Gamer's Outpost Press (Archived)

by L.W. Barker aka ‘Sarge’

There are two types of gamers… those who embrace digital content, and those who tightly hold on to physical copies.

I for one is the latter who is quite aware that physical games for Xbox One, and PS4 are blu rays and cannot directly play content from the disc. And that these games are automatically installed on the console’s hard drive prior to playing. But, there is nothing like that feeling of actually holding that game in hand. Just being able to see and touch the game gives it value in my collection.

The fact is our Industry is going through changes that have transformed the  old “retail” formula into something new that promises to push it from its “tried and true” physical past to a “money making” digital future…like the Music Industry did a few years ago.

However, this does not bode well with some gamers. “Digital” to them means that games are not really owned.  And without that physical copy in hand, the thought of publishers and developers suddenly deciding to take back digital content is always on their minds. These gamers will collect physical copies of their games until they run out of storage space…and then they’ll make room for more.

Other gamers have embraced digital content. From music to movies and now games, they were born into a world that only knows digital content, and physical copies are obsolete. Armed with the knowledge that their hard drives will eventually get full, these gamers are “Masters of the Cloud” so to speak.

Thus, our changing Industry has made some gamers uncomfortable with the thought of not having that physical game in hand. And yet digital is where the Industry is going. Developers are leading the way with many bypassing publishers and retailers and presenting their games directly to gamers, who for the most part, have embraced it.

Now as our Industry moves toward an all digital future, there might not be a place for gamers like me. A fact made all too clear the other day when a young gamer asked me with astonishment in his voice, “You still have games on discs!?”

Visit our Official Website at http://www.gamersoutpost.net

The audacity of charging full price for half a game

by L.W. Barker aka ‘Sarge’

Star Wars: Battlefront is a major disappointment. Yes, the game has fantastic graphics, and its sound is on par with some of the best in the first person shooter (FPS) genre, but even with those features, the game is half baked at best and is not worth its $60 asking price.

Why Electronic Arts and DICE decided on releasing Battlefront without a single player campaign is known only to them, but I can summise that their decision was based on the achievements of past games, such as EA’s own ‘Titanfall’ which was developed by Respawn Entertainment, and ‘Evolve’ by Turtle Rock Studios and 2K Games.

Titanfall was release on March 10, 2014, and like Battlefront it was highly anticipated by a vast majority of gamers. Much of this anticipation was a result of clever marketing and promotion techniques that convinced our Industry that Titanfall was “THE Call of Duty killer”. The reality though it is wasn’t, for when it was released, gamers quickly realized that unlike Call of Duty, Titanfall was missing a true single player campaign which is basically the heart and soul of a FPS. Thus, its popularity quicky dropped which resulted in the game currently being played by only a handful of hopeful gamers who are “hanging in there” for Titanfall’s promised 2017 second coming.

On February 10, 2015, Evolve was released to much critical acclaim from the industry which led to it being nominated for six different Game Critics Awards. And unlike Battlefront and Titanfall, it was widely known that the game was to be a multiplayer only fare prior to it being released. However, developer, Turtle Rock Studios received heat from gamers who felt that the developer was deliberately withholding Downloadable Content (DLC) from Evolve to be sold separately as a market strategy to make more money from the game. This controversy caused Evolve to received mixed reviews from critics which brought it an overall Metacritic score of 78% on all platforms.

So now, Star Wars: Battlefront is yet another game released with high gamer expectation that was quickly dashed when it was realized that the game did not have a single player campaign, little replay value, and not worth its $60 price tag. At best, without a single player campaign, Battlefront and all other games like it, to include Ubisoft’s recently released ‘Tom Clancy’s Rainbox Six: Siege’ should cost half their asking price with DLC making up the other half. No multiplayer only game should be full price with DLC costing upwards of $20 for each additional piece of content.

Thus, this Industry’s publishers and developers need to realize that the success of a game is based on appeasing ALL gamers and not just the ones who enjoy multiplayer. I enjoy my single player campaigns, and would have bought Battlefront if it contained one. But this game without single player is half baked and NOT worth its $60 asking price.

Finally, we as gamers have the power to change our Industry’s audacious perception that we are “suckers” who are easily taken advantage of with continual DLC. And the best way to do that is to keep our hard earned money away from games made for “suckers” and use it on ones designed for who we are…gamers.

Visit our Official Website at http://www.gamersoutpost.net

by Mat ‘Inferiorego’ Elfring via Comic Vine

There was no other game I was more excited for that Star Wars: Battlefront. I have been waiting for years, like many other fans of the original two games. Those were games where I spent quite a lot of nights playing with buddies, so again, I was pumped for Battlefront, especially since first person shooters have become to feel a bit repetitive for me: see every Call of Duty Game.

Then the game came out and I quickly spent time waiting for it to install on my Xbox One, which felt like it took for days. That’s not a knock against Battlefront though, just Xbox. Anyway, I spent some time playing match after match and all the tutorials and I realized that Battlefront, as a complete game, is insanely frustrating.

The biggest problem with this release is that it feels like half a game. After getting through some training missions, which were pretty fun, I decided that I wanted to do a single-player game. I had essentially four maps to choose from in that area. I wanted to play a level where I could fly around in an X-Wing or Tie-Fighter, but those levels do not exist in single player mode, minus the tutorials.

As I played a couple rounds of battle mode, squaring off against a group of AI, I quickly found that there’s no reason to keep playing this mode. You don’t unlock anything, since all the weapons are already unlocked for you, and the only mission you have is to “shoot people that aren’t on your team.” Single player mode became something that felt like it was shoehorned into the final game with no thought behind it. If they simply mirrored multiplayer mode for offline play, it would actually feel like a bit more complete game.

The real driving force of the game was behind online multiplayer and again, there’s no real story there, just things happening. The last online-only FPS I truly enjoyed was Titanfall and there was a campaign mode in the game which at least gave us a bit of a story. Within Battlefront, depending on what mission you play, there are objectives which are pretty much the same for every level. There isn’t much variety here and before you know it, you’ve played through all the levels in the game. There is replayability, but it’s frustrating to not be able to talk to your teammates, in a game that needs strategy.

Luckily, EA is really good at taking money from people and got suckers like me to pay $10 extra in order to buy the deluxe edition, which gives players access to a level a week before anyone else. In addition, there’s a $50 DLC where we’ll get a few more levels. That’s right: $50. The most insulting season pass for a major video game, especially when you compare it to other games, like Witcher III which offer a ton of bang for your buck.

That lead me to come to the conclusion that this isn’t a full game. It’s half a game, at least it feels like half a game. In order to get the full game, you need to dump down $110 in total. That sucks. It’s a kick in the crotch after you’ve already been kicked in the crotch.

Why this has been nothing but complaining and the venting of frustrations, I actually do like the game, even if, at times, it just feels like a bare-bones FPS with a Star Wars skin pasted on top. It’s fun and it looks really pretty. You can fly around in a Tie Fighter or ride around in an AT-AT and blow people up. That’s one of the many cool moments you can get experience in this game. The control scheme works well, and again, everything looks so incredibly pretty and true to the Star Wars universe. Even playing as the heroes or villains like Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader is a pretty cool addition to the overall game, but it’s simply not enough to get me to ignore the fact that so much feels missing.

Overall, there’s a lot to love but so much within this game that doesn’t reach its potential. It’s a bummer to see what could have been with this game because so much of it feels halfway there. If you’re a Star Wars fan, like myself, you’re going to pick it up. You probably already picked it up, but with the $110 price tag to get everything this game should have originally come with is an insult to those who purchased it. As for me, I’ll probably keep playing the game, and most likely, I’ll eventually cave on the season pass because I’m a sucker and the exact type of person EA wants to buy their game. So, in the end, I’m the one that loses.

Visit our Official Website at http://www.gamersoutpost.net

Digital sales are gaining on those archaic discs and plastic cases — and it’s about time.

by Damon Beres via The Huffington Post

New data suggests people are buying more of their video games digitally, rather than banking on clunky plastic cases and discs.

A report published Tuesday by SuperData, an industry analysis firm, says that the digital video game market has grown 7 percent since last year to a total of $5.5 billion. That’s pretty good news for one reason in particular: Physical video games are basically obsolete wastes of space and resources.

You may not realize it, but if you’re gaming on a PlayStation 4 or Xbox One, the actual disc you buy at the store doesn’t really do much. Games need to be installed on your system’s hard drive because the consoles can’t run games directly off of the Blu-Ray discs. Beyond that, you’re buying into a system that produces plastic waste for basically no reason. The industry isn’t exactly ruining the planet on its own — plastic cases are recyclable — but why support physical games at all when most titles are released digitally?

Joost van Dreunen, CEO of SuperData, told The Huffington Post that digital game sales are trending upward while physical purchases are trending down.

In the third quarter of 2015, Electronic Arts, a massive video game publisher, made $666 million in physical sales and $480 million in digital, according to numbers provided by SuperData. At the same time last year, it made $692 million in physical sales and $348 million in digital.

“We’re anticipating digital to outperform physical for the first time this year, which indicates a sea change in the industry,” van Dreunen said in an email.

In the past, it was easier to justify buying physical video games because it was cheaper to get them used or otherwise marked down. But times are changing. Digital game vendors like Steam, GOG.com, PlayStation and Xbox have become known for frequent sales — especially around the holidays — meaning it’s easy to make impulse purchases.

Gaming is also more convenient when you move to a digital library. Any games you want are stored on your hard drive and boot up the moment you select them — no getting off of the couch to switch discs out. (The horror!)

Some people are always going to prefer having physical collections. But the rest of us might consider giving digital games and gift codes this holiday season to avoid paying into a dusty old system.

Visit our Official Website at http://www.gamersoutpost.net

by Paul Tamburro via Crave Online

More speculative information regarding Hideo Kojima’s departure from publisher Konami has been revealed, with Metal Gear Solid composer Rika Muranaka reportedly discussing the reason behind Kojima and Konami having severed ties.

According to The Codec podcast’s co-host Clayton Daley, an interview held with Muranaka by another podcast he hosts called Metal Gear Central shed some light on the reasons why the relationship between the publisher and Metal Gear creator soured, with the reasoning being that Kojima frequently over budget during the development of Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain.

Read an excerpt of Daley’s explanation of Muranaka’s claims below (thanks to NeoGAF user Jindrax for the find):

Daley: “The main reason for the falling out, at least in her opinion, is that Kojima gets paid a salary, and doesn’t make any profit share on the game. He gets paid a certain amount no matter what, and he was spending so much money and delaying the project, and adding all these features and making sure the game was the biggest and best thing it could be, and Konami was unhappy with that because [delaying] has no effect on him. He was spending the budget on this and that and upgrading the Fox Engine and then delaying further because the engine wasn’t ready, and Konami wasn’t happy with that because he gets his salary and he takes a more traditional “Japanese man” approach by not taking a profit share. So in doing that, he gets a little more than a game creator would but doesn’t take bonuses from the game selling well.”

Yong: “So you’re telling me that Kojima wanting to make the game the best it can be is what started the conflict?”

Daley: “Yes. In her eyes, Kojima’s a fantastic creator, and probably the best creator of his time, but he doesn’t have a strong business sense like Konami would like him to have. Where instead of, for example, cutting corners by lowering foliage resolution, he wants to make sure everything looks as good and polished as possible. She said they paid for her to write 30-40 songs that ended up not being used, and he’d tell her to write another one, then another one, then another one, because he settles for what he likes and has a good mind for what people want to see and what people want to hear.

Daley: “She’s worked directly with Kojima for the music before so she does have some insight, and personally believes that the music has suffered in MGSV because she’s not a part of it, because they couldn’t afford her. So instead of paying her to go to all these people and recruit them for the music, they chose to remove her from the equation and go to the people directly.”

While we have still yet to hear the reasoning behind Kojima’s departure from either Konami or Kojima himself, if Murunaka’s claims are correct then this certainly adds an interesting spin on the whole debacle. Refusing to accept anything less than the very best for the next entry in the Metal Gear series certainly sounds like something Kojima would do, and I can imagine his dedicated to recreating his vision for the game would have certainly sent it over budget, but if Kojima was fired by Konami then, from an outsider’s perspective, it seems that was the fault of the publisher and the contract they had signed with him.

Scalding and actively punishing a creator for wanting to create the best thing they possibly can seems like a huge backwards step, and though we’ll likely never hear of the real reasons why Konami and Kojima parted ways, this latest rumor comes from a pretty credible source.

by Dave Thier via Forbes

The Xbox One continues to change. Microsoft’s flagship console is more or less unrecognizable from the machine it sold at launch, and that’s an eminently good thing. It might not be enough for it to catch up to the PS4, but it’s enough to save it from failure, something Microsoft should be pleased with. This trend continues, the company just detailed in a new blog post, as the machine gets its most significant update since it lost the Kinect and cut the price. Microsoft is promising a “completely re-imagined” Xbox One experience, and they’re finally fixing what’s been my biggest gripe about the actual system since launch: the interface. Just in time for Windows 10.

There was a time when Microsoft thought tiles were a really great idea: that time did not last very long. PC users were able to avoid Windows 8 by just skipping on back to Windows 7 before upgrading to Windows 10, but people with Surfaces, Windows phones or Xbox One’s still find themselves saddled with the company’s curious design choice. But aesthetics aren’t the whole problem with the Xbox One UI: the thing just doesn’t work very well. It’s slow, difficult to navigate, and much-vaunted features like gesture controls are more or less nonexistent. I found myself shouting “Xbox go to Xbox Video” at my console 10 times or so yesterday before giving up and using the controller. I had once succeeded in getting it to “snap” Xbox video, but this is not what I wanted it to do.

We already knew about backwards compatibility, probably the biggest single new feature of this update. But I’m very curious to see to what degree Microsoft can fix the seriously hobbled experience of doing anything but basic tasks on the Xbox One. Anyone who’s used a PS4 knows what a joy it is when smooth navigation between games, friends lists and other features goes well, and hopefully Xbox One can get in line with that next-gen feel. I’m not sure we’re getting it this time around, but I would love to see the return of that mini-menu you could get from pressing the center button the Xbox 360. That thing was great. Here’s Microsoft’s Mike Ybarra:

We’ll have more on the new interface once it rolls out, but until then, the Xbox One continues to be one of the most interesting things to watch in video games.

by Paul Tassi via Forbes

Nintendo has filed a new patent for a device that many believe could be their next NX console, or at least have something to do with it. Spotted by NeoGAF, the official US patent shows a new hardware unit that looks like a game console, but is missing one very game console-like feature, a disc drive:

“The example system is not provided with an optical disc drive for reading out a program and/or data from an optical disc,” the patent reads. “An example system includes an internal hard disc drive storing a program and/or data, a communication unit transmitting/receiving a program and/or data via a network, and a processor executing a program stored in the hard disc drive to perform game processing.”

The patent also seems to show a controller that includes a display unit, much like the current Wii U gamepad.

First, the grains of salt. There is no confirmation that this device is specifically the NX, as the name is not listed in the patent. Secondly, just because Nintendo patents a type of system, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it will be the final product.

And yet, with the NX described by Nintendo as a “dedicated game platform with a brand-new concept,” this seems to fit the bill pretty well. Not that a lack of a disc drive would be the only brand-new concept, but it would certainly be a significant development all the same.

Many will remember that once upon a time, the Xbox One practically shed its disc drive, and at the very least, was planning to create a games marketplace that would make discs more or less obsolete. But violent fan pushback forced them to change the system to be more like Sony’s PS4, and both consoles now play both new and used discs exactly like the last two console generations.

While it seems likely that by the time the next console generation comes around, consumers may be more willing to let go of discs as sales of digital games continue to climb, but it is a bit odd that Nintendo could be the one leading the charge with the NX.

In this age when the 500 GB hard drives of the Xbox One and PS4 are considered “too small” for someone trying to build an entirely digital library, the original Wii U shipped with an 8 GB hard drive. Now, most models are up to 32 GB. Granted, these drives are not directly comparable, as Nintendo’s drives are not HDDs but instead use flash storage, but still. Building an entirely disc-free console would have to have a way to store an entire library of games, preferable without resorting to a collection of memory cards or external hard drives. It’s just a little difficult to imagine Nintendo going from 32 GB of flash storage to a 1TB or more drive to contain an entire collection of games. Flash or no, the fact remains that this year when I simply downloaded my Bayonetta 1/2 pack when the sequel was released, it filled the majority of my hard drive by itself.

The appearance of another screen-based controller is also perplexing. This may mean that the disc-less unit is compatible with the existing Wii U gamepad, as Nintendo loves backwards hardware compatibility, or it could be an entirely new controller. Still, the gamepad hasn’t exactly been a smash hit feature in current-gen Nintendo games to date, really only being used well in a handful. Would they really double down with another similar controller concept next time around?

Nintendo, continually refusing to share their plans for the NX until 2016, will not answer requests for comment on the system, or likely this patent either. And yet again, we find ourselves rooting through scraps of information to try and extract their future plans. A new disc-less console suggested in this patent makes a certain amount of sense, but a bit less so when you consider Nintendo’s history. Then again, maybe they can be the first tread where others haven’t dared. We’ll have to wait until 2016 to see, it seems.

by Gordon Kelly via Forbes

Windows 10 splits opinions and it has split mine. I think Microsoft MSFT +0.43% nailed the core OS, but the policies around it are controlling and overly invasive. In short: great software, shame about the rules. And here’s another perfect example…

Now Windows 10 has launched, Microsoft is starting to fill in the blanks regarding features removed from Windows 7 and Windows 8 and it doesn’t make for pleasant reading. Why? Because behind this free upgrade are the first signs of where Microsoft will start charging users in future and it begins at the very bottom:

1. Solitaire

Yes, surprising as it might seem, Microsoft has announced it will actually charge users a monthly subscription to play Solitaire – a free staple of Windows releases since Windows 3.0 in 1990.

Having been stripped out of Windows 10, Solitare is now found in the Windows Store and it is a freemium download. This means it can be used for free, but is ad supported and in this case the ads are highly invasive with mandatory 30 second video slots playing over the screen between every game. If you want to switch that off you must pay Microsoft $1.49 per month or $9.99 per year.

The good news is for that fee you do get an upgraded game with five variations, more card designs, daily challenges and tournaments. Still you would think those upgrades would be what the premium upgrade was for, not access to the basic game.

For those with conspiracy theories about Windows 10’s long term subscription ambitions, Solitaire (of all things) will only add more fuel to the fire.

2. Windows DVD Player

Along with Solitaire, another feature removed from Windows 7 and Windows 8 was the venerable Windows Media Center. WMC was long in the tooth, but beloved by those who still used it and in conjunction with its removal from Windows 10 the lack of even a basic DVD player in the new operating system was something of a mystery.

Not anymore. Microsoft has now announced the launch of ‘Windows DVD Player’. It is no WMC replacement and its full feature list is simply:
•Plays DVDs on your PC
•Simple controls for disc navigation

Windows DVD Player also won’t play Blu-ray discs nor DVDs from file backups, it is 100% optical discs only. All of which makes it pretty limited, but this is just the start.

Microsoft states Windows DVD Player will only be “free for a limited time” but doesn’t say how long this will be. Even the player’s FAQ simply says “The timing has not been finalized yet. It will end at or before the free Windows 10 upgrade offer.” Great.

After that unspecified time Microsoft will charge a hefty $14.99 for Windows DVD Player, a ludicrous decision when far more powerful and accomplished players like VLC are free. What’s more, even if you grab Windows DVD Player for free now, you may have to pay for it later.

Digging further into the player’s FAO page, Microsoft states only upgraders from Windows 7 or Windows 8 will get it free and users who perform clean installations of Windows 10 will not. Furthermore if users ever need to reinstall Windows 10 (for example, due to problems) then Microsoft doesn’t count that as coming from Windows 7 or Windows 8 and again you lose free access to Windows DVD Player unless you first install Windows 7 or Windows 8 then upgrade to Windows 10.

Yes, this is bonkers. It also asks a bigger question: where is all this headed?

Windows As A Service

At this point it is important to state that Solitaire and Windows DVD Player alone cannot be held up as indisputable proof of an evil Microsoft master plan to trick users out of their money via a mass of tiny, expensive additions. That said both are clear indicators of how the company’s business model is evolving.

Having openly stated that ‘Windows as a service’ is the platform’s future, Microsoft is effectively taking a hit by giving Windows 10 away free on the gamble that it opens up the possibility of charging for add-ons. This can be as small as Solitaire and Windows DVD Player, but more importantly than the software in question this time (third party Solitaire apps and DVD players are everywhere) is how it sets the precedent for Microsoft to scale up to bigger features in future. Those features can be automatically pushed to users in trial form through Windows 10’s mandatory upgrades with fees to then keep them running.

In itself this business model is nothing new, but it is new for Windows users and – quite understandably – many don’t like it.

Personally my belief is Microsoft is entitled to do whatever it wants to do and earn however it wants to earn and customers will vote with their feet. The trouble is in the run up to Windows 10 Microsoft has not been transparent with users so many are not clear on what they are signing up to or from where future costs may come. Microsoft is sitting back and letting ‘Free Windows 10’ do all the selling.

And that’s true: the core Windows 10 experience IS free. But when it comes to even the simplest of extras, what is increasingly clear is users are getting what they paid for.

by ‘Apolon’ via iDigitalTimes

There’s a lot riding on the Nintendo NX, Nintendo’s upcoming “game platform,” which everybody seems to be assuming is a handheld and console hybrid (I wouldn’t be so sure—all we know for sure is that it isn’t Android-based and isn’t virtual reality–based. It’s a big mystery, and it carries on its shoulders the whole future of Nintendo… which may not be great news, since we hear the thing might be weaker than the PS4.

The Nintendo NX Really Needs To Succeed

Don’t get me wrong: Nintendo isn’t really in dire straits. The company isn’t even losing money anymore, although it did for two years in a row—the only time in the company’s century-long history it lost money at all. The Wii and the Nintendo DS were, of course, both phenomenal successes. The Nintendo 3DS was an initial failure that turned into a reasonable success. The Wii U has not done very well at all. Nintendo’s new “third pillar,” Amiibo, is the company’s highlight right now… a major success, selling millions of units every month. But the company needs a dedicated platform to support its new toy line.

For that, the Nintendo NX needs to be a hit. The company has scraped by the Wii U generation on the back of the 3DS and Amiibo, even as the Wii U has never really taken off. But ‘scraping by’ really is the phrase to use. Wii U releases have been relatively few and far between. Flagship titles haven’t been coming out nearly enough to drive strong interest in the console, aside from Super Smash Bros Wii U, which also had a Nintendo 3DS counterpart. And third party releases are totally gone at this point, besides from standard EA shovelware. There’s not much to cling to, and even with a new slew of first-party AAA titles, the console wouldn’t get new momentum at this late stage, in what would normally be mid-lifecycle.

So instead it looks like Nintendo is going to move beyond Wii U and hope to kickstart the new generation half a cycle early with the Nintendo NX. It’s a big risk,  and a lot is riding on it, probably up to and including Nintendo’s future in the hardware business. Certainly the console business is at stake. If Nintendo NX is a bust, following the Wii U… it’s hard to imagine Nintendo having the money and good will for a third stab at a dedicated console. Face it: If Nintendo NX doesn’t succeed, Nintendo as we know it will change forever. And that’s why the company is getting ready to go all in.