360 version of the game is another story, but one that will be revealed in full next E3. But here's the other key point.

If these titles are on a WiiU, the chances of other franchises crossing over to a Nintendo console are high. The big N realises now, more than ever, that strong relationships with key industry partner's is the key to ensuring the WiiU can maintain a high level of sales beyond the odd jump thanks to a 1st party release.

What's more interesting, however, was EA's cameo. Not only did they mention their sports titles, they mentioned Battlefield and the Frostbite engine. Though there wasn't a confirmation, nor a 'yes, it's going to happen', the fact that it was mentioned within the same breath as 'Nintendo' bodes hope in the graphical capabilities of the system.

As long as that talk exists, the opportunities are there. There will still be casual games, there will still be high quality Mario and Zelda titles among other Nintendo franchises.

Speaking of talk, ever since the launch, the WiiU seems to be everywhere already. Good, bad or indifferent, it's on people's minds. That, if anything, is a win for Nintendo. If the console hasn't even shown off what it can do, but it's already at the forefront of conversation ahead of Sony's handheld or Microsoft's Kinect games, imagine what might happen when we finally get to see the results?

So in answering the above gripes:

* Just like the Wii, gimmicks are only if the developers use them. This one, however, is actually more appealing than motion control. And yet, motion control also exists. So what is the WiiU? An all-rounder. It's a console with options aplenty, but again, it's up to how the games make use of these options that determine the results.
* Yes, no games. That's next year, and it'll be worth the wait.
* Nintendo are actually closer than they've ever been, and the 3DS will aid towards that. EA are the biggest publishers of content out there. Also of note, developers such as Retro 'Metroid Prime' Studios are co-working on Mario Kart, a sign that Nintendo are branching out from their humble norms to get some much needed extra points of view. Like I said, casual will always be there, but the console will hold its own against the competition graphically, and that will make a world of difference in itself.
* Yeah, the name kinda sucks. But it makes sense. Why walk away from a brand name that's so engrained in the senses of all games. The Wii took some time to get used to, just like the DS or the 3DS. The WiiU (if you pronounce it quickly enough, it sounds a little like Ryu) will stick in time.
* IN TIME! Geez.

This will work, I have a confidence that I never had with the Wii. Why? Because the last three consoles Nintendo released, I was sceptical. I wasn't sure about dual screens, about motion control, or about 3D in a handheld. And yet they worked. And so will this. But let's allow this to simmer for a while, we've got a long way to go before we fully understand what this console is capable of. Hold onto that resentment and concern until the day we see Zelda in HD. I am.

E3 - Electronic Entertainment Extraveganintendo

2011-06-07T08:53:00.000-07:00

I'm waiting for the Nintendo conference to start. You'd think that at my age ... wait, wait, wait ... I've forgotten how old I am. Damn. Just, just wait here a second, I'll go check my birth certificate.

Huh. Older than I thought.

Anyway, it's been a while since I've been this excited over a conference, and I've seen a lot of them. But this time, there's something different in the air. Anticipation so big that if it fails, the entire gaming world will cry in unison. Or maybe just me, but it'll happen! That's how big this could be, how the entire shape of the gaming industry can change in one night, just like it did six years or so ago when Nintendo launched the Wii. It was a game changer, so much so that Microsoft's entire E3 2011 conference was motion controlled based. As of tomorrow morning, motion control could be a thing of the past.

Tell you what, I'm going to pause this post here and write up a sequel tomorrow. I'm hoping it'll be full of expletives of the excited nature. If it isn't, be prepared for an onslaught of the bad kind.

Nintendo, don't let me down.

Beyond Gaming

2011-06-04T08:56:00.000-07:00

I've got twenty five minutes left on my laptop battery. Yes, I realise I can just plug it in, but I prefer writing to deadlines.

Huh ... you know, in my head, that opening line sounded funnier. Probably because I had more time to write it at the start and took it for granted.

I take a lot of things for granted, the world around me doesn't always work for me because of it. It's something I'm happy to fix, but it just never comes together. It's the reason why I continue to find myself alone on most occasions. Please, don't confuse me with a loner here, I have no interest in receiving 'oh you poor thing' replies. If anything, I'm just trying to make more sense of my own life.

I do consider myself happier on occasion if I'm sitting by myself doing my own thing. I don't go out often, not because I don't want to, I just don't. I do what I please. More importantly, I do what makes me happy, not to make others happy. Selfish, perhaps, but at least that way I'm not holding people up, nor sitting in the corner looking like an idiot because I'm not enjoying myself (trust me, that's happened too often).

So I play games. I play them because I want to avoid reality, which I hate with a passion. It hurts both physically and mentally, the heart can't keep up. It's expensive, it's dirty, it's demanding. Egotistical. Melodramatic. Other words longer than three letters. It gets you down more than it attempts to impress, it's a wonder our population is increasing not decreasing. Or is it?

More and more gamers are turning to online games every year, spending countless hours and just as much money on their World's of Warcraft, DC, guilds, heroes and villains. It's getting so big, it's become an institution all it's own. There's laws, traders, certain communication guidelines. Lives revolve around what time the next raid takes place, or how long it will take to dig enough pieces of eight to trade for that shield you need to take out that character just to get an even better shield to beat that other character. It's far more than just a game, it's a living. A professional addiction, if you will.

I'm not bagging MMO's. I've played them, I understand the enjoyment of them. But I worry for those who put so much time into it, that any life spent outdoors exists simply to go down the road for milk. Unless they're lactose intolerant. Maybe just water, if they don't have a tap to get it from in the first place. Or they prefer bottled water ... you know what, let's move on.

So yes, I play video games, but I know my limits. I don't play for hours on end, I do have a social life per se, but it's not the most important thing in my life. If someone came up to me and dragged me out for a drink, I wouldn't argue against it. I wouldn't crave the thought of being at home judging who should die by my giant hammer of death while pretending to like beer.

Of course, it would be nice if someone did ask me out every once in a while, instead of my poor attempts of doing it myself. But that's a different story. Safe to say, I'm not entirely lost to the world of the imagination. Although, I am a writer, so let's just put me on the edge of insanity for sanity's sake.

What's a 'Normal' Female?

2011-05-19T09:58:00.000-07:00

Let's get serious for a moment.

There's something that's been bugging me of late. It could very well be the fact that everywhere I look, there's no end to the mythological belief that all women are short skirt wearing, big boob owning, makeup dominated creatures of the night life.

I must have missed the memo when they approved all that.

Before you get me wrong, I'm not suggesting a for or against mentality here to those who actually want to dress like this. It's a persons right to decide what they wear and how they act. What disturbs me is how this 'version', for lack of a better word, is the dominant iteration spotted in most forms of media. Especially gaming.

The common excuses for such actions is that gaming is a male dominated society, it's what people want to see. Even I can see that this a dated term, dare I say it a pathetic excuse for nudity or sexual exploitation just for the sake of selling a few extra copies. Yes I'm looking at you, Grand Theft Auto. Coffee anyone?

There's some small level of comfort that a game like, say Mass Effect 2, allowed you to create your own character (male or female) and decide yourself how he/she acts and responds to certain events. It's up to you as the player to choose how they look, to a point. I've also read just recently that gay/lesbian relationships will be introduced into the third game. It's an edgy call to make for a game so well known in the public eye, but does it make it right? Especially when it isn't a believable scenario?

Truth is, as long as video games portray women in a light that deems scantly clad as normal for police officers, detectives, doctors, lawyers, heroes, mothers, scientists, etc, etc, than how can gaming possibly be considered an adult medium, if it's such a childish mentality in design?

There's an argument for and against. For: gaming needs to be unbelievable in order for it to be entertaining. Against: True to a point, but where does that leave LA Noir or (dare I say it) Call of Duty, that rely on realism for the impact of the story to hit home?

Here's another interesting point, relative to this thought process. In the last ten years of video games, only a small number of games with a female lead character have sold in profitable numbers. I dare you to remember at least one of them that doesn't feature a certain Lara Croft. Got one? Okay, was this character in any way like what I suggested above? Big boobs? Maybe even all that?

Hands up who thought of Portal? Congratulations, you picked one of the only games in modern history (not counting the Mario Bros. titles, which depicts a helpless princess ... I'll get to that problem another day) that doesn't follow all the typical rules.

It could be considered unusual that I, being a male, would write on such a topic. I guess, maybe, I have an opinion that doesn't conform with reality. A reality that's become tainted by immoral choices considered 'normal'. I guess that's why it bugs me. Why should it be considered normal in the first place, when clearly it isn't. Gaming or otherwise, it's the ultimate misstep by society, especially when I see fourteen or fifteen year olds dressing like this. It just seems ... wrong. Very wrong.

What's a PSN?

2011-05-17T08:37:00.000-07:00

I'm torn. The PSN's back. I found it at the back door, tail between its legs. "Sorry, Master. Next time I'll leave a note." But I'm not really sure if I should let it back in, besides the fact that it's been raining and I just washed the floors.

See, with the network down, I had to find other methods of maintaining my interest. Funny thing is, despite my concern over this thing they call 'real life', I actually found it rather rewarding. More rewarding than trophies, believe it or not. So I opened the door the other day and discovered this thing called 'The Sun.' It's this amazing gas giant that the Earth revolves around (I don't think that's been proven yet, I'll get back to you on that). It warmed my skin way better than my usual microwave technique, I can't believe I didn't discover it before on wikileaks.

Still with me? My point is, we've become such a technology driven society that if something were to go wrong, we'd be bleeped. Totally bleeping bleeped. No emails? No SMS? Forget about the world turning, this is end of the galaxy stuff!

Perhaps, on reflection, I'm judging this a little harshly. I mean, Sony *did* have all our contact details and credit card info stolen. Bad Sony, bad! Go to the corner! But seriously, it's not something to be taking the bleep out of. What annoys me, however, are the endless amount of people complaining that their lives, their weekend plans, their whole supposed existence has been utterly destroyed because they can't pull out a spleen or drop a hole in the ground against a fourteen year old kid in Iceland.

I'd like formally apologise to any readers from Iceland. Clearly not all of your fourteen year olds play PS3 ... what with all that ice around.

I'd like to formally apologise to any readers from Iceland. Clearly your land isn't full of ice. However, if you do in fact have some, my coke's getting warm.

What was I typing? Something about games, I think. Seems like all this time away from them have left me a confused mess. Even my 3DS left fifteen messages for me, but I couldn't bare to answer. That's the moral of this blog post. Now that PSN is back online, don't allow it to take over your life again. Or anything else gaming wise for that matter (I'm looking at you, World of Killing Things!). Go outside, smell the roses, or if you so desire, burn some ants.

I'd like to formally apologise to any readers from Antland. Clearly you are an inferior species, but I love you all the same and I'd never burn you. Besides, I've got Portal 2 co-op to catch up on. Cya in virtual hell folks!

The Kombat Distraction

2011-04-30T11:01:00.000-07:00

Please note. If you haven't seen Mortal Kombat: Legacy yet, the following may spoil a few surprises. So go watch them first on YouTube, okay? Go on, I'll wait.

...

...

Okay, ready? Good:

I'm all for expanding a universe. No, not this one, clearly that's beyond science. For now.

I'm talking the fictional kind, taking something known and giving it a new slant through other forms of media. It's been done numerous times before. Some work, some don't. Others are called movie flops (no offence to anyone who's seen Prince of Persia and liked it). Largely I enjoy them, especially ones that delve to a point where you never thought you'd see such a thing, certainly not within the original idea, and alter your perspective in the process.

The Dark Knight is a perfect example. The news shorts that doubled as prime time, current affairs style interviews with key players in the movie were an extra treat, as were the many company websites that were later vandalised by the Joker. You could say they weren't really required, most viewers care little for extra incentives, but there's a clear and precise market for it. The best kind of advertising for a product should be the one that goes beyond simply stating 'this product is cool' or throwing endless amounts of celebrities at you push it further.

Games have had their moments too. Remember the live action ads for Metroid Prime and Other M? Or the awesome animated rip on Mario Kart for Blur? ... Okay, maybe not, but I do, so that's all that matters. They're important points of reference, where an ad becomes a work of art, a slice of pop culture that fans can revel in.

So where does that leave Mortal Kombat Legacy? Maybe for this particular Australian market, we should care little for this mini-series, especially considering the prime product it's trying to advertise (to a degree) isn't even available here. That's a blog post for another day, safe to say an R rating is needed. Now.

As of this published article of elegant splendour (proudly sponsored by Apple, if for no reason other than this was typed on one), there are three episodes of the violent, gritty and overly Hollywoodish series that provide a sense of modern day back story to each main character from a franchise that really isn't dead yet. I do say that out of surprise since, out of all the 90's franchises still around, that's the one I least expected. There's only so much you can get out of a few fatalities, right?

Judging from reviews of the latest game, I guess I'm wrong.

But back to the web series. The short note: It's good, so far. Having an entire episode detail the down out and of poor little Johnny Cage is a key highlight, largely because it was so unexpected. The first two parts uploaded to much fanfare were a little underwhelming, to be honest. Fun, no doubt, but I was expecting more from them, especially following on from the high standard set from the leaked 'wing on a prayer' that was the teaser last year. That, by the way, was far more violent than anything seen in this so far.

Maybe it was the fact that the first episode spent half the time watching seven of nine in slow motion. Or that the fight between Jax and Kano wasn't a brutal affair that the video games are well known for. It just didn't click for me. Since all this is a prequel to MK, before most of these characters have all of their particular traits and signature looks, I can forgive all 'lacks of', like Kano's eye (besides, by the end of episode two they've made up for that rather well.) Still, I really wanted more, especially Stryker, if only to make him seem like a viable fighter I'd want to play as, for once. That, and I've met Tahmoh Penikett. He's cool.

And then Cage came along. The tongue in cheek, former Power Ranger (I chuckled at that one) needing one last pay cheque, pitching a reality show in order to become a hit again... a far better narrative than the stock standard action flick that came before it. I really did feel sorry for him, especially having to resort to cheesy one liners to try and win over the rather typical executives with an eye for a bigger prize. Whoever chose Matt Mullins to play Cage chose well, he fits the role perfectly both as an actor with the right look and the fighting chops to pull it off.

And I looked it up. He wasn't in Power Rangers despite the references, although he DID play a role in the similarly styled 'Kamen Rider', so there you go.

It's early days yet, but I'm liking this series so far. It's building up nicely, but the question remains whether they can pull off key characters Sub Zero and Scorpion without them coming off poorly conceived, much like the original movie versions. If they can at least be believable while also kicking all kinds of ass, I'll be relatively distracted by the lack of local Kombat. Some what. Or maybe not at all, I haven't decided yet.

And Thor Makes Three

2011-04-25T02:46:00.000-07:00

The following blog is classified G. It contains no spoilers and possibly a lot of squeeing.

I've seen Thor twice now. I'll tell you this for a start, I'm relieved. Why? This was the biggest stumbling block for Marvel, trying to convince not only ardent fans but also newcomers to the franchise that a God, for ease of explanation, can exist within a mortal realm of technology, war heroes and scientists. And Tony Stark.

The good news is, they've done it right. Thor works both as a mythology that's believable, and as a character people can rally behind and enjoy. Even if he's a little over ambitious and more humorous in the early stanzas. Not that I didn't like that, probably better to go that route than to have him as the utmost deity of Asgard so soon into the franchise (as in the most recent comic book series. If you haven't read that yet, what are you waiting for?!)

Surprisingly, I enjoyed it better the second time around. Of course, Imax can be classified the culprit. The 3D seemed to work better on the bigger screen, at the right angle. It's largely subtle, which is something a lot of people who bicker and moan about the tech don't understand. Things don't always have to jump out at you for you to enjoy it. The little flakes of snow drifting across the wastelands, the level of depth providing a better idea of how big the main throne room and subsequent areas of the kingdom are. The height at which Thor rises off the ground, or how deep the crater is. I like it that way, far better than some stupid gimmick leaping out at the screen just to remind you of the glasses you're wearing.

But that's just me.

I think Thor works better as an opening stanza than Iron Man did, and it's in a better position to be granted sequels and expansions. IM2 had to fit in a lot of references and characters to open out the franchise to the Avengers. Thor, and hopefully Captain America, don't have to rely on that as much. They both need to ensure the two leads stand out from the crowd, before the eventual get together. That means more time concentrating on their worlds and enemies, their story arcs and the minor characters that belong to said worlds. More importantly though, it gives each lead actor a chance to shine, before Robert out does them all. And believe me when I say, I can't wait for Thor, Cap and Stark's bickering between each other, while Hulk plays smash and grab in the corner.

Out of everything, even the team based action in waiting and Caps first 'here's my shield, ain't it cool' moment, I'm now more excited to see Asgard and the six unseen realms. The possibilities here could be far and wide. I just love the fact that this, of all the Marvel movies so far, feels more broader in tone and substance. We're talking Gods and Monsters here, not just technology and smart asses who accidentally stumble into their super human arcs. It's as close to a breath of fresh air for the super hero genre yet ... but not quite. See, if Thor can get away from Middle Earth ... sorry, Midgard, that should be Midgard ... and travel the depths of the galaxy seeking justice and such, than this could be the real core franchise Marvel's been looking for.

Better yet, if they follow the lead of its script writer, they could always destroy Asgard and bring it to Earth. Trust me, that worked better in the comics than that sentence.

Or it could just be another reason to continue adding new characters to the long line of cameos. THANOS BABY, YEAH!

Sorry, what? ... Oh, a rating? Really? You haven't read every other review out there already? This is a blog, you know ... *sigh* Oh alright. I'll give it ... umm ... say four easter eggs out of five. But only because I ate the fifth one. It tempted me, with its foil shining in the sunlight, melted butter and cocoa calling my name like a Goddess' desires.

What was I talking about again?

The PSN Debacle

2011-04-24T02:10:00.000-07:00

It's the easter holidays. People of all creeds are enjoying the time off, whether they follow the words of a certain religion or simply appreciate the finer chocolates in life. But for some, the weekend has been lost and spoilt by an invisible hand, an unknown enemy that seeks to destroy all known entertainment in the universe.

Or I could be wrong.

Either way, Playstation gamers haven't had the best time of it lately. Between countless technical issues resulting in online downtime, to the issues surrounding blu-ray rights with LG, it's been an up and down year. I guess it's no surprise that someone, somewhere, decided to attack the PSN servers on this holy of weekends to disrupt things just that little bit further. I mean, why not, it's the time when everyone's at home with nothing to do, right? ... Okay, maybe that's just me, but my point still stands.

Truth is, I don't play online much these days. Sure, I just bought Portal 2 and I'm keen for some co-op action, but I'm not hanging out impatiently waiting for an update from Sony. But I know how it must feel. The disruption doesn't just annoy those who wanted a quick COD or Mortal Kombat, it shuts down DC Universe, closes off LittleBigPlanet and SOCOM, and who plays single player FIFA or NBA this late in the season? (don't quote me on that though, I'm probably wrong.)

So the obvious question is why. Not why now, that one's obvious. But why would someone want to do this in the first place. Making a statement is one thing, but it's been done before (to death, I might add), so this isn't a new experience. Clearly Sony are so concerned that they've shut down completely and are rebuilding the network (almost) from scratch to ensure it doesn't happen again, whatever 'it' was.

I'm not necessarily concerned. Like I said, I don't play online much. But if there's a bigger reason than just 'we can't play online', perhaps a security loophole as discussed in the last effort, it might be better for Sony to come clean this time, tell us all what's really going on instead of covering it up. We all know there's problems with the service, and no matter how free most of it may be there's no excuse to have a system in this day and age that can be hacked so easily.

I do hope to play Portal 2 soon enough, single player is my preferred method of playing right now so I'm enjoying it. But the longer this one gets dragged out, the more likely it is I'll defer back to my old Xbox Live account. Or, dare I say it, start playing my Wii again ... do you think Portal will ever be a Wii2 game? Worth a dare, maybe.

Project Cafe: Why I'm Worried

2011-04-23T09:06:00.000-07:00

There's a lot of rumours floating around regarding Project Cafe, i.e. Nintendo's new home console. Now I'm not one to normally NOT be excited by rumours of a new console by the big N, but in this particular case, I can't feel anything but concern.

For starters, it seems as if Nintendo are reverting away from their 'we do it our way' mentality, by having a console that's not only fully HD, but possibly 3D compatible too. I realise that's a silly thing to say considering the 3DS, but that's a glasses free technology. Unless this supposed Wii2 does the same, then this is simply an additional system requirement that puts it in line with the competition, instead of surpassing it. It's one thing to say 'we can do it better', it's another to say 'we can do it differently', and the latter is what Nintendo are known for. This doesn't have that feel to it.

What set the Wii apart from everyone else was its ability to provide a different kind of experience, whether it be a first person shooter, a 3rd person platformer or a part title. It's two part control system was like nothing else, and it came as no surprise that Sony and Microsoft launched their own 'point and click' control systems ... okay I lie, Kinect isn't a point and click, unless you consider your finger as a clicker. Can't wait for the day I mockingly point my finger in the shape of a gun to play Gears of War. Oh sarcastic joy!

Enter my second concern. Supposedly, Nintendo are working on a controller that incorporates a touch screen into the pad itself. I'll be brutally honest here before I go any further. I love the DS. I love the 3DS. But I DO NOT WANT the same touch screen tech on my console controller. It doesn't belong there, it doesn't seem right there, and it doesn't make any sort of logical sense in terms of advancing video games. If it's a gimmick, something that most developers can ignore, than I can forgive the decision. But until such time that someone shows me the benefits of having to look away from the action to garner more info on what I'm doing, or having to move my hands away from a comfortable position to 'tap' at it ... see where I'm coming from?

Which makes me wonder. Has Nintendo hit the brick wall, so to speak? Have they finally run out of ideas now that the 3D barrier has been broken? Until such time as that can be taken forward into larger screens, is there anything left to do? Patching together a DS into a dual stick control pad seems like a haphazard approach to the next generation, in my non-professional opinion. And if you've stumbled into this article by chance through a google search for more clues ... sorry to annoy you with that thought, it just doesn't make sense to me why a touch screen would ever be a valuable solution. Motion control always made sense, but not this.

But don't get me wrong here. I love the idea of playing Zelda, Mario and Kirby within a full HD space, complete with 7.1 surround sound and further advancements in visual superiority. But not like this. Not with a console that seems to be trying too hard to distance itself from the Wii, when it should be embracing it. If anything, Nintendo should follow it's very own design methodology of its handheld history.

Every portable Nintendo has either made use of a trusted visual method or previous look and feel to get its point across, hence the constant sense of the familiar with each iteration. The DS as evolved four times over, but each one gives off that 'hey, remember me?' feel, and that's what makes it special. But every Nintendo console, since the SNES upgraded the NES, has tried to up the design so much that there's no consistency. From black, one joystick designs to purple boxes, Nintendo has taken the approach to be so far fetched and different, it's almost alienated itself from it own brand awareness. If it wasn't for the Nintendo logo and the familiar characters, you'd be forgiven for thinking it was designed by someone else.

I know what you're thinking, I'm good at that. Sega never followed that design with their consoles. Neither Atari, for the most part. The NES didn't exactly have any visual connections to the SNES, per se. And the PS3 has no relation to the PSOne Classic. I'll give you all that. But there are plenty of past moments where a design manifesto has carried over different designs, not just as a basic money saving opportunity, but within the purpose of maintaining the brand. Commodore's, original Atari's, most of those consoles looked similar to each other in most respects. These days, it's the controller that carries that on.

If anything, Nintendo should look to improve the console's output to future proof it. Look to blow out the visual architecture far beyond what the PS3 or Xbox 360 can do, force the two rivals' hands in that regard. But maintain the control scheme, keep the two piece remote style, just improve it further. Sony made that correct decision when choosing its controller for the PS3 (thank God, I'd hate to have to play God of War using a batarang.)

Whether all this talk and speculation (and no offence to IGN, but post proof or retract, douches!) is real or not, the fact we're all taking about it is proof positive that Nintendo will always be an important part of the industry. If anything, we look to them to revitalise our interests in an industry that can go stale quickly, which the 3DS has done with aplomb. I'm nervous. I'm concerned. I'm playing my 3DS anyway, so make me care, Ninty!

What's in a Name

2011-04-11T16:47:00.000-07:00

I was sitting in a well loved and enjoyed institution the other day (more commonly known as 'Maccas'), when a young boy sprinted past with his Dad close behind calling out his name. I normally don't take much notice of parents attempting to chase down children clearly fitter than they are, but in this case I had no choice, considering the name used was 'Boston'.

Yup. Boston.

Who calls anyone a city that isn't from Hollywood? A Celtics fan? A drug addict? Is it short for something I don't know about? Bostlivonion, a well known Russian King? (to save you the time in googling, that's a fake king. He's actually Greek.)

This all got me thinking. What if people began naming their kids after video game characters. Famous actors or pieces of fruit be damned, this has to be the way of the future. I'm not just thinking of Mario either, that's too obvious. Say, for examples sake:

Marcus - This one's clear cut. A simple name that I've already met once or twice before, but unbeknownst to those who use it, also a reference to one Gears of War. Just be wary of anyone naming their kid 'Chainsaw' or 'Multikill'.

Link - Zelda would also work, in fact it's considered rather normal by today's standards (there's even a few well known novels that use that name.) But if someone came out with the name Link, that would be killer. Unless he started raiding houses and throwing chickens.

Lara - Okay, so this one is rather obvious again, unless it somehow becomes a boy's name, which would just be confusing with fewer boob joke opportunities.

Peach - A certain Geldof is half way there, but I doubt it was a reference to the Princess of the Mushroom Kingdom.

Ken - Barbie's toy boy (get it?) or Street Fighter brawler? Close call, unless he's born with a headband and red garments.

Duke - Although it might not get the same reaction if he doesn't grow up into a rude talking, sex loving, alien crushing hero, but hey, at least you can start talking about how cool the Nuke is again, what with the 'on again' rebirth of said character. More on that later.

Sonic - Nah. Too 80's.

Bowser - Nah. Too dinosaur centric.

Maybe, if the time ever did come to name a child, something like Alan (Wake) or Chris (of Resident Evil) would be less obvious more still an insiders joke. Truth is, we've become so enthralled with baby names being as unique as possible, it's more a publicity stunt than being thoughtful about the future of these kids. Perhaps we should revert back to traditional names.

Because, dare I say it, I'd hate to have to vote for President Wii any time soon.

The Social Network Society

2011-04-03T08:23:00.001-07:00

So I've finally seen The Social Network. Was anyone else weirded out by the fake twin brothers? Even if they were real, and I'm not stating either way since at this very point in time I haven't bothered to double check the credits, it just weirded me out. That and the fake cold breaths. I guess that's a good sign that my only two gripes are visually and not anything else remotely connected to storytelling.

It did make me wonder though. Since Facebook and Twitter, all we ever seem to do is check, and double check, and refresh our lives every five seconds to see what everyone else is doing. Now I'm not the first person to pick up a phone and start ringing people in the dead of night, or the middle of the day, or any time at all for that matter. Why? Because I don't. I have no reasoning for it, I just don't. It's not something that I do. I'll never understand why myself either.

What I CAN do, however, is check in on facebook (sorry, Facebook ... it needs a cap F now, it seems) and see what the word on the street is. People doing social activities, posting videos, redirecting people to other people, and so on and so forth. It's socially normal to sit at a computer and type out what your life is about instead of talking it over or sending a postcard. Not that anyone does that anymore. You can just point people at a photo of where you're staying online, then blog about how nice it is, saving you a few handful of dollars on flimsy cardboard that takes two weeks or longer to get wherever it's going.

Oldschool. Bah humbug.

But back to my point. We're so in tune with technology, where does it end? Our society of misfit children growing out of their violent video games and sexy attire into a corporate and virtual reality driven universe, driven by the need to always be aware of what's happening within each millimicrosecond, and eating chocolate off the back of lizards.

That last part might not actually happen.

What's bugging me, though, isn't about where our future may or may not end up at. It's that we already think we're there, and those that don't believe in technology criticise it, just like those who didn't believe in nuclear power did, just like those who didn't believe in television did ... we're a never ending cycle of new ideas that grow and grow until they can't grow anymore, replaced with something else that does the same.

Maybe there's a modern day miracle waiting in the wings that will provide with an out clause, the ability to leave technology behind and rediscover what it means to live. For now, we're stuck here. Just here. Typing away madly trying to manufacture the next big thing in order to survive the rat race. Me? I just want to write to keep myself sane. Think I'm doing a good job?

Oh, and for the record, The Social Network was good. I await it's sequel, The Twitter Emporium, with much interest.

The Nintendo 3DS: What Next?

2011-04-01T06:15:00.000-07:00

So I bought a 3DS. I didn't exactly wait in line for hours on end for one, though that would have been some what entertaining compared to walking in at 8am to an empty shopping centre, to be one of only two customers at the GAME store *ahem* game enough to be open that early compared to everyone else.

Ever since the big reveal just under a year ago, when Nintendo copyrighted the term 'You have to see it to believe it' ... that might be a lie ... I've wanted a 3DS. I've wanted a console to reignite my interest in Nintendo products, having played out my fill of Pokemon and Wii games with the word Wii in them.

And now that I have one to call my own, having spent the last two days (between living my substandard normal 2D life, of course) playing out a majority of the launch titles and the inbuilt augmented reality programs, I've come to the conclusion that a) Yes, when the 3D works, it works damn well, and b) I'M SHOOTING MY DOG IN THE FACE!*

So to the important question of the blog.

WHAT NEXT?

The console is now out in all the major markets, soaking up every potential public display stand and revelling in hype machine that's constantly followed it from day dot. The launch list, while mainly bleh quality, has its minor gems and solid franchise additions. There's no doubt in my mind that this console will sell.

If, in the off chance it doesn't, Nintendo made the bold move of selling it's most recent Pokemon game on the DS just a few weeks before the 3DS launch. To cover its ass? Not even close. More likely, they did so to ensure the DS gets the farewell it deserves, while ensuring (and those of you who've tried DS games in the 3DS will understand this) that gamers who want the big upgrade will see the stark differences between the old and the new. I'm not just talking about 3D either.

So where to from here? The hype machine will no doubt build towards the next E3 (Electronic Entertainment Expo), where Nintendo will show off its future releases. Just before that, however, we should receive Kid Icarus, Zelda: Ocarina of Time and Starfox, among a handful of 3rd party releases.

Okay, so I'm going to open up a can of worms for this next part. I've been thinking about where Nintendo could, and should go with this. One of my dreams will soon become a reality, thanks to Nintendo's previous confirmation of a Mario platform game similar to Super Mario 64 and Mario Galaxy. But there's a huge number of other options out there. Here's just a top 10 possible ideas list (in no particular order) just as a taster:

10) DONKEY KONG COUNTRY RETURNS ... RETURNS!

This one's an obvious one in my eyes. DKC returned big time last year, cementing Retro Studios as a key Nintendo partner (if they hadn't already done so with the Metroid Prime series). Sure, a Metroid shooter on the console would be interesting, but I'd much prefer Donkey Kong and co. Why? Check out Rabbids 3D and you'll see the potential, where Ubisoft used the 3D effect to create a sense of space between foreground and background. Imagine that in, say, the levels in DKCR where you barrel blast to platform in the background ... see what I mean? The opportunity there is clear as day, and with the added power of the 3DS, making it a reality is a no-brainer.

9) MARIO GOLF 3DS

It's a forgotten sports franchise from the N64/GBC days, replaced with mini games in Wii Sports, but of all the Mario licensed sports games that could work in a 3D space, golf seems the logical choice. Using the upper screen's depth perception to better translate how far you are from the cup, or how high you are on the green, could add a new level of strategy to a sport that hasn't seen much in the way of evolution on consoles outside of the Tiger Woods brand.

8) THE VIRTUAL BOY

It died a horrible, horrible death, but the Virtual Boy could very well live on here. Okay, maybe not in different shades of red, but to be fair to the long forgotten portable, it had some reasonable ideas going for it. Tetris 3D or the updated edition of the original Mario Bros. arcade game, where platforms lay close or away from the screen, would find a solid home here. And even if Nintendo do decide to re-release the originals as they were, crimson and all, I wouldn't complain. Barely anyone would have played the old games way back when (me included), so where better to say 'Hey, look what you missed out on!'

7) ONLINE AUGMENTED DOWNLOADED

Let me explain. Augmented Reality is another key element to the 3DS, which is bundled with a number of games and cards that take advantage of the camera system and turns everything around you into a virtual play field. Honestly, it has my interest a lot more than the 3D itself, and if Nintendo really want to push it, they have to ensure there's plenty of products out there that use it. That starts online. The ability to download and print off more cards would be a major draw, allowing anyone, anywhere to get their hands on a number of new mini games. Pre-printed cards packed together with new 3DS releases like Starfox would be another good move.

The other possibility is to open it out to other developers. Imagine, say, Capcom releasing a series of cards that allow you to control Mega Man around your living room furniture, or maybe Ryu vs Ken atop your TV system. It doesn't all have to be shooters, per se.

6) FORMER AND FORGOTTEN FRANCHISES

The Wii, up until this blog post, hasn't seen a number of Nintendo franchises unleashed on its motion control domain. That may change before a new home console is released, but we're already seeing a number of old names making the shift to the handheld instead. Kid Icarus is the obvious returning hero, with Starfox and Pilotwings the other two old hats that have missed one or more previous console generations. But there's a number of others waiting in the wings, the most important of which is F-Zero, which last made an appearance on the Gamecube and GBA to much acclaim. You'd expect a name like that to return sooner rather than later, and racing games should receive and added benefit of fun with 3D in its back pocket of tricks.

Let's not forget some of the other Nintendo names, such as Ice Climbers, Excitebike, Pikmin, Fire Emblem, Golden Sun and Custom Robo. All have made fleeting appearances over the years, and all would be at home in 3D for certain. Unfortunately, it's more likely that Nintendo will continue it's 'for everyone' attitude by unleashing more Wii Sports style titles, possibly new Brain Training games. Rhythm Heaven, however, would be one recent franchise that would be a shoe in.

Of course, there's always the chance of something new. FaceRaiders is a good example of Nintendo's willingness to birth new games without the need of a well known franchise character headlining...

Half way there. Still with me?

5) METROID DREAD

I mentioned this well known name earlier, but as Metroid games go, the most sought after title in the franchise is one that has never been released. Dread's been on Nintendo's draft table for a long, long time, and with the Prime trilogy wrapped along with the most recent Metroid: Other M keeping the fire alight, now's a better time than any to get Samus back where she belongs, in a 2D side scrolling adventure of epic proportions. Whether Team Ninja or Retro Studios are involved is open to possibility, but if it were ever to happen, this would surely be an in-house Nintendo product.

4) ANIMAL CROSSING

Besides Pokemon, there's only one other Nintendo franchise that gets fans pumped about trading and collecting numerous items of varying worth. With StreetPass as another key 3DS element, you'd almost put the house on Animal Crossing making the move to the new handheld. It's more a question of when then if.

3) POKEMON

The same can be said of Nintendo's biggest seller, it's prime console mover (outside of the various Brain Training and party games that have flooded the market in recent years). Outside of Mario, a main title in the Pokemon series could sell a console on its own merit, which is why so many raised eyebrows at the thought of a new Pokemon game (that's arguably the best ever in the series so far) reaching the market so close to a new console launch. Which leads me to believe that, if they continue the tradition of adding a third (or fourth) title within a current series (i.e. Yellow to Red and Blue, or Emerald to Ruby and Sapphire), then it's possible the next Pokemon game will be a 3DS exclusive.

It's also possible that Black and White will relaunch as a 3DS upgrade, or a brand new two pronged attack will hit the market in the next year. This one's got me intrigued more than most.

2) THE eSHOP

A lot was made of the Virtual Console, competing with Microsoft's Xbox Live and Sony's PSN network. What it should have been, a home to the classic Nintendo games of old, was only half way realised. Most of the big names made the trip across, but many more never made it. Over the last year, the well has dried out, but Nintendo has promised the same won't happen to the new eSHOP, the 3DS equivalent to the Virtual Console. Housing Game Boy games among others should, in theory, be easier to handle, being smaller in size. So keeping that in mind, releasing a number of games a week shouldn't be an issue, there's plenty to choose from after all.

Super Mario Land and Zelda: Link's Awakening have already been mentioned numerously, but here's hoping the 3rd party developers get in on the act as well. Either way, I hope to be playing Mario Land, F1 Race, Tetris and Dr. Mario (in your face!!) ... sorry, got a tinge of retro there. Look up the ad, trust me.

Last, but not least:

1) THE NEXT 3DS

Upgrades are a tradition in the gaming race. Days in, and everyone's already wondering when to expect it. Complaints about poor battery life, awkward d-pad placement and still low res screens despite the update have hampered the launch, although most don't seem too bothered by that just yet. The chances of, say, a 3DS Lite are probably likely in a year or two. For now, it's more likely we'll see the addition of new colours by years end. I love my black 3DS, but a red one wouldn't be a bad idea either.

So that's it, the possible possibles of the 3DS in the years to come. There's a lot more than that, of course, and much of it rests on the other big name game developers (and those who are yet to develop on a handheld platform), but I'll get to that another day. Thanks for reading, sorry it took so long to get here, but I hope you enjoyed it. Blog out.

* Translation: FaceRaiders is good too.