[I'm trying something new (though not entirely original) here at PEEG. My time is in short supply of late which puts a cramp on my style as far as blogging and playing games about which too blog. But I still manage to keep up-to-date on what's happening in the game industry and gaming culture so, in an attempt to keep my fingers typing I'm going to subject you, Inconstant Reader, to a weekend update of sorts. Basically these are my quick thoughts on several interesting game related news stories from the previous week.]
The FCC is considering a standardized rating system that would apply to games, movies, television shows, and mobile apps. Many commenters see this as another step towards censorship which I find that a weak concern. What scares me most is the logistics of such a thing. It takes long enough to get a product rated by an independent organization focused on one specific medium - imagine a governmental body charged with standardizing ratings across multiple types media!That issue aside I'm rather intrigued by the idea. A standardized system could garner more equity across ratings. For example, some things that are tame enough to be included in a PG-13 movie will elicit and MA rating in a game. Standardized ratings would expose this gross inequality, or at least open up debate as to why one and the same action is more "mature" if it's included in an interactive medium (even if the action itself is part of a cutscene or otherwise out of the player's direct control). I personally doubt this umbrella system will ever come to pass, but I don't see it being a gross blow to the games industry if it does.
According to the Chatty Cathys of the interwebs Best Buy is willing to bribe people out of returning their recently purchased PS3 Fats for PS3 Slims.
Obviously no one likes feeling they just got shafted by purchasing a $400 piece of hardware only to learn the following day that a newer version of it could be had for 3/4 the price. But isn't that exactly what a company does if they try (and fail) to keep these things a secret? Why not let people know about a price drop or new system in advance? Because sales will probably wane in the interim as people hold out for the newer, cheaper system. So by withholding that information the company is basically decieiving consumers. Put another way, the company is hoping consumers will get shafted. That's just bad PR if you ask me. By officially announcing something like this, say, a month in advance and also - though this is a pipe dream - encouraging stores to inform consumers at the point of purchase, you give people a choice. Maybe I just can't wait a month to get the system I want, but I should be able to make an informed choice. Besides, marketing people should know the American consumer enough to realize that we're impulse buyers at heart!
Finally, on the subject of American consumerism... can you believe that people would actually consider purchasing a Scribblenauts strategy guide!? Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees. Scribblenauts is not a game about winning, it's a game about creativity. The only possible reason a person would desire a strategy guide for such a jewel of a game is if they approaching gaming as just another conquest. Everything I've read about the game suggests that it won't be all that difficult - it's not the destination but the journey that's important. Using a strategy guide is like making the journey on rails... in an enclosed vehicle... with a single window... facing the ground....
Actually, the strategy guide for Scribblenauts doesn't seem like a bad idea. Of course, I mean for AFTER the playtrough to see what kind of objects might be fun to experiment with, not as an actual help to get trough the game.
ReplyDeleteAlso, from my tests, it seems like getting trough the game's puzzle is not quite as simple as you make out it to be.