Lauren Welninski

Lauren Welninski

Review One

Eng 298

Rating 7-8

Madden 2010

First things first, while conducting my research for my review; it really was a long day. I watched hours upon hours of Madden play. That being said I did do some playing for this review. Just so that is stated I did so some literal hands on research for the review. So, let’s continue on. Madden 10 and Madden 09 I played and watched both. I did this because I wanted to see for myself the differences and changes that have been made between the too different years of the same game.

So the differences that are from this year verses last year are the roster changes every year. The teams get new players from the draft and they as well trade to get different players as well. Something else that is different is the plays. Every year the plays change the offense and defense plays. All of the plays that are used are very close to the actual play books used by the coaches and the teams.

Some graphic differences that where found are the weather scenes are a lot more real which means that they have made the overall graphics better. The way the catch the ball and the way the players fall is as well a lot more life like. As well the players themselves every year become more and more realistic. It is more as if you are watching a real football game but, controlling what is going to happen.

slashgamer.com

The one thing that I can absolutely not stand about this game is Madden himself His voice drives me crazy! It is really annoying hearing him commentate the whole the game. I always this time while doing research and any time while Justin is playing and I am watching turn the sound off and turn the radio on because he gets on my nerves so much. The video here is has some of John Madden's voice in it so you can all hear how annoying it is! http://ps3.ign.com/dor/objects/14270630/madden-nfl-2010/videos/madden10_gmp_dreamteamoffense_81109.html (link from IGNvideo.com)

In this link you will find a video that tells all the new things on Madden 10. They touch on the on thing that has changed and the one thing that really drives my fiancée crazy. He absolutely hates the new gang tackling feature. A gang tackle is when a player on the offense is running with the ball and he is trying to be forced down the multiple players from the opposite teams. He finds it extremely annoying. While I was playing to do research I as well found it annoying that six, seven, or eight playing could come up and jump on you and try and tackle you. Yes yes it does make it seem more real, due to the fact that, that is what really happens in a real game BUT, this is a video game and I find it totally unnecessary. http://ps3.ign.com/dor/objects/14270630/madden-nfl-2010/videos/ignstrategize_madden10_081209.html (link from IGNVideo.com)

Gang tackles Gaming trend.com

The next thing that annoyed me as well, do more to the fact that it prolongs the game, is that if a touch down is close to the goal line the referees need to discuss it. They stop and stare and it appears that they are talking to one another to make a decision on to what they are going to call the play as. Than the commentary continues and they announce the call. Blah Blah Blah.

Some things that are advancing on Madden 10, that I did work on but, didn't actually play is the online experience. There are new achievements that can happen offence, defense, quarterback achievements. Something that was new in 09' and came back in 10' is Madden Moments. This is actually are really cool feature. This allows you to play the highlighted moments from the year before. Not just to watch them, but to actually PLAY them! How cool is that. And of course the music is always new. New songs new bands, etc.

So really there are not too many differences from one Madden to the other or is there? I think it is all in the eye of the beholder. If you are a huge Madden player and your ultimate dream is to be able to play in the Madden tournament on the big screen in NYC, well good luck. But, there is a lot of controversy about games like Madden, it’s just a videogame. Yea I said it. It’s just a videogame if this is what people like to do with their spare time or not spare time just all their time, well that is just fine.

Again, like I stated in the beginning of the review, I did do a little play so I could get the feel of the game. I am not a huge videogame player by any means, let alone a little bit of a player. I am more of a watcher and I think that watching Madden is boring, just as boring as watching football on TV and playing it (from what I have tried) is hard for me. But as far as from one Madden to another, to me if there are differences it's all the same to me.

Playing games in clas!! what!

I played a couple of flash games, on Addiciting games.com . One of the games I played was Squzzle. It is a game similar to Tetris in where you have to fit blocked shapes together to fill a whole grid and once you do that, that grid clears and you start over. there are four grids you can play from at one time. The more you play the faster the you have to put the piece in spots to clear out your grid. Yes, I would consider this art. It is full of viberant colors and you have a objective and rules to follow. It was very fun which was a plus.

In the article Is it art? the author ...

 
In the article Is it art? the author states, "The other way in which games might converge on art is through the beauty and detail of their imagined worlds, combined with the freedom they give the player to wander around in them. " I feel that this is true for all games. I feel that in order to combine a story line that people are going to want to play, great graphics, and the imagination that it takes for someone to think up all the characters and ideas that make and become the videogame itself.

 

"Many games now aspire to be “cinematic” above all else. In Halo 3, as in most games, the plot is conveyed largely through short expositional movies that are interspersed throughout the action." As for this part to determine whether or not a videogame is considered art, I say why not. If a movie is considered art than i say why cant a videogmae that is made on a computer the same way a movie by Pixar is? I am sure that when videogame developers sit down to build a videogame whether or not it is the first time the game is coming out or is the third release, they are going to sit down and put their creative minds together and make clay figures for the computer people to create the people on the computer. JUST like when the creators of Shrek (one, two and three) and Finding Nemo etc. sat down and brainstormed. they would draw and make figures and write out story lines one after another on a story board, pounding out their ideas to make any movie, videogame etc the best it can be!

 

So YES videogames in my opinion can be art. If someone can sit and draw, mold, create character after character on a computer and create something that has a great storyline and people love to play it and continue on to play the sequel than they have created art. Just think people are still talking about the Mona Lisa and how long has that been considered art!?

Let me first state this. The article ...

Let me first state this. The article Killzone 2: The Edge Verdict, I hardly know five words of what they are talking about in the article. I was so confused within the first two paragraphs that I quite reading it because it was pissing me off.....any help? Now as for the article Edge Killzone 2 Review: A Disservice To Game Consumers, By PSX Extreme basically is saying that numerical reviews on videogames are yes there and people look at them and consider them when they review games on line, "As we said, we're not about to question if there are legitimate reasons, and we're well aware of the often drastic differences in review policy from one publication to the next. But this is nothing more than a blatant attempt at attention, and if it were a strict editorial that doesn't really have any impact on the consumer, we wouldn't blink an eye."--But these do have an impact on the consumer. People take into account that number, (most people) because publications started to use them in the first place and it is what the media uses when they talk about a game. They probably say something to the effect that, -This game is a sequel to this game, the first game got a 7 will this one is just as good and it got an 8, BUT when you actually play the game you feel that you are playing the first game not the sequel there is nothing different or not much different between the two and you feel that the sequel deserved more like a 4. If they would have reviewed the game correctly and give it the right score and you wouldn't have wasted your money on it.   Continuing on with my rant the same article the writer writes, " But this is assigning a numerical value to a game that basically says, "it's good, but there are better titles out there for your money." This...is...a...lie. That's right, a lie. Like it or not, opinions exist on a sliding scale, and we're not saying everyone is going to enjoy KZ2, but this review is akin to saying something similar about "The Godfather II" or "Citizen Kane."

 

OK so how does everyone feel about the numerical parts of reviews? Do you think that too much weight is put on them? I do, I am almost to the point to say that I think that numerical parts of reviews shouldn't even be allowed!!!! What do ya think about that? They create too much bias toward a game, when you already that within when you think about it. If it is a game you like or kind of game you like you are more likely to rent, buy or "fly" that game anyways. Where as in you many people have friends who are as well gamers and they tend to feed off one another in their game choices and if one friend like first person shooter games and the other friend likes a game like Grand Theft Auto, one friend plays one and the other plays, and they trade and tell one another to play the other  OR TO NOT giving each other a personal review of their favorite game. O goodness I hope that makes sense to everyone. Sorry if it doesn't.  

Basically, I think Leigh is right. Ga...

 In order for me to write this blog I had to actually read a few video game reviews myself. Before this I have never seen a review of a videogame.  Anything I have ever read on a videogame is either here starting in this class, possibly in a magazine or seeing the commercial on the TV for the game. Which yes as more to be an advertisement I would consider that a review to an extent, because it is showing you pieces of the game and how the game is going to look and that is what a majority of the reviews are on, are they not?

 

In one of the articles, If critics did more championing and less obsessing over details, the writer states,"Basically, I think Leigh is right. Game critics (broadly speaking) do attribute too much to minor details, especially ones that are already present in games they love, and fail to give credit to bigger picture advances in storytelling and game play." Videogame Press. Now not knowing a whole lot and only having few examples to go by from what I have seen and read already I would say this is a very true statement! Most of the reviews have gone over well this screen shot sucked, and this camera angel doesn't work in this game. Or they continue on about the graphics, music, colors etc. I would say these are the BASIC and first things of a game that are reviewed. However, I have a feeling that true "hardcore" games who love one game to another want more. They want a new and improved story line. They would love to see better graphics and more achievements more levels and different characters on the levels. They don't want to feel that they are continually playing the same version of a game over and over when it is a sequel to the one before it! As stated in the article, If critics did more championing and less obsessing over details, "Of course there will always be those who just want a rundown of game play elements and analyses of how good they are compared to what's come before. But it's also wonderful to see critics with completely different orientations as to what matters and what doesn't when reviewing a game." The writer goes on to say that basically reviewers who get more into the story lines and see the bigger picture of the game that the more mature audiences of videogame players will want to go try different games they want to be challenged by the critics and want them to really think about what they are playing and give deeper insight about the videogame not making the review just like any other review. In the same article that is stated above, 'The videogame audience is maturing, and the result is that there are gamers who want to be challenged by critics to think about what they're playing, or should be playing, in a new way. The more critics who are championing what's new, challenging what we think is good, and engaging with each other and the audiences, the better off the art form of videogames will be."--

 

So from what I have read on videogame reviews I find an article like this extremely refreshing wanting reviewers to put out more engaged and thoughtful reviews. Ones that are not so monotonous and boring and continue on in the same format as the one before it and before that one and so on. Please give us something else to think about we get that graphics where all they could be! This isn't the Army we are talking about here!

 

 

 

Blog 9-15 Our lives with videogames

     "Delving into the complexities of cultural definition are completely un-worthwhile (and hardly entertaining) for you the reader. It's an endless rabbit hole of confusion. Instead let's adopt the mantra that culture should be understood as a very open term, with the generally accepted definition being: “the way of life of a people”. (Column: 'Lingua Franca' – The Place Of Games In Culture) These people could be connected by geography (country), interest (fan) or anything else that binds them together." --OK so does this quote from the article, Column: 'Lingua Franca' – The Place Of Games In Culture, really give you the definition of culture. For me it does to an extent. Last year I took a multicultural education class. We had to define culture in our own words. For me culture is who we are, it is how we define ourselves as a person. The dictionary defines culture as the "behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and though esp. as expressed in a particular community or period." (The American Heritage Dictionary, pg. 213)

   

    With in the gaming community there are certain things that define it as a culture. The community has it is own language and style of wording. It feels that those who develop the games are artists. These folks go to school for such are and they have their own institutions and products and systems on how they develop their art. Such as a photographer uses a black room and certain programs on a computer to develop and edit pictures.

 

    The next question once the culture is developed is who is considered to be in the community of gamers? One article talks about the difference between a gamer and a hipster. They define a hipster as someone who plays games because they are fab, for example when everyone wanted a Nintendo Wii so they could bowl, and they than had parties that revolved around the Wii. Or when Guitar Hero came out and parties revolved around it. In the article, The Hipsters of Gaming it states, "A hipster is judged by what’s now; gamers, by what they were playing in 1993.” Easily the most popular critics of video games is Penny Arcade, and as she points out, they accomplish this through a sense of inclusiveness. But past these social difference, they are technically performing the same cultural activity. Both identities are self-created and enforced by the community’s own tastes."  So a hipster is someone who plays the game at the time and when something new comes out it moves on to the new WOW!

    

    So lets put out there the true people of the videogaming community. They are defined as this according to the article The Hipsters of Gaming, "“Gamers accumulate knowledge; hipsters move through it, consuming and relinquishing it daily. Gamers accumulate years’ worth of garbage and trivia, and never let it go. They are still making Portal jokes. " These are the ones who dwell and go back and play the game over and over again. They are the ones who are out there developing and making these games better. They have the heart and ambition to stay with gaming and certainly does not ever stray away, from their favorite but tries out everything, and is always wanting to know more. As Ian Bogost states in his article "The End of Gamers, he feels "The point is not whether games qualify as art or not. Nor whether games are useful tools or not.  Rather, the point is that there are lots of other things people can and do accomplish with videogames. Some are well-established, like entertainment, and some are emerging, like meditation. No matter, all of those uses taken together make the medium stronger and give it greater longevity." Now just because games are used for other things such as helping someone through postpartum syndrome or exercising does that really mean that it is knocking out the term gamer?  I don't feel that it does. I think that the gamers should be proud that something they are so passionate about can help someone over come a struggle in their life, and you never know that person may someday become one of their own!

 

 

videogames vs. video games

The discussion in class today was very interesting. I was surprised as to how many people where extremely passionate about whether or not it should be video games or videogames! It was nice how when it was brought up, the added discussion of digital games or just games. That people made really good points: games is to vague when we are blogging about something specific and they are open to the public. It is a good idea that we stick with video games or videogames outside of the realm of the class. As for digital games i am glad that we squashed that topic quickly and no one really cared to call it that!

So back to video games vs. videogames. I would have to say honestly as long as its there who cares. It is specific enough for someone to read your blog and know that you are not just referring to a game but something specific as a videogame or video game. There was a good point made that it, for the sake (just like in the book) we want the video gaming community and culture to be taken more seriously that we do need to start sounding more uniform in the writing and reviews that are put out for others to read. Videogame(s) makes term more linguistically correct seems how it is one thing. It is a game played with some sort of monitor, TV, console, CPU or whatever have you, for the video part. Game correctly that you have parameters, rules, and guidelines that you follow to play. Putting those two terms together you are forming one thing and one word.

As we ended it is personal preference I myself may use them interchangeably but, I am defiantly leading more toward videogame(s), for my writing and reviews that I will tackling for this class. For the record when you spell check apparently in the dictionary videogame(s) is video games..........

This is only a test to see if I will ...

This is only a test to see if I will be able to get this to work. Writing my blogs here and uploading it to my blog!!!!!! OYE!

My gaming history

Hello,

My gaming history is minimal. I am quite unfamiliar with a lot of the terminology and abbreviations. So lets begin at the beginning. I was a wee tot when me dad brought in his Atari from the garage and set it up to see if it would play. I think it did for about a half of second. A few years later my sister and I received Nintendo the first one. We used to play Tetris and Mario Bros. and of course Dunk Hunt all the time. Next for us came Super Nintendo, on this system we played Donkey Kong, more Tetris and probably some others. Continuing on was N64 we played a lot of James Bond 007 and Mario Kart......OYE the competitions that would rise from these games!!! Somewhere between all of those I played a lot of Organ Trail on the computer. For a couple of years I didn't play much if anything at all on the gaming systems and stuck more to the free online games, mostly the word games such as Book Worm. I played a lot of euchre online too. Than I got a PS2 and played mostly sport games like NBA and Tiger Woods. Once Guitar Hero came out, myself as well as my sister got into that for a while.....now I don't do much in respect to playing video games, but i do a lot more watching as my fiancee is really into playing his beloved PS3. Now don't get me wrong it is not that I don't like gaming it is more I don't have TIME for gaming, it is very far down on my list of things to do. There you have it my gaming history.

My first

I am a virgin blogger. NOT ANY MORE!

L