Killzone 3 Set for release. Can it live up to the hype?

Killzone 3 was Playstation's exclusive FPS dynamo last year and it looks like the follow up to Killzone 2 is shaping up to be exactly what everyone has hoped for. When Killzone 2 first started to aire the trailers a couple years ago, everyone was in awe of the graphics, the 3 dimension perspective and the way that the game designers handled the sheer size dimensions and how they all related to the gameplay. The industry was sent reeling when it was finally released and it lived up to every promise. Nobody was disappointed.

Now here we are, two years later and we are awaiting the release of Killzone 3. Set to hit stores on February 22, 2011 and everybody is wondering the same thing. Can the game live up to the hype and this time, will it at least equal the dynamics of the last offering or will Killzone 2 be unbeatable? We will all just have to wait and see, but Guerrilla is not holding back and has said that they will surprise everyone with what they will experience in this upcoming release.

In Killzone 2 the main antagonist was Visari. A ruthless leader of the Helghast army bent on destroying the ISA and it's defense of Vektra. What floored everyone about this game was the utter dominance of the voice acting by Brian Cox who did the voice overs for Visari. The speech scenes and the way that Guerrilla presented these scenes was just beautiful. The graphical drama that was portrayed on the screen was better than almost anything we have been presented with except for maybe Metal Gear and it's cut scenes. How can they expect to best what they gave us in Killzone 2 with this next game?

Well, no promises but Guerrilla is hoping that the hiring of actors Ray Winstone and Malcolm McDowell will be just what they need to bring the necessary drama and realistic feel to the cut scenes that we had in the last game. I think if you view the trailer below, you will agree because the voice overs in this game so far seem very well done and well placed. The whole game should shape up very well. And from what we are seeing of the Beta Test reports it appears the multiplayer aspect of the game has shaped up quite well also.




We have a lot to look forward to with Killzone 3 and it will deliver on it's promises. If there is one thing we should have learned from Guerrilla Games it's that they put 110% into every game they make and they leave nothing behind. They are an innovative group and have the ability to shock us all with every release. Killzone 3 will be no different. Expect to be blown away by the gameplay and awestruck by the story. This one will aim to please. And it is also a Playstation 3 exclusive! Sorry Crap-Box, but you will get none of this action.

We have also added a countdown timer on the right sidebar of the site so that you can always check back and see how long we all have until we can put this game in our library!

Blockbuster vs. Netflix - Not a fair fight!

As I drive through town, I pass the local Blockbuster and wonder to myself, "why are they still in business?". As the last couple years have gone by, I have seen Netflix gain more and more momentum in the video rental industry and on the flipside have not seen Blockbuster do anything at all. Matter of fact, when is the last time you can remember even seeing a Blockbuster Video commercial? I cannot remember one for at least 2 or 3 years! For a company that just about owned the entire industry it is a shame. So what happened? Did they just drop the ball? Did they not see Netflix coming at all? Or is it something completely different and have absolutely nothing to do with Netflix?

Blockbuster was the giant on the block. A few years back you could not go anywhere and not see one somewhere. It was almost the Starbucks syndrome. A blockbuster on nearly every corner. Back before they hit it big, I think right before the DVD craze, everyone had a membership to their local mom and pop video store. And almost everyone could name every employee in the store. That is one thing that seemed to be a big difference between Blockbuster and the mom and pops, the personal treatment. The local video stores were usually so friendly. Mainly because the people who owned and ran them were regular people just like you and I. They were just people who loved movies. And back in the day the video rental store was a great business model. Everyone loved renting movies, to do so required a membership, and each movie rented for about $3 to $5 each. And you never went home with just one!

That all changed with the advent of Blockbuster. So much so that their name seemed appropriate. When they came to town, at first it seemed a novelty. They had the bright lights. The familiar yellow and blue color scheme. And rows upon rows of movies. And that is just it. They had tons of them. Blockbuster came into town with multiple copies of popular movies and new releases. It was not unusual for the local Blockbuster to have a copy of the movie you wanted to rent on Friday night even though it was a brand new release that day. Maybe that was the draw? Maybe it was their "chain-store" like feel? Or maybe none of those reasons. But it was something, because soon after Blockbuster came to town the mom and pop video stores slowly fell apart. You could tell things were changing when the local video store that used to be crowded on Friday and Saturday evenings were almost empty when you walked through the doors.

In what seemed almost no time at all Blockbuster became the big kid on the block. They completely owned the movie rental market. And soon after that happened all the lesser stores were gone. Even the start-ups like Hollywood video did not stand a chance. Blockbuster was too ingrained in the market. It was theirs to lose, and that may have been exactly what happened. A few years after their dominance was solidified a new player came on the scene. It's not too often that after dominating a market so completely a company can be knocked off it's perch. But that is precisely what happened to Blockbuster. Because a new player has just entered the game, and they were playing for keeps.

Netflix joined the movie rental party in 1997. Their business model was a bit different from Blockbuster. Instead of you having to go to the store to rent a movie, Netflix brought the movie to you. By now we are all familiar with Netflix and how they operate. But at the time, they were entering a market that was solely dominated by one company and doing so with a service that was untested. A risky move by anyones standards. However, their astute marketing and excellent service proved they were not only in the game but that they were in it to win it.

A short time after entering the market Netflix made what could be considered a smart business move. Early on in their history they decided that instead of trying to compete with Blockbuster, the big guys, with their as of yet un-proven business model, that they would attempt to join the movie rental monster. They offered Blockbuster a chance to join forces. They offered to Blockbuster a chance for Netflix to run their Online sales while Blockbuster would manage their brand in stores. According to an article by CNET about Netflix and their dealings with Blockbuster, they were actually laughed out of the office after Netflix made that proposal. Blockbuster did not think at the time that Netflix would be able to even compete with them in the rental market.

It did not take long for Blockbuster to see the error of their ways. A year or so after that meeting Netflix began to slowly eat away at Blockbuster's market share. Netflix was beginning to not double, but triple and quadruple their earnings from one year to the next. They brought in a subscription service to their model and that was the real difference maker. Netflix was now the dominant force in the video rental game and Blockbuster found themselves wishing they had a second chance at the Netflix proposal from years back. Sadly, a time machine has yet to be developed.

In September Blockbuster filed for bankruptcy protection and professors are teaching the Netflix business model in colleges all over the country. This story surely goes to show that no matter the size of the company or the market, things can take a sharp turn anytime. You have to be very careful when change is upon you because most of the time you cannot even see that it is there. Blockbuster should have seen something coming because when Netflix was making their proposal the ecommerce market was on the verge of exploding. It is rather strange that the big wigs at Blockbuster could not see that when the rest of the business world did. Was it overconfidence in their brand? Or were they just secure in the fact that they had a hold on the market no matter what changes were upon them? I think they should have maybe examined their options more because they had opportunities to enter various avenues of the movie market and they sat on their opportunities. When they should have expanded their market, they expanded their store count. Eh.. but who am I to say what they should have done, I am just a Netflix subscriber!

Why Video Games May Change The World.

Games of all kinds have been around for centuries. Since the beginning of the civilized world, people have played and used games for many different reasons. For relaxation, to pass the time, to best another person, to win money, and even to train knights and today, soldiers. So why is it that in today's world, video games get such a bad rap? Could it be that young children play them and act out what they see in the games? It shouldn't be, because this has been happening since the days of emperor Charlemagne. Is it because the designers and publishers are making money hand over fist selling games to young children that might be considered by some or many as content for adults? Or is it just because people just need someone to be the bad guy? The villain.

Regardless of how you look at it, or what popular opinion of government or watchdog groups may be, the fact is that video games are here to stay. Matter of fact as time goes on, they will become an ever increasing part of the fabric of our everyday lives. Just 5 short years ago 45.7 million homes had a video game console hooked up to their television set. That number has grown steadily over the years at a rate of about 18.5% per year! This according to a report released by The Nielsen Company. So if you think video games are going anywhere anytime soon, you have another thing coming! So where does this leave us? Well, it leaves us now trying to find a way to regulate the industry and insure that what is given to our children is something that they can handle. Aha! I almost had you there! See, this is actually the parents job! Many of these so-called "watchdog" groups have tried to petition the government (among other officials) to regulate the industry and to try and put a stop to alot of what the video game industry has been and has plans to release. But they are barking up the wrong tree if you ask me. If anything, these people should be ONLY trying to get ratings systems standardized throughout the industry. This is fine and something that I and many others would support. There is nothing wrong with someone putting a rating on content being sold so that people who may not be fully aware of what they may be buying will have some way to at least know that it is appropriate for whomever they may be buying it for. This action I applaud. And as long as they try to put a standard system in place then great. They have a start, and they have a rating system currently in place, but it is far from a standard across the board and across all related media and systems.

But this gets us away from the topic at hand and is a discussion best left for another day. However the rating system does play a part in the industry ingraining itself within our daily lives. We as a society must realize first and foremost that what some may see as escapism and a way for some people to isolate is actually more of a learning experience and a way for people to (maybe unwittingly) train their body and mind to carry out tasks in an efficient and adept manner. This action also helps to change a persons outlook from negative to positive in more ways than one. And this is what I would like to expound on next.

Many experts and scientists have undergone many hours of experiments and studies over this topic of late. Mostly I suppose because of the press that it has received over the last few years with regards to children acting out game-like fantasies and dehumanizing the world around them. There is an overwhelming thought that children who grow up playing violent games have a tendency to become violent themselves. And that they have a tendency to see the people around them as a non valuable asset, meaning another's life has no value to that child because just as in the game where they just finished killing hundreds of people with no consequence - the same holds true in real life. Well.. this is not true. Regardless of what people think, it has been shown that children do realize they are playing a game. And they can separate the game world from the real world. And without getting into the whole psychological debate because I would not last, I believe most of that falls upon the parent and the environment that child grows up in. If the child lives in a loving environment where his/her parents openly and frequently acknowledge the real world around them and the child is taught the difference, these problems do no exist. It is only when there is an environment where the child is not cared for or the love that would normally accompany a child through his or her early years growing up is vacant that you can end up with a situation where the kid ends up losing grip on reality and acts out game-like fantasies. And even then I would not be sure that the kid would "lose grip" on reality. I would argue that the child knows what he is undertaking, but just does not care. And more so because of what he sees on the evening news or in his neighborhood then because of what he experiences in a violent video game.

I went a bit deeper into that thought then I wanted to but it serves to show the negative result of what a child's environment has on him or her. More to the point of positive and negative. Video games really have a positive effect on peoples outlooks on life. Or they can anyway. Take a normal person doing a normal task at work. They perform this task over and over for a few times and every time, they fail. And they look at it that way. The overwhelming outlook on this by the worker is, "I failed at this task". However if you have a similar situation in a video game, where a person continues to try the same task over and over again yet cannot complete, it they do not think that they "failed". The thought in this situation is, "I have not succeeded yet". And this is a very positive change. So you can see the value of having a "gamers outlook" on life. And this is what researchers are trying to find ways to convey into the "real world".

Many companies have over the years, tried to use video games to assist in training their employees. Although they have not found a sure fire way to do this successfully, maybe they should take a page from the US Army's training manual. Years ago the US Army realized the popularity of First Person Shooters among kids at the perfect recruitment age. So they spent some money, did some research, and came up with their grand idea. They developed a video game that would not only be a top notch video game graphically and mechanically (where it counts), but also does a wonderful job teaching the player about the Army way of thinking along the way. When playing this game for a length of time, you do become genuinely interested in possibly joining the Army. Or at least you do if your a teenager almost ready to finish high school. But regardless of what the percentages of kids signing up because of the game are, the game succeeds where other similar projects have failed. The Army spent the time and money to do proper research to develop a game that got everything right where it mattered. They realized that their target audience was intelligent and had alot of experience in the field. And this is true of almost all gamers. They know the game industry. And today's young children are taught about technology at an increasingly young age. So by the time kids get to the age where advertising or a training style game will reach them, they are very smart and know what they want. So if anyone tries to utilize this method to reach a target group in this demographic they better not make any mistakes. Because these kids will spot them a mile away!

The point here is that video games in more ways than one have become a part of our everyday lives. And they look to continue along this path. With all the money being spent in various research and studies. And the millions being spent in development that has nothing at all to do with the leading game companies, it looks as if we will start to see games enter arenas that we have never expected them to enter. And we now enter an age where the three major game systems all have motion control and cameras to add a myriad of different features. And they have all found ways to include those in your family that never played games before. Video games are becoming a complete family experience. So over the next couple years, we will see changes in the industry; some that are expected and some that nobody could have ever guessed. The question is, how much will gaming enter YOUR life? Will you change to meet gaming halfway? Or will the games adjust to meet society somewhere in the middle?

2010 Video Game Awards. Not too shabby!

Well it wasn't just my birthday coming and going that signaled another year has come and gone. For me, it was the 2010 Video Game Awards on Spike. Many people may have not watched the annual show as the ratings for the past couple years have shown. But if you ask me the show has gotten better as the years go on. Just like anyone else, the producers at Spike TV are getting better every year, and this year is no exception. Actually there is one thing that they do need to fix. And that is the guest appearances by the celebrities - they SUCK! It is not just the people they get, but the monologues they spew. And yes, I will call it "spew", because that is exactly what they did. I don't know if it is that the video game audience is just not paying attention to the people on stage, or if it is just that they are a bit too smart for the lame jokes they try and lay on people. But there were alot of crickets out.

Aside from the boring guests, Neil Patrick Harris did a great job as the host of the show. He was funny when he needed to be, and on point when it was required. The one guest that did do ok was Olivia Munn. She is the long time host of Attack of the Show and did a great job interacting with Doogie. But forget about the hosts, who won what?

Lets get to the two systems. The Best XBox 360 Game was voted to be Mass Effect 2. Out of the other games that were nominated, there was only one game worthy of even being in that category and that was Halo: Reach. There were probably just a few other games that I would have liked to see in that bunch. And for the Best PS3 Game the vote went to God Of War 3. The difference in this one was that the games that were nominated along with the winner actually deserved to be there. Along with God Of War 3 was Heavy Rain, Red Dead Redemption and Modnation Racers. All great games and each one worthy of being game of the year. And with alot less fan fair, the Best PC Game turned out to be Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty, and nobody would have doubted that that one would win. No matter what game it went up against.

Now when you get down to the nitty gritty and what is considered the most popular category, you are talking about the "Shooter" category. First person shooters have quickly taken over with sales over 3 times as much as another other game genre over the last few years. And most of that is due to the popularity of one or two games. One of those games is the Call of Duty series. Although I have a differing opinion on the quality of any of the Call Of Duty games. They still have done wonders for the popularity of the genre. So is it any wonder that when we are talking about the Best Shooter of the Year we are talking about Call of Duty: Black Ops. And the other games nominated in the category were no slouches either. The others were: Battlefield Bad Company 2, Halo Reach and Bioshock 2. All great games. And in my opinion Bad Company is a better game when you talk about the graphics and the game mechanics. But Black Ops is a much deeper game. So I have to say if that is why they won, I would have to agree.

On to the game of the year... and before I get into the winner, I have to say there should have been a couple more games included in the nominees. But what can you do. These games are all voted in by general popularity, and sometimes what society grabs on to just does not make sense. So without further adieu Game of the Year Red Dead Redemption. Now this is a game that never got much publicity but did receive many accolades within the industry. The graphics are just slightly above average but what gets you into the game is the story and mechanics. When you have a game that does a good job of mixing the game mechanics and the story is engrossing you have a game that will keep you playing for many hours. Today it is hard to find a game that does this well, and Red Dead Redemption is one of them.

So if you take the Video Game Awards for what it is, a show that is aimed at the youth of today, but is programmed and advertised for the young adult you have a show with an odd mix of feelings. Maybe that is why the jokes don't go over well or why the guest appearances leave the audience wondering why the hell that guy is on stage with a microphone. But regardless, if you can find a way to take all that out of the picture and just watch it for what it is, an award show - then it is enjoyable. But because of the way they put it together, the awkward breaks, and the inappropriate monologues you should do what most apparently do and just catch the results online. Keep the awards where they start... on your computer.

Medal of Honor and the public outcry it has caused.

Seems Electronic Arts has done it again. Their latest installment in the medal Of Honor series has angered many people. In particular one mother who has taken the protest to national media outlets and chastised EA and anyone who chooses to play the game. The actual point of her argument gets lost sadly because she ends up talking in circles and never really saying anything new. Check it HERE.

I can understand people being upset. I mean, the timing of the games release (October 12th) is poor. But lets be realistic here. How many games, first person shooters specifically, have featured enemies hailing from the middle eastern countries? I don't have a count but I know it is a large majority of them. Lets take a look at the enemies featured in these games regardless of if they are the main enemy or just play a small role in the game. We have the Russians, Japanese, Chinese, and Middle Eastern soldiers. In each game they appear, they all look realistic compared to their real world counterparts. The uniforms, the weapons, their vehicles and even their surroundings and the territory they come from. So why are these not an issue? Why is it that in a game you can play as an American soldier AND usually have the choice of being one of the soldiers from the above list?

I'll tell you why. Again because of timing. It appears that people are upset about the Medal Of Honor game because we are still currently fighting (and dying) the Taliban. We have to put ourselves in the shoes of the protesters for at least a minute. And in doing so, I can understand their angst. Imagine your the father of a soldier. Your son left over a year ago and is fighting in Iraq. You watch the news daily to see anything you can find about the war. Hoping to catch a glimpse of what your son might be seeing daily. Then one day your get a knock at the door and two soldiers are on your front step telling you that your son was killed in action. Now a few days later your walking past the living room where your youngest son (lets say he is about 12). You take a glance at the TV screen to see what he is playing on his PS3. What do you see? You see your son playing as a Taliban soldier shooting the enemy which in this case is a US Marine. Needless to say, I think you would be pretty upset.

Of course this is a hypothetical situation. But it is also something that could happen. I mean the odds of the above scenario occurring are actually pretty good. So how does that affect your thoughts on the game? Should a company be allowed to publish such content? Or are people just being too overly sensitive?
Now don't misunderstand me. I am a staunch patriot. But me.. I do not see a problem with the game. We have (gamers) been playing such games for a long time. And aside from the timing of it, I don't see this as un-patriotic. Consider the last few FPS games that have come out. Most of the time the enemies are middle eastern insurgents. And when you play single player you are ALWAYS  the US soldiers. It is only when you play online multi player that someone has to be the bad guy. When you played cops and robbers as a kid, someone had to be the cop and someone the robber. Does that make the game something that you should be put down for? Just because you happen to play as the robber? No, it does not. It is all a matter of your perception and that perception is what you project onto those around you when this is the subject matter.

Lets face it. No one is going to get this game to not be released. On October 12th the game will be sold in stores. And much to the dismay of those opposed to its sale, the game will sell and it will sell very well. There may be protests out in front of a couple Best Buy locations, but I suspect those will be few and far between. And most parents of kids below the age of 18 will probably not allow their kids to purchase it. But people will need to realize that the average age of gamers today is 35 - 40 years old. Way old enough to make their own decisions and purchase their own games. We will have to wait and see how this one turns out. I will keep a close eye on game sales and compare this to other games in the same genre and also against the first Medal Of Honor. Stay tuned for that info sometime in October, most likely about a week after the games release. All in all I see why people are upset. But then again.. things like this are the reason we love living in America in the first place. Because we have the freedom to do crazy stupid things. No matter how foul or distasteful. Once we lose that right (and some say we are close to that happening) we lose our identity.