Forgot to mention...

As those of you who listened to the radio show a while back might know, my nickname is now DJ Goron, not DJ Komali.

Unnecessary Trash Talk

Lately, Sony executives Jack Tretton and Kaz "Ridge Racer" Hirai have been bashing their competition a lot. I'm not really sure what right they have to do that, considering both their platforms are "losing" terribly in all regions (I put "losing" in quotes because even though the executives of the Big 3 and the Type-A fanboys seem to think so, it isn't a competition). Trash talk in competition is natural; all three companies are guilty of it. But Sony seems to be doing it more than the others. Microsoft is not innocent of this; I'll be talking about their offense later in this post. It's just that Sony seems to have the most to say.

It's understandable that they'd be upset about losing the exclusivity of Final Fantasy XIII, but bashing Microsoft for "currying developers" is just dumb. For one thing, Microsoft doesn't neet to "curry developers" to make the 360 an appealing platform; it's outselling the PS3 by a wide margin, and THAT'S why Square Enix made their decision.

It's also preposterous to say that Metal Gear Solid 4 would be impossible on the 360. It might be different (possibly on multiple discs, for example), but not impossible; they're making Dead Rising for Wii, after all (and no fanboys or companies seem to have any problem with that, which surprises me). And who says having multiple discs is a bad thing? I want to remind Sony and its Type-A fanboys that both the original Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy VII ran on multiple discs, and they did pretty well. Is Sony going to say that those games were bad? I doubt it.

And finally, there's Kaz Hirai saying in a very assholish way that just like the PS1 and PS2, the PS3 will keep selling well as its competitors die. Yeah, there's just one problem with that: the PS1 and PS2 outsold their competitors from the very beginning, while the PS3 has never been in the lead. The PS1 and PS2 didn't gain their leads at the end of their "console wars"; they just kept the leads they already had. And it's a lot easier to keep a lead than to gain one. The continued success of the PS2 is a result of its consistently large fan base, which the PS3 currently does not have. As time goes on, people aren't going to magically decide that the PS3 is for them. Whatever Sony's doing now is not working, and rather than just sitting around and saying "we're the best and you will love us," they should actually work on making that true. The PS3 won't sell well simply because it follows the PS1 and PS2; it's foolish of them to count on that.

Again, while Sony seems to be doing this bullshit the most, they're not alone. Recently Microsoft denied that Miis had any influence on its upcoming "Avatars" for the 360, and also downplayed the idea of Playstation Home, saying they're "not holding their breath". Not quite as inflammatory as what Sony said, but obviously not true. There's nothing wrong with being influenced by your competitors, as long as you just admit it.

Nintendo hasn't really said anything of this sort lately, but that doesn't mean they haven't said it. I'm too lazy to go back through archives of gaming news blogs to find examples, but I'm sure they exist. If anyone knows of any, please comment on this post so I can add them to the article.

This kind of talk is what's fueling the Type-A Fanboys and making the gamer community segmented and angry. The more I hear this kind of talk, the more I worry that these companies don't care about the wellbeing and happiness of their fans at all. All companies care more about making money than pretty much anything else; that's why they're companies. But I like to think they put the happiness of their fans as a high priority too. If they keep talking like this, I'll start to believe that they want us to fight with each other, and that's not cool.

Sharing the Love

E3 is almost finished. Doesn't seem like there were any huge announcements this time around, except for 1: Final Fantasy XIII coming to the Xbox 360. Many people were excited, but many more were pissed. Why? Well, most of them were probably Type-A fanboys (see the post "Types of Fanboys" for a definition). The same goes for Bioshock coming to the PS3 with exclusive content, though not quite as strong a reaction. Still, both of these show how irrational and selfish Type-A fanboys can be.

Final Fantasy XIII coming to the Xbox 360 will not at all change the experience of playing it on the PS3, despite what some people think. Square-Enix confirmed this. Yet the Type-A Sony fanboys are still upset. They seem to think Square Enix owes them something; that putting the game on the 360 breaks the tradition of all Final Fantasy games being on Sony consoles. Obviously that's ridiculous; the first 6, and many spin-offs, were on Nintendo consoles, and XI came out for the 360. Square-Enix is smart to put their games on the consoles with the highest install base. Square-Enix, Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo are companies; companies exist to make money. None of them are non-profit organizations, so to say that one of them only cares about money while excusing the others is stupid. And it's not like Sony or PS3 owners have done anything for which Square-Enix owes them. Square-Enix doesn't owe anyone anything; they're making their own choices. Yes, they have created a tradition of releasing Final Fantasy games on Sony consoles, but again, they also had a tradition of releasing them on Nintendo consoles. And once again, the PS3 is still getting it, so they're not breaking that tradition anyway.

So that explains how the decision is good for the company, and that's their priority. It's also good for gamers. Type-A Sony fanboys are being selfish. That's the real problem. They don't want 360 owners to enjoy FFXIII so they can boast about how the PS3 has it. They want to have something that others don't have. That's human nature; it's understandable. But it's the kind of human nature we have to fight. Why shouldn't as many people as possible be able to enjoy the game? As we've already discussed, it doesn't hurt PS3 owners. In pushing their Type-A fanboyism, they're trying to keep other people from having fun. Type-A fanboys, think about it that way. Is it really fair for the millions of 360 owners not to be able to play the game? Just so you can say your console is better?

That's what this is all about. It's the Type-A fanboys wanting to keep millions of people from having fun so that they can feel better about their console choice. Putting themselves above millions of others when it won't hurt them either way. And that's just stupid. It's also stupid to say they're doing it for Sony. Their complaints are not going to help Sony, and Sony won't know who they are anyway. It's immature selfishness, and nothing else.

Types of Fanboys

NOTE: I know that fangirls exist too, but I'm too lazy to write both every time and "fanboys" is the more recognized term.

This post is mostly just to set up my next post, as well as other posts that involve fanboys. Basically, there are two main types of fanboys. Usually the term has a negative connotation because people always think of the first type; I'll call them Type-A fanboys, because it's a good classification system, and also because they tend to exhibit Type-A personalities. These are the fanboys that I rant about; the ones who are loyal to one of the "big three" (Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft) and go on forums and blogs to complain about the other two. Any time something good happens to one of the other two companies, Type-A fanboys complain and complain, apparently thinking the companies (or other gamers for that matter) give a rat's ass about their opinions. And of course, they fiercely defend any stupid move that their preferred company makes. Nintendo sues Nyko for making a wireless nunchuk? Type-A fanboys say Nyko should have asked permission first (while also buying up the wireless ones). Microsoft creates "avatars" and claims they were not at all inspired by Nintendo? Type-A fanboys believe it (and continue to bash the concept of Miis despite even the official Xbox Magazine using them). Sony removes backwards compatibility, one of their big selling points, from the PS3? Type-A fanboys claim that nobody really cares about PS2 games (while also talking about how great it is that PS2 games are still being made). And of course, whenever representatives of the preferred company say things that are clearly not true (like the avatar/Mii example above), Type-A fanboys believe and defend it. Type-A fanboys flame and insult anyone who disagrees with them. I mentioned the hilariously named "Mr. Common Sense" in a previous post; he's a prime example.

Then there are Type-B fanboys. I admit to being a Type-B Nintendo fanboy, and I have no problem admitting to it because I have nothing against Type-B fanboys. Type-B fanboys also have a strong loyalty to one of the "big three", whether it's because that's what they've always had, or because they just like that company's products a lot. What separates them from Type-A fanboys is that they're not assholes about it. Type-B fanboys spread their opinions, sure. And they may dislike one or both of the other companies, regardless of which company they do like. But they don't insult people who disagree with them, try to look at things objectively, and don't blindly agree with everything their preferred company does. I mentioned earlier my distaste for Nintendo suing Nyko, and I'm not a fan of some of Nintendo's other choices. That doesn't mean I don't love Nintendo.

It's hard to be a Type-B fanboy. I do dislike Sony, and while that is not because I like Nintendo (it's because of their business practices and bad PR), it's hard to deny that I probably wouldn't have as much of a problem with them if I wasn't a Type-B Nintendo fanboy. But that still doesn't make me a Type-A fanboy, for two simple reasons: I'm not an asshole to others about it, and I don't blindly follow Nintendo. There are subtleties; Type-B fanboys can do Type-A things, and vice-versa. But those two factors (not being an asshole and not blindly agreeing) are the key difference.

Graphics Are Not Everything

The Wii keeps getting put down because its graphics are not on par with its competitors. If I wanted to exhibit the console wars mentality, I would simply point you to the sales numbers and leave that as my proof that it doesn't matter. As tempting as it is to just leave it there, I am not that kind of gamer. I'm going to explain to you exactly why it doesn't matter.

Video games are an art form, yes, and graphics are a big part of that artistic aspect of video games. But great art is not determined by how smooth or realistic it looks. The Mona Lisa is not clean, smooth, or realistic. Peter and the Wolf does not depict its story nearly as realistically as, say, a movie would. One of the most artistic games I've ever played was LocoRoco, a PSP game, and contrary to what some people will tell you, the Wii is more powerful than the PSP. The Guiness Book of World Records Gamers' Edition shows the stats. Anyway, the point is that a system doesn't have to be massively powerful to be artistic. Another case is Super Mario Galaxy, the highest-rated console game of this generation, according to Metacritic. The classic Mario graphic and music style was particularly praised in this game. Another game praised for its art is Okami, which debuted on the PS2 and is now on the Wii. And system power has nothing to do with music, other than minor differences in sound quality that are barely noticed when you're just listening to music, let alone when you're gaming. So I think I've done enough to establish, at least for now, that a powerful systems doesn't equal great artistic value.

System power also does not equal fun. Wii Sports is enough to show that; it's probably the most widely-used game for social gatherings these days (or at least one of them). And LucasArts has been putting a lot of emphasis on the Wii version of the upcoming Star Wars: The Force Unleashed, because of the motion controls. The motion controls make the games more immersive, which helps make them more fun. True, more powerful systems can also make games more fun; something like Dead Rising would never work on the Wii. In other words, they are equal; they have different benefits over each other to make games more fun.

Probably the most important reason is that the system the game is on doesn't necessarily make any difference to the game itself. The highly-popular (especially at Grinnell) Super Smash Bros. Brawl does not use the Wii's motion controls at all, but it's still a lot of fun and very popular. Super Mario Galaxy, which is, again, the highest rated console game of this generation, makes little use of them. Bioshock, the second highest rated game of the generation, is just as fun on a PC with the lowest graphics settings as it is on an Xbox 360 or a PC with the highest graphics settings, and I know this because I play it on my PC with the lowest graphics settings, and I've played the 360 version.

Gamers and reviewers especially need to understand that graphics are not key to fun or successful games. They are one small part of many, and a system not designed around graphics should not be penalized for that if the games are fun. I'm tired of reviewers marking down Wii games for not having HD-quality graphics when it's not designed for that. Graphics that aren't as good as those on other systems doesn't necessarily make the game worse.

A hollow victory, from a gaming perspective

In accordance with my previous post, this post is not about bashing Sony. It's about defending my previous statements.

Now that Blu-ray has one the format war, you might expect me to come out and say I was wrong that designing the PS3 around Blu-ray was a bad idea. But I don't think it was a bad idea. Even though we now know for sure that Blu-ray will continue to be used (at least until downloads become the norm, but we don't know how far off that is) and the PS3 is only a little bit more expensive than the 360, Sony still did irreparable damage to the console's future. The reason? The high price point originally led many early adopters to choose the Xbox 360. Also, even though the format is a success, there's little reason to believe it will replace DVD any time too soon, given how long it took DVD to replace VHS when it first came out. That's why comparing the PS3's Blu-ray player to the PS2's DVD player doesn't make sense; DVD existed long before the PS2. Maybe when more people are willing to get a new player, the PS3 will seem more attractive. That seems likely. However, there's another caveat of the argument we should look at: Sony wanted to use the Blu-ray movie functionality of the PS3 to attract more casual gamers, or at least I remember reading that; leave a comment if I'm wrong. Even if I am wrong, it seems reasonable that they wouldn't push the movies to attract hardcore gamers. But the casual gamers seem to have made their choice, and they've chosen Wii.

All that being said, though, including Blu-ray with the PS3 ended up being a worthwhile risk from a movie perspective. And I do believe that it will/has increase(d) the PS3's sales. But I also know that the PS3 is still lagging far behind its competitors, and I think Blu-ray is part of the reason. Not the main reason, by any stretch of the imagination, but a reason. As for what I think the main reason is, I've talked about that before.

Another important note: if I ever discuss Blu-ray or HD-DVD again on this blog or the radio show, it will only be for things that directly relate specifically to gaming or game consoles. I don't think the media formats themselves are inherently related to video games, which is what this blog and radio show are about.

Fanboys Return: DJ Goron's Rebellion

Back when this blog was called Warriors of Gaming, I talked a lot about how annoying the console wars mentality is to me. Long story short, fanboyism is not inherently a bad thing. It's when you turn it into hating other companies that it becomes a bad thing. As things heat up and I keep checking QJ.net more thoroughly to get news for the radio show, I realize that even though my hate of Sony did not come from fanboyism, and that I always tried to be rational about it, I was still exhibiting the console wars mentality. So now, as I said on the radio, I am going to work even harder to make sure the console wars mentality is not part of anything I say about Sony. I still don't like them all that much as a company, but especially when I'm on the air or writing this blog, I am rededicating myself to not letting my personal opinions get out of hand. I am dedicating myself to staying completely rational, and not automatically assuming the worst from Sony.

Because I see it all the time. People deluding themselves into thinking Nintendo is manufacturing a Wii shortage, or that the red ring of death is proof that Microsoft doesn't care about customers, or that Sony would be out of business without Square-Enix. It's ridiculous. They are businesses trying to make money, yes, and there is nothing wrong with caring about their business practices, but either be rational or keep it to yourself.

Here's an example. On QJ there's one guy who goes by the rather stuck-up and hypocritical name of "Mr. Common Sense" who jumps at every chance to bash. But he doesn't bash Nintendo the way I bash Sony (with reasoned arguments); he prefers long, angry rants about how Nintendo is evil and their fans are idiots. You don't have to like Nintendo, buddy, but insulting your fellow gamers because they have different tastes than you is not going to help anyone. Do me a favor and look at the backlogs of this blog. I've said some pretty discouraging Sony, but have I ever been an asshole about it or insulted Sony fans? No. And if I have and just forgot about it, I deeply apologize, because as I hope you can tell from everything else I'm saying here, that isn't me. Tell me where it is and I'll change it. People like Mr. Common Sense him are the pinnacle of what I'm talking about here. It's ridiculous, and it has to stop. I'm doing my part, now do yours.

You might say, "But DJ Komali, but saying that about Mr. Common Sense, aren't you also bashing your fellow gamers for their opinions?" No, and let me explain why: I'm bashing one particular person, and not for what he believes or likes, but for how he acts. That's the difference. I'm not saying don't get mad at people, I'm saying keep it civil, and get mad at people when they actually DO something to make you upset, not just when they like brand A and you like brand B.

We're back with a new name, on the radio, and as angry as ever

That's right, my few readers, I'm back. I probably will not return to Dark Diamond, as I would rather not have the content of my posts edited by others, so for now I'm focusing on my own blog.

Next, this blog has a brand new name and address. The former Warriors of Gaming is now Press Start: Blog for Gamers. This is because it will now go along with Press Start: Radio for Gamers, a radio show my friends and I are doing on our college radio station. For more information about the show, and how to listen to it online, go to freewebs.com/presstartkdic and check it out. Because of this change, my co-hosts Denny and Hanna (aka DJ Lemonsmith) may drop by for some posts as well. Also, I will start calling myself by my radio name (DJ Goron) instead of my previous nickname, Unknownwarrior33. The radio show is based on the same ideas and content as Warriors of Gaming was, so the type of content in the blog is not likely to change.

I hope you enjoy, and keep reading the blog. For gamers, it's the way to go.