Hello antiherogamers!

You’ll notice a lull in posts as of late. Don’t panic we’ve not died an early death. Far from it! We are gaining members all the time so make sure you spread the word. The lull in post’s is due to the fact that in under 10 days I’ll be moving house. This is quite naturally one of the more time consuming activites that one can go through, so do bare with us while we make the change, and get the internet sorted.

I’m going to tell you about my feelings on why Video Gaming is the most social “anti social past time” I know of. People scratching their heads at the last sentence should read it again a little slower. Video gaming has long been regarded as an anti social pastime. We’ve all been there: Alone, playing a computer game, family downstairs, girlfriend in the next room. No gamer who regards Video Gaming as a solid hobby cannot say that they’ve not been playing games at some point when there was a chance to do something that, for what many may view, is a more worthwhile use of their time. Many people stereotype gamers as the loner male, wearing glasses, hopeless with women and something of a social outcast. This is an opinion that we’ve all come across at some point. I appreciate that in recent years this stereotype may have softened due to various things, but then that’s part of what I’m here to talk about. Gaming as we know it is changing and because of this it is becoming one of the most social anti social pastimes we know. Let’s take a look:

The gaming industry is growing. This is not unexpected; mostly due to the large boom in popularity of the current generation of consoles. Market researcher DFC Intelligence predicts that by 2015 the industry will be worth over seventy billion dollars. This is an increase of around sixteen percent based on figures from 2009; and while not a huge growth, it is growth none the less. The current consoles are catering for such a wide audience that it is unlikely that these predictions are incorrect. Consoles are affordable; there is large replay value with new accessories such as the Xbox Kinect and the Playstation Move and they are very popular. Kinect in particular has totally obliterated its sales targets. We can go back further from recent times and look at the introduction of the Wii, now entering its fifth year, which has really re-enforced the idea of casual gaming to the living room for many families. Games such as Guitar Hero and Rockband only further strength this argument. Gaming is moving out of the shadowy teenagers’ bedroom and into the light of mainstream; but does that make it more socially acceptable?

The answer to that is a very predictable yes and no. The fact remains that for each casual game (not all of them good!) there are still many more games that use a traditional joypad and involve the things we love best, shooting things, looting and generally becoming immersed within a world totally separate to our own. It’s where gaming started and it is still the foundation for many of the best selling titles today. While these are socially acceptable in their own way; there are people that view them as addictive, violent and a health hazard to the player. This is a totally separate argument and not a can of worms I want to open today, but it’s relevant because as popular as gaming is becoming not all of it is seen as a positive influence, and while they may be correct they cannot state that gaming is antisocial and here is why -


Getting your friends over for Mario Kart is socialising but hardly difficult .

Today’s games feature multiplayer as a standard. This has become such a standard that I can only think of two games in the last four years that didn’t have an online component (namely Bioshock and Red Steel 2). Multiplayer games cover such a vast number that it would be impossible to talk about them all but I will say that it’s a lot easier to be social with a console then a PC. Console based gaming not only caters for playing online but is also the easiest way to get some friends over for a session on Pro Evo, Mario Kart, Rockband, you name it and it’s probably happened to you. This does require you to have friends beforehand and if you’re anything like me, I generally have to pay people to include me in activities. (Please note this is a joke, I’m not a psychotic shut in) PC Gaming although very fun, can be a pain for LAN matches unless you’ve got space and patience. However I regard multiplayer PC gaming as possibly the most social gaming aspect of my life in the last seven years.

I’ve been a PC Gamer since I was old enough to stand and was mainly into single player games until the age of seventeen, when I picked up Call Of Duty: United Offensive. This game was a milestone for me, in that it opened up a whole world I knew nothing about. Joining a clan; I met people from all over the world who played this game and had the same love for it I did. We practiced, we fought, we won, we lost and we did it all together. I did this while juggling a normal social life, a girlfriend, having a job and going to University. Not one area of my life suffered for it and I created a new group of friends, many of which I keep in contact with now on a regular basis, despite not playing the game anymore. For those who’ve never been in a Clan, I can only liken it to a more socially recognised team activity, such as a football team. The image of gaming in a clan can again be stereotyped to a group of men with no hope in life, social outcasts to the real world. That stereotype couldn’t be further from the truth. I played against and with females, people from all walks of life, who had jobs and families. I spoke to people in France, Germany, America, the Netherlands, even Australia. We swapped stories, we laughed and we had fun. We socialised.


Forming long lasting friendships in this enviroment is more challenging but ultimately more rewarding

Despite no longer playing that game, and the clan itself is now just playing for fun rather than for competitions, I still continue to meet people through gaming online. The camaraderie that recent games such as Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead and Killing Floor, to name but a few, allow strangers to either win and live together, or die and fail alone. I’ve never been so worried about a group of total and utter strangers than I was in Left 4 Dead. Sure the gameplay forces that on you but that’s what it’s all about. This sort of connection has further been enhanced with services such as Steam, a product that has generated a list of friends so long that it rivals that of my non gaming friends. There are people on there that I rarely speak to but then can anyone honestly state that they speak to all of their friends every day? No. You can’t.

As much as I could start retelling moments of true bravery or the experiences I’ve shared with people there is a negative aspect to all of this. Socialising generally means interacting with people and not just in real life, people are not always buckets of sunshine and roses. The negative aspect of socialising in gaming is that people can be very quick to judge, very quick to accuse and equally quick to stab you in the back. While this is a risk with any relationship, there is an obvious detachment in the sense that it is just someone on the end of a computer and not someone you have to see everyday as a simple “block” or “delete” will wipe them from your conscience forever. There are also people who have taken it too far, as with anything in life and have sacrificed real friends for computer based ones, but it’s not my place to state if this is good or bad thing.

Finally I’ll also mention Massive Multiplayer Online Games very briefly as I’m no expert so can’t pass comment on them with any real accuracy. I can surmise that this must be the most social form of gaming simply for the vast numbers of people and style of gameplay it requires. Anyone who suggests that gaming is anti social need only look at the figures of games such as World Of Warcraft which, as of October 2010, has over 12 million users subscribed to it. To put that into perspective; there are only 6 million people currently living in Ireland. That’s 12 million people; using one game. Are they all anti social? I highly doubt it.

Thanks for reading

CptToffer

Good afternoon antiherogamers and welcome to 2011.

With the hangovers fading and the chocolate supply dwindling, I’ve finally had time to sit down and sink a good few hours into my two video game gifts this year: Assassins Creed: Brotherhood on the Xbox360 and Donkey Kong Country Returns on the Wii. I’m a big fan of both series was had concerns about the quality of both games. I’m going to give an overall preview of the game’s so far, but will make them as spoiler free as possible. I’ve only sunk about two hours into each, and anything major I won’t include anyway.
With Assassins Creed: Brotherhood I was worried (as were a number of people it seems) that this would essentially be Assassins 2.5 rather then another full chapter in what is quickly becoming an excellent series. With a very similar backdrop, and similar lead character people’s grew increasingly concerned, while news of a few changes to the core gameplay and multiplayer to a previously single player only game served to increase gamers intrigue but not settle their nerves.

With Donkey Kong Country Returns, in the hands of the talented Retro Studios. The first entry to the Donkey Kong Country series in over 14 years and the first game not in the hands of Rare, I had my personal concerns that it just wouldn’t cut the mustard on the Wii. I also have concerns about old series being revived on the Wii where motion controls may not agree with gameplay from that era. Although DK did have outings on the Gamecube and Nintendo DS I don’t count them as part of the Country series as they are vastly different in terms of gameplay and overall aim.

Firstly looking at assassins Creed Brotherhood, I can safely say that anyone who played the last installment in the series will feel right at home here. If people wanted a major change from Assassins Creed 2, then they won’t be getting it here. That said I thought that the previous game was excellent and the minor changes made do enough to provide a slightly altered experience. The start to the game is excellent and I really can’t question the story at all. When I played the original, I really had a few “What the hell is going on?” moments. Clearly Ubisoft Montreal had a plan long-term because the story is clear and there is a helpful recap of what is going on at the start if you’re new to the series, although to be honest I’m telling everyone to go back and play the first two games, even if the original does get bland and repetitive at points, it’s a must.

Once the action really gets going, you find yourself back in Rome, with a lot of your hard work from the previous game undone, you face an uphill struggle to wrestle control away from the Borgia. I’m not sure how the developers have done it but the movements of getting around Rome feels even tighter and responsive than before. I was impressed with the subtle tweaks made from the first game to the second, but the third installment really feels as fluent and as realistic as I can see it becoming currently. Fighting as also become more enjoyable, not now a wait for a counter attack from the enemy but quick button presses allow for kills to be played out almost in a combo fashion as you target others while in one fight. I would love for the hand to hand fighting to be expanded upon as I think it’s really overlooked. Taking a leaf from Uncharted’s melee fighting would help with this. The game generally has grown in size. It can be over-whelming for some players to have this many options so early on in the game, and I happen to be one of them. I like to be let off the leash to do what I want, but I like to have some direction aswell. The game is really what you want it to be, as you can dip in and do some story missions, carry out a couple of contracts or just do a few side missions. Getting around Rome can be done on foot, by horseback or through various linked tunnels. The tunnels are a nice feature, but the horses seems to be too slow for me, and never seem to gather any real pace.


Never gets old

The multiplayer is something that I’ve also briefly dipped into and I can say it is as addictive as it is fun. Myself and Fitz have logged a couple of hours both separate and together, and they have been very enjoyable. I’ve had time with the first two game types, ‘Wanted’ and ‘Alliance’. These are basically solo and team versions of a very basic concept, which is you have a target, that you have to hunt, while someone is hunting you. Kill your target to get points, and another target. Kill the wrong person and you’ll just show up on your murders radar and also feel quite daft. There’s a lot more to it then I can really talk about here, but suffice to say it’s a very different multiplayer experience and it’s not something that feels tacked on or overlooked at all.

Finally two excellent features I have to comment on are the training mode and the inclusion of secondary objectives in the single player. Anyone who’s played Metal Gear Solid and done the VR training missions will see the influences it’s had on the Assassins training mode. There are targets to beat, medals to be won and a few different modes to try. Not needed for this type of game but very welcome indeed. Secondary objectives are also present in the majority of main story missions, providing you with goals such as “remain undetected”, “only use your sword” or even “complete the memory in under 400 seconds”. Again while these are not required they add a little extra layer to this game that really is going from strength to strength.


The excellent training mode

The second game I was lucky enough to get was Donkey Kong Country Returns for the Wii. Nintendo is the bread and butter of my gaming life. It’s the company who’s consoles I grew up playing and I have a lot of time and love for many of the old characters. One such character is Donkey Kong and the ‘Country’ series which for me was great platforming that had a sharp learning curve. When I heard the announcement they were going to be handing the series over to Retro Studios to do a fresh entry I was very excited. There was a worrying feeling that my nostalgia would not allow the new game to be any good but judging from the reviews it was worth the gamble. Im happy to report that this is a fantastic new entry to the series.

I’ve said it already in this article but anyone who’s played the original Donkey Kong Country games feel right at home and I challenge anyone not to fall in love with the general excellence of the platforming on offer here. Each level I’ve played so far while following a theme, is different from the last, presenting a different challenge and asking something else of the player. While the Wii is never going to compete with the graphics produced by the other two consoles, this is a great looking game. Some levels are stunning especially those set in the Jungle at sunset. They don’t just look good, they look really bloody cool aswell.


Wow

There has been a lot of talk about the difficulty curve in this game. I’m currently on World 3 and I can slowly see it picking up now, having to retry a level several times last night. Despite having to retry, I carried on enjoying the game knowing that It was my inability to succeed as opposed to a part of the game that was just unfair or poorly designed. The controls are tight and responsive, the motion control aspect being kept to a minimum. That said one of Donkey Kong’s new moves is to kneel down and blow onto objects on the terrain to reveal hidden collectables (which are key to that 100% completion. This feels very unlike DK as I’d rather see him clap a gust of wind towards the objects. The mechanic is also used to disable some enemy’s but It still seems a little strange and breaks up the pace that is built up. My only other complaint is the enemies themselves. I miss the Kremlings terribly and I really cannot take the new guys seriously. That said I fully respect that Retro Studios probably wanted to separate it away from the Rare days and put their mark on the series, which they have done here very successfully.

Hopefully this articles convinced you to at least take a look at these two games. They are both excellent entry’s to their respective series and I’ve barely scratched the surface on either. Thanks for reading and look forward to any thoughts you have.

See you again at the end of the week.

CptToffer

Hello antiherogamers!

As the festive season is drawing to a close and everyone prepares for one last 'hurrah' on New Year’s Eve; many people around the globe look forward to what 2011 will bring for the world of video games. The schedule for next year is looking very sweet already and as such I think it would be a good time to have a look at five specific games that I know I won't be able to do without next year! It's probably a good time to explain how we’re going to look at games here at antiherogaming. Currently it's just myself and Fitz looking at games, passing on our thoughts and feelings on them, and other things gaming related. As much as it pains us to admit it, we’re not going to be able to look at every game out there. There's just far too many of them for us to handle. That said; what we will say about the games we look at will be honest and will hopefully be fun and informative to read. If you ever want us to look at, or give a specific view on a game, or something gaming related then drop us an email

Let’s have a look at what 2011 holds for us in no particular order:

Portal 2 (PC, Xbox360, PS3)

If you've not played the first Portal then stop reading this article and go get a copy now. It's likely to be very cheap and it's going to be worth any money you spend on it. The reason the original works so well is that like most great games the premise is so simple: One gun that does two things. A simple plot and a lot of fun made this one of the modern day classics. The basic idea of firing an entrance and an exit portal to solve various puzzles in a first person shooter setting was gaming gold right from the word go. Seen almost as an add-on to the Orange Box it created an almost cult like following that received just as much interest as the other two already established series in the Orange Box itself.
So when Valve announced Portal 2; it is looking like it will be a game worth your time and attention. With new features including revisiting Aperture Science laboratories, new puzzle mechanics, a co-op mode, and the return of your arch enemy from the first game; this is a game that has a lot of hope riding on it but will surely not fail to deliver.


Can't wait


The Legend Of Zelda: Skyward Sword (Wii)

Oh Skyward Sword. You tricksy little thing. Anyone who knows me even a little will know that my one true love is Zelda games. No matter how they look, who the main enemy is, or where they are set, I love everything about them. I was a lot happier when we moved on from the Wind Waker style to the Twilight Princess one. I've got no preference over the graphics per se, as they are not important to me, however I personally would prefer to see a darker tone and more realistic graphics in Zelda games; to better the series. With that in mind; I’m still going to be playing Skyward Sword because it is a Zelda game first and foremost. This means that Nintendo will give it the love and care that ensures it will provide a first class experience, in story, gameplay and quirky mechanics. It may not be everyone's cup of tea these days but I for one cannot wait to try my hand at the latest Zelda experience.


Dead Space 2 (PC, Xbox360, PS3)

A few weeks back myself and Fitz had the opportunity to play the demo at an event hosted by IGN. That same demo is now out for the general public to play and hopefully you'll all see what the fuss was about. Dead Space was simply a bit of a sleeper hit. No-one seemed to be talking about it, and all of a sudden it was just there. It looked very interesting so I went straight out and got a copy. It was, in a word, awesome. It literally was one of the scariest things I have played since "that level" in Thief. Not only that but the plot and combat were of a high quality. It's one of only a handful of games I've replayed more than twice. So you can imagine that with this particular release being right around the corner my anticipation is reaching fever pitched levels. It simply looks even better than the first. If you haven't seen the latest trailer do so now and hopefully you'll understand what I’m babbling on about. This is going to be my first big purchase of 2011 and I can't wait!


So very creepy!


Deus Ex: Human Revolution (PC, Xbox360, PS3)

Any gamer worth their salt would of heard of Deus Ex at some point over the last ten years. This little gem was at its time phenomenal; simply because it combined first person and RPG elements with the ability to literally play the game how you wanted to. It became a benchmark that many games were compared against and it is this very same quality that next year’s prequel will be compared to. I’m personally looking forward to playing this as I recently finished yet another play through of the original. It was not easy going doing so on realistic mode and deciding to plug all my XP into swimming and other non-essential skills, let me assure you. This next game from what I've seen so far looks to combine elements of both Deus Ex and its sequel Invisible War. I’m personally hoping for gameplay and combat from the former and the general feel and graphical approach of the latter. The beauty of Deus Ex is playing the game how you see fit. Many games can boast guns blazing or stealth options, but no game offers the various routes that Deus Ex does. It's also going to be a single player focused game, something of a rarity these days. This is probably going to be one of the most, if not the most, anticipated game of 2011.



Uncharted: Drakes Deception (PS3)

There is one game, that can steal the 'most anticipated' crown from Deus Ex: Human Revolution and that game is Uncharted: Drakes Deception. I’m something of a newcomer to the series, after being pointed towards it only in the last year by my good friend Matt, something of an Uncharted expert. Both games have been amazing successes for developers Naughty Dog, and fans can rest assured they won't be rocking the boat with the third title, as the series simply goes from strength to strength. Recent trailers and screenshots just make this seem more and more awesome. Uncharted combines’ action and platformer, sprinkles in some puzzles, a pinch of humour and glazes with the best graphics I've seen on a console to date. Just when the PS3 can't be pushed any further; Naughty Dog just seem to crank it up to eleven and go all out. Human Revolution is resting on the coat tails of a huge game in Deus Ex, but it’s simply looking too good to bet against even at this early stage. It’s easily going to be the top purchase for any PS3 owner next year.


Just Wow

Here concludes my 'must plays' for 2011. What games are you looking forward to next year?

Thanks for reading

CptToffer

Good evening antiherogamers!

If you live in Britain right now you’ll know we are experiencing some snow, and if it’s two inches or fifteen the country’s done the proper British thing and gone into total meltdown at the idea of having to cope with something outside our normal routine. Finally the end is in sight (please god let it be) and we can focus on this weekend, which is Christmas.
On the way home from Fitz’s house this evening I got thinking about festive seasons gone by and cast my mind back to 1998 when as a bright-eyed young nipper I got my hands on Legend Of Zelda: Ocarina Of Time. This game literally defined not only my gaming expectations of the genre, but parts of who I am today (You can expect a blog on this at some point during my lifetime). In terms of gaming it is a milestone for me.

My earliest memory of the game is not playing it, but when I was watching a film on television and it cut to adverts. The usual rubbish came on, and I watched along mindlessly. However within a few minutes came the best 01:03 of my life according to television. It was the advert for the game that a good majority of the world was looking forward to. It was pure gold. It was the perfect blend of action, music, and text. The music is composed by Basil Poledouris, and the title is Riddle of Steel / Riders of Doom. The music was (I believe) originally featured in the film Conan The Barbarian. The only thing it did slightly wrong was as the article states, question the ability of fledgling heroes. Nintendo clearly didn’t think that tagline through and it was soon removed after many people suggested it was sexist.

The advert still for me remains what a gaming advert should be: “Here’s some backing music, here’s a few clips and here’s some text to go with it” Like that stupid meerkat states “Simples!” I’m aware advertising changes based on the audience and the product so I’m not surprised that Nintendo are using Ant or Dec to advertise the latest Wii games this year. We only have to look across the sea’s at our gaming brethren the Japanese to see how insane gaming adverts can get. Just have a look at the Japanese version of a A Link To The Past Advert. It all goes abit... Thriller!

What are your favourite gaming advertisements and why do they stick in your mind?

Chris

Onto today’s thoughts, which revolve around “Casual and Hardcore gaming.” As far as topics go, this has been talked about more and more in recent times, and while the difference between the two groups maybe very clear to some, I believe there is a grey area that is being all together missed. Let us begin…
We should start by actually getting a clear picture of what “casual” and “hardcore” actually mean in the gaming world. This is very much open to individual interpretation and so on that basis I’ll try to keep it as mainstream as possible for the basis of the blog. A simple google search and quick click throws me this little nugget:

“A casual game is a video game or online game targeted at or used by a mass audience of casual gamers. Casual games can have any type of gameplay, and fit in any genre. They are typically distinguished by their simple rules and lack of commitment required in contrast to more complex hardcore games.”

Wow. I didn’t think it was going to say that. Ok well basically this is how I think the majority would describe casual gamers. They basically don’t stick to any genre or any gameplay type. I’d be lying if I thought that a large amount of casual gamers were playing first person shooters or action adventure games, as they generally require time or commitment and can boast various rules or gameplay elements that require time to be spent learning them. First person shooters can also be quite unforgiving (but hey that’s what regenerative health’s for right?) I’d like to add to the above statement that I think casual gaming also represents something people dip in and out of, and they are the type of gamer who doesn’t wake up in the morning wondering when they will get to play some games today. My girlfriend is a casual gamer.

So what’s a hardcore gamer? People at this stage to look back at the above quote and remember “They are typically distinguished by their simple rules and lack of commitment required in contrast to more complex hardcore games.” For the record I don’t believe that just hardcore gamers play hardcore games. Due to its popularity and general time requirements World Of Warcraft maybe considered a hardcore game, although it has many very basic elements that a casual gamer could enjoy without going to the very depth that seasoned players enter.

So:

“A Hardcore gamer is a widely used term applied to describe a type of video game player. There is currently no unanimously agreed upon definition for the term. Some describe hardcore gamers as those whose leisure time is largely devoted to playing video games. This type of gamer prefers to take significant time and practice on games, in contrast to a casual gamer”

Wow, I’m even more stunned. I find it fascinating that there is no unanimously agreed upon definition for “Hardcore Gamer” and yet a “casual gamer” which in my eyes has only really become mainstream in the last ten years has its own definition. I’m aware there were games that could cater for both sides as far back as Tetris in 1989, but I believe casual gaming has gaming as exploded in the last eight years, with everything from mobile phone games, to internet games, right through to major console’s such as the Nintendo Wii. So to me a hardcore gamer is someone who spends a lot of their free time gaming. It is also one of their main hobbies and is something that will expand past the gaming onto things such as forum participation, joining clans and focusing their skills on certain games to reach high levels of skill. This is not typical of all hardcore gamers but is merely various trends associated with them. I consider myself to be a hardcore gamer.

With such broad definitions that go deeper than the little inserts I’ve given you, how can their possibly be any overlap? In some ways they are complete polar opposites. I’m going to use myself and my girlfriend as examples (well spotted for those that already guessed this) as to why they are very much alike. My girlfriend is the most casual of the casual gamer definition. Before she met me she had no interest in gaming whatsoever. She hadn’t owned a console, a handheld or a PC. She had a laptop for work purposes. Unless she’s leading a double life (it’s possible, I’ve got the self-awareness of a melon) she has little to no interest in gaming. When I met her, I was entering my six month in a Call Of Duty clan, which I’m still with today. I had tickets to attend a gaming museum, and I was wearing a Nintendo t-shirt. Before anyone ask’s no she’s not blind, and no I’m not rich.

Anyway, fast forward to today and she plays the occasional game but is still very much in the casual camp. She owns a Wii however. (lets face it who doesn’t) She also partakes in the odd PC game. I found her one day playing the addictive Plants Vs Zombies. She seemed very captivated by its simplicity, by the fun and also by the idea of having her own Zen Garden. To get the garden you need money, and the money is best earnt from the survival mode. The survival mode is a tough son of a bitch at the best of times, but this didn’t stop her. She tried various strategies, different plants, different formations and ideas. She even went online and looked at some of the more successful ones to try to replicate them. She would do this, when she visited me for 2-3 hours at a time. She specifically asked to play on occasions. Now as good as this game is, I wasn’t too fussed about the bloody garden, and once completed I didn’t play it an awful lot. I casually played it to fill in time between doing other tasks. It only occurred to me recently that there had been a slight role reversal, and not only that but it had come from something that by definition is a casual game. Puzzle games are listed as something that generally is a casual genre based on their simple demands and lack of constant commitment to maintain skill level. I found this undeniably fascinating. A game aimed at a casual audience had turned me into its target and my partner into something of a hardcore gamer.

I thought this might be just a reaction to Plants Vs Zombies and its Zen Garden and colourful premise. However this continued onto Peggle. Peggle, another puzzle game, has bought an almost identical reaction from her. Insistent on completing every level one hundred percent, she can be found playing it at least twice when she visits. She even ( I hate admitting this as it makes me feel dirty) holds the top score with one shot on my version of Peggle. This is my girlfriend. If I asked her what the Master Sword was, she’d probably tell me it’s the trophy given to the people who win MasterChef.


(No, Im not telling you what her high score was)

At this stage she still fulfills the criteria of a casual gamer. She has no desire to go out and buy loads of games, nor devote large amounts of time to games. Yet she also fulfils the loose definition of a hardcore gamer as she’s honing skills, focusing on completing goals that to the casual gamer is unattainable. She further confuses me buy purchasing “Pikmin” and “A Boy And His Blob” for the Wii. Neither of these are easy or casual by definition. In fact they are both quite unforgiving at stages requiring a deft amount of skill and patience.

Overall I’d be lying if I knew what all this meant, but it does suggest that it is not that easy just to categorise gamers into two groups. My girlfriend has clearly muddied the waters by displaying a hardcore gamers approach to games that are aimed at a casual audience, while maintaining her casual identity. To this day she has no real interest in gaming that is “Hardcore” by definition. She does however play casual games with a feverish commitment that is seen in Call Of Duty players. One cannot argue that is simply because the games are easy or simple, because for the most part what she is trying to achieve is not. It is because of this that I would argue that there is not a lot of difference between the two concepts. I should imagine there are a lot of people who play casual games with tenacity that a hardcore gamer plays hardcore games.

What are your thoughts behind the concepts of “Casual and Hardcore Gaming?”

Hope you enjoyed this article

Chris

Hello all and welcome to another edition of antiherogaming!

Today, while fighting the battle between mankind and the common cold (it's kicking my ass, seriously a BFG 3000 wouldn't go amiss here), I'm going to speak about my feelings about regenerating health. As you will come to learn over getting to know me through these blogs, I've been gaming for the better part of 20 years and as such as seen a lot of trends come and go. However this one seems to be more resilient then a case of herpes. Recently we've seen a few games move away from it, but it's still knocking around and I'm going to give an overview and an opinion on the whole thing.

To start with let's look back at when this all began. Due to it's commercial success (no im not sure why either) people regard Halo:Combat Evolved as the first time a regenerating health system was used in a game. While it may seem that I'm pedantic when stating this I don't believe it to be the case. Halo had a regenerating shield bar and a separate health bar that you could get health kits for. While it may of also made the concept popular, the first game to actually use this was Faceball 2000 originally for the Gameboy then later ported to SNES. As the Halo series grew in size, the health system under went many changes but I believe they all featured some sort of shield / health balance, according to Bungie.

The first Halo game was released back in 2001, and as we draw to the close of 2010, we have seen an explosion in the use of regenerative health / shields in one of the corner stones of gaming; the First Person Shooter. Attaching itself to one of the most popular forms of gaming has allowed this form of health system to spread to other well known franchises such as the Call Of Duty and Gears Of War series. If it's so popular why do I think it's a bad idea?

For a start I believe it heavily impacts the fun factor of gaming. I understand that there are different roles within shooter games today. There are your Serious Sam's who wade in all guns blazing. There are your Theif's who have to sneak around and not get spotted. There are literally hundreds of ways of playing today's games. However the fun factor is hampered when gaming becomes a task of returning fire, taking damage, then hiding behind a rock for 5-10 seconds. It just isn't realistic. People will say that not all games are realistic. Fine, but if I'm playing as some hulking space dude who's circumventing Saturns fourth moon, while riding my chocolate and swede rocket ship, I want to be able to shoot at the evil space slugs of the planet Lorn, without having to worry that I need to go hide behind the nearest Asteroid Belt, incase I got shot a bit to much. I appreciate that the future of mankind may allow us some sort of regenerating health, so maybe that fits well with those sorts of games

However if I'm currently playing a game set in Medieval England, or out in latest nameless country some ones invaded in some shooter, and the developers are trying to portray "real war" I don't count getting shot with a rocket, and then quickly scurrying behind the nearest car to regenerate my left arm and right kidney totally correct for the style of game I'm participating in. I just don't feel it has a place there in the context of the situation. It breaks immersion in my opinion, and immersion is the reason why games work so well.

Secondly I believe regenerating health impacts the skill factor involved in gaming. Unless the game in question has particularly gifted A.I there is nothing to stop the player from hiding behind the nearest solid object and slowly picking off the opposition. I would much rather know that after I get shot a couple of times, I've either got pull off a massive win and cap the last two guys without dying or make a dash for that health kit. It does not enable the sort of player development that I found crucial five - eight years ago as you can literally wait each fire fight out. I find that in order to make games for difficult the 'hard modes' of today's main stream games just propose to throw more and more bodies at you, and you succumb to the fact that too many people are shooting at you at one time, in an attempt to sap your super human powers.

Linked to the skill factor, is a lesser point of fairness. Now don't get me wrong, at this stage your probably thinking that this is a rant because I suck at games. While I am by no means as amazing as some people I know and have watched, I am not the worlds worse gamer. I played with a successful clan for the better part of three years and enjoyed winning a lot of matches and competitions. However the use of regenerating health in multiplayer has a negative effect on the experience. If I've spotted you, shot you and you manage to get behind cover, well done. Have a cookie! I, however have injured you, with my deft shooting and as such you should now be at a disadvantage because you were busy being about as self aware as an banana. What I propose to be totally annoying and down right agitating is that when said banana pops his head up and starts blasting away at me, he's returned to full health, and me, the total mug in the open, making a mad dash to get to him before his magic health bar refills, is now totally and utterly screwed. People will say I should of killed him first time, or I should of waited, but why should I? This is a game, I want to get over there and finish the git off.

"So if not regenerating health then what else CptToffer? "You can't be critical without some sort of better option." Luckily my dear fellows, I have one. Far Cry 2 represents this better option. For those not familiar with the concept it uses a mix of regenerative health, segmented health bars and health kits. This means that perhaps the health bar will be split into four, twenty five percent bars. If your health empties out of the segment, it can only be regained by a health kit. If you take a slight hit and it knocks a little bit out of the segments then given a few seconds it will refill. Lose the majority of your segments and first aid will have to be used, perhaps by removing a bullet, or setting of a broken bone?



Remember children, if you get shot, call an ambulance. Don't get your mum's finest silverware and start playing operation


I'm not saying that this is perfect nor is it above criticism. If I thought pulling a bullet out of my leg would solve any health issues after being shot over thirty times then I would of picked up a real gun long ago. It is however I think a step in the right direction.

In closing I leave you with this thought, and something that honestly only struck me while writing this article. I'm currently playing a lot of Call Of Duty: Black Ops (and to be honest the only people who aren't probably don't have electricity) which has a regenerating health system. Grenades regularly get thrown at me because I've got into the habit of killing people. Now with a health pack system, I would be running and diving for cover, grinning like a madman if I managed to survive with a small piece of health. However with the regeneration system I view this grenade, this rolling ball of death as nothing more than an inconvenience. I can't kill it, it will be gone soon, and there's a good chance it won't kill me. I watch it roll near to me and wait. It explodes, I take damage, I wait, I move on. The grenade might aswell not of even existed. This reaction (or lack there of) is created by regenerating health. It totally removes the fight or flight response that gaming brings out in me and for that, I find regenerating health is slowly killing game.

I welcome any feedback both via comments or email at waldo5@hotmail.com Thanks for reading and see you next time.

CptToffer