Reflecting on the PS3/Wii/Xbox 360 generation

Phew...I feel really terrible for leaving my readers alone without an update for over a month.  I really do apologize for that.  I've been going through hell with work, school, and numerous other projects.  But I do want to support this blog, so I'm working towards getting more published.  I know this sounds like the same speech I give forever and for always, but I do mean it.  I want share with everyone.  Anyway, enough of the depressing apologies.  Let's get into some reflections on the previous console generation now that the PS4, Xbone, and Wii U have been released.

Reflecting on the PS3/Wii/Xbox 360 generation

            Hello, all.  It's near the end of 2013, we've officially started the next generation of gaming with three brand new consoles, and the start of a new era has begun.  As such, I think I'd like to take a short break from my typical analysis and do a bit of reflecting on the previous generation.  For me, there is one word that perfectly sums up the PS3/Wii/Xbox 360 generation.  Abject disappointment.  Coming off the PS2 era, this generation was a massive heel turn on three aspects.  The last generation disappointed me.  I was disappointed in the publishers, in the media, and in the game industry as a whole.  This could just be me being an old man...of almost 26...but let me explain my position.

Rest in peace, the last genuinely good generation of gaming.

            Let's start with the publishers.  The advent of a console which could regularly connect to the internet was, in my opinion, one of the biggest blows to quality control in the world of console gaming since the Video Game Crash of 1979.  In previous generations, PS2, PSone, SNES, NES, etc. when you bought a console, it had to work straight out of the box.  If it didn't the company which made it had problems, as they'd have to do a massive recall to fix the problem and waste millions of dollars, if not more.  However, in modern gaming, if a game or a console is of terrible quality, the mentality is not to fix it before it goes out but rather to "patch it" to try and fix the problems online.  Sometimes these patches can make things even worse, as reports of Wii bricking after certain firmware updates early in its life cycle.  Games no longer have any need for quality control because regardless of bugs, failings, or what have you, the mentality is that it can be fixed later, so long as we give them the money now.

Last generation was punctuated by laziness, glitches, and failure on the part of publishers.  RROD.  Need I say more?

            That's not the only disappointing aspect of game publishers by any means, however.  The age of the internet also became the age of DLC.  Many features in video games which were included to be unlocked in previous generations through gameplay are now sold piecemeal to try and make more money off the fan base.  Truthfully, publishers abusing their customer base has been a staple of this generation.  Piecemeal DLC, season passes with content that may never appear, online passes, paywalls for certain games, updates which hurt a game more than fixing it, releasing "better" versions of their game a short period of time after the initial release, the list goes on and on.  The publishers have abused their power to a large degree.  Worse is that they have increased the costs of developing games so that they are prohibitively expensive, meaning that fewer games can be released unless they appeal to a much wider demographic, which waters down games.  They are forced to try and appeal to everyone, ultimately making them less appealing to those who might have given it a look to begin with.  Video game publishers continue to make mistakes with gleeful abandon, when if they simply respected their customers and did away with certain shoddy practices they would rake in not only money, but brand loyalty.

Surely game developers wouldn't released watered down glitchy games to their loyal fan-ohhhh...

            In regards to publishers, this feels like the age of shortcuts, scams, and betrayals.  Capcom epitomizes this with their scummy on disc DLC practices, their release of a broken version of Marvel Vs. Capcom 3, which they did not patch and instead released a new version of the game with no consideration given to early adopters, myself included.  Game manuals have gotten shorter to save on printing costs, to the point where they can be as thin as two pages.  At that point, why bother even printing it?  Some games don't even come with manuals to save on the cost.  The increase in price for the decrease in quality is one of the most disappointing parts of this generation.  Game developers and publishers play the pauper for us, but they demand more and more money.  This generation the price for almost all games, regardless of length, quality, or anything else is usually $60.  Budget titles are almost nonexistent.  Worse, support for the burgeoning idea of digital distribution has been crippled by this same principal, where the costs for making physical copies have been eliminated, but the same amount of money is charged regardless.  This is what destroyed the PSPgo.  The costs were the same for digital games, not all games were supported, and support in general seemed limited.  Greed has defined this generation.  Don't misunderstand me.  I know that all game companies want money and in my precious SNES era, many games were sold at a premium of $60-$80, but this was the exception, not the norm.  The norm now is for publishers to squeeze their fans for as much money as possible until they abandon them.  And that's just sad.

This generation showed just how low game publishers could go to make money off their fans.

            Moving on to games media, what I find most disappointing is the out of control hype machine that it has become, the vitriolic editorialist nature of it, of which I freely admit that I too am a part, a general lack of internal ethics, and the often times conflicting nature of game reviews and game press.  I do believe a huge part of this is simply growing pains as our burgeoning hobby is coming into its own, hence the title of my blog, however it is more clear to me now than ever that the media is a lot more flash than substance.  I was told that games were great from magazines when in fact they were horrible.  The flashy covers and interviews and coverage of magazines or websites get us excited to a degree that we cannot match.

Anyone else remember the hype machine on this?  Remember how it crashed and burned horribly?

            The hype machine in particular is bringing more and more disappointment all around because everyone wants to try and be largely positive before a review is out so that they can get more coverage, fill pages of magazines, fill websites, etc.  however it creates an unreasonable expectation, feeding a gamer's glee and desire for a game to be good regardless of the actual substance of the game in question.  Ironically, this largely feeds into the second disappointing aspect of gaming media, the vitriolic editorialistic nature of it.  I love Bioshock.  I also love Bioshock 2.  In the lead up to Bioshock 2, the hype machine was huge, the return to Rapture was going to be a triumphant new adventure as a Big Daddy.  Then, when it came out, people began to shit on the game for being a disappointment.  The hype machine built up a game that could not be and then capitalized on it by treating it with polarizing views of angry dismissal or angry defense.  I also admit to this, having expressed my anger at games like Demons Souls, Bioshock Infinite, and even Skyrim.  I'm disappointed just as much in myself as others because rather than trying to find the good in moderately fun games or even flawed titles, if they do not merit a solid 9/10 or 10/10, it seems like we are content to get upset at them.  We live in a culture that largely responds to game criticism, hype, or even general discussion with anger and games media has helped that along.  Worse though is when people start being rude, angry, or generally cruel when they could have avoided it.  Jason Schrier's flame war with George Kamitani over the portrayal of women in Dragon's Crown or Marcus Beer's attacks on Phil fish are good examples of this.

Not a bad game.  Please stop buying into the hype machine of what it was supposed to be, stop being angry, and just enjoy it for what it is.

            More distressing is the lack of ethics in games media.  Now, I'm not someone who believes that game reviewers or those who deal with the news of games are privileged because they get free games or consoles.  That is their work.  That is no different than a law book for a lawyer or an abacus for an actuary.  It is a tool.  However, when they abuse those tools, I start to get upset.  In the last generation, we received dozens of 9/10 and 10/10 review scores across the board for games like Bioshock Infinite, which was a remarkably flawed game, to Skyrim, which was released with a huge amount of bugs but which was declared a masterpiece regardless, to XCOM, which was so buggy at times that it was unplayable.  It seems like journalists either cannot separate personal feelings from issues of fault, bugginess, or flaws in the game design...or they've been paid off.  When I was younger, I played a game called Ephemeral Fantasia, which was panned on one game website, but which received more modest scores on others.  Each one noted its flaws or bugs, but highlighted different facets of the title, offering different opinions, one of which eventually made me buy the game.  These days, only independent reviewers, like those on Blistered Thumbs or Total Biscuit tend to be brutally honest about games, whereas larger publishers tend to have across the board either positive or negative reviews...a consensus.  It makes me raise an eyebrow.  And even those independent reviewers can make mistakes.  Someone on Blistered Thumbs gave Xenoblade Chronicles a 10/10 review score when I have already addressed at great length its many flaws.  This leads to my final disappointment.  The conflicting interests.  Publishers are the ones who give game journalists and media outlets review copies before the launch day.  If the media site or reviewer pans the title, the publisher is less likely to send them a game in the future.  This happened with Total Biscuit in regards to Garry's Incident on Steam, which was so buggy it was nearly unplayable.  However, to avoid bad publicity, the publisher tried to get his review pulled from Youtube.  While thhere is a large deal of ethics issues or ethical confusion, I'm not going to say all game reviewers or media outlets are morally bankrupt.  Some are probably just...in a tough situation.  Coupled with the conflicting interests, it makes games media a muddled thing indeed, as it's difficult to find the truth from the hype, the honest review from the fan boy review, and the heartfelt admiration from the corporate pay off.  I know that this has been an issue in the past, Nintendo Power was after all propaganda, however this generation has been rampant with it.  And that disappoints me.

One of the glitchiest games of the generation.  9.5 out of 10...see why I'm down on the media?

            Finally, let's discuss the games industry as a whole.  We are a bunch of sexist, entitled, fan boy bastards.  Not all of us and some not to as huge a degree as others, but we, as a culture and an industry, have problems.  These problems were made all too clear in this generation.  Sexism was a prime issue here.  The harassment of Anita Sarkeesian and women in the game industry, keeping women off video game covers unless they are half naked, ignoring or marginalizing the female gamer population, ala "the fake gamer girl" incidents...we have a lot of growing up to do.  And we're not helping our image with these ideas.  We're also highly self entitled.  We believe the world owes us something when really...it doesn't.  Game piracy is easily the biggest example of self entitlement in the game industry and it hurts everyone.  The truth is, I think we've blurred the lines between what we really are entitled as customers and what we believe we are entitled too.  Say what you want about the Mass Effect 3 ending, but the fact that gamers believed that, after paying for a finished product, they believed they were entitled to more...it is telling about our mindset and culture.  As customers, we do deserve a working product, which makes the Diablo 3 or Sim City incidents especially depressing as we did not even get that, however we are not owed anything unless we have plopped down the money for it.  Even then, we may not be owed a blasted thing.  But the game industry continually seems to think that because we want it, we deserve it.  Publishers, media, and gamers alike.

We deserve working games, for sure...but entitlement is a problem in our culture.  We deserve working games.  But we are not entitled to hurt others, in or out of the game industry, if we don't get them.

            My final problem with the game industry is the fan boy issue.  We have become so vitriolic and defensive about almost everything that we will angrily defend, even making an argument personal or threatening or harassing others just to prove our point.  We cannot continue on like this.  These are the efforts of children, screaming at parents and threatening their classmates without realizing the totality of their actions.  There have always been and likely will always be fan boys.  However, no matter how brutal, smarmy, or rude it could be in the past, it pales in comparison to the nastiness on open display in the games industry at the moment.  Developers blatantly insulting their customers to their detriment, fans berating anyone who steps out of line with their train of thought, media pundits harassing developers...we are getting worse and worse.  And it makes me sad.  It makes me want to distance myself from the industry and culture I once loved.

The parody of the fanboy has become so hilarious because the reality is so depressing. 

            So, yeah, to me this generation has been a huge disappointment for me.  Even putting aside those issues, the forced attempts at innovation played into the hype machine...we were promised full motion feed back with the Wii and got shoddy controls.  We were promised a controllerless perfect experience on Xbox 360 Kinect and got a useless peripheral.  The dual shock sixaxis was supposed to use tilt technology to improve game design, but the controllers were poorly made pieces of crap.  Games themselves also seem to be watered down and more flash than substance.  I really can't justify buying games that are 4 hours in length for $60 or even $40.

Forcing innovation was an expensive bomb last generation for the tentative promise of something better this generation.  I'm not holding my breath.

            It's not all bad though.  Let me give a quick forecast of the next generation to try and lift some spirits, okay?  Honestly, I believe this new generation will either be the time of the Wii U or, what is more likely, the return to power of the PC.  The PS4 and Xbox One are basically over glorified, underpowered PCs with a few exclusive games like Killzone or Dead Rising 3.  Anything they can do, a PC can do better, more efficiently, and with less hassle.  Consoles seem to be moving more towards the PC, but without any of the benefits, so I predict either the PC will become the major gaming platform and supplant consoles, or the Wii U will gain steam and overtake them all.  Why?  Well, the Wii U has a number of things going for it other companies don't have.  While digital distribution on PS4 and Xbox One often have PC equivalents on Steam or GOG, the Wii U has the virtual console, which, short of emulation or trying to hunt down old cartridges, is the only legal way to play older console games from Nintendo and Sega.  Titles like Earthbound cannot be found anywhere else.  If that receives support, then the Wii U will have more power in the digital arena.  The Wii U is also the cheapest of the three consoles and a dedicated gaming machine rather than a multi-media platform.  The Wii U also is trying something new with the game pad, releasing it from the shackles of the television while opening up new venues of play with the television.  It also has the house Mario built, Nintendo, supporting it.  The Wii U is behind at the moment, but that could rapidly change.  I think that Sony and Microsoft will make decent sales with their consoles at first, but as more people become fed up with the watering down and PC-ification of their consoles, I think they'll either move to Wii U or to PC.

The one true savior.

            I also believe that this generation will not necessarily belong to large publishers, but to the smaller studios.  The indies.  Through crowd sourcing, they now have a means to get capital without groveling at the feet of giants, making releasing quality games on a budget, usually for the PC, child's play.  It releases many developers from the burden of the overpriced, exorbitance of the AAA industry.  Indies are the future, as far as I'm concerned.  I think that larger publishers, as budgets increase, will eventually implode when they cannot get enough money to cover their costs, while Indies, with their low costs and roots in the community, will survive.

The other true savior.

            In general, while I believe this generation to be a disappointment, this new generation or the one after it will be a bit of a shake up.  I honestly believe that things are going to change.  I don't fear becoming a PC gamer, thanks to my recent conversion to Steam and GOG, but I would weep for the loss of what I consider to be console culture.  It was my childhood, after all.  Regardless of what comes though, I think that the game industry as it is now will not be able to stay as it is.  Even now, we are seeing more acts of altruism in small ways.  Promoting a kickstarter for a game to try and get it off the ground for no other reason than the game looks fun.  Defending or discussing issues in a civil manner.  We all have our bigots, our sexists, our angry fan boys...but we also have people who have a great love of gaming.  And so, I predict that in spite of my disappointment with this last generation, I do believe the future will get brighter.

Seriously, everyone...thank you for reading.  It's been an honor and a privilege.

            I'd like to take a moment to thank all my wonderful readers.  All...4 of you.  I kid, I kid.  I do this for myself, but it's nice to know that some people do pay attention and enjoy, or at least are engaged by my work.  I hope to be less vitriolic in the coming year and to get more posts out on a regular basis.  I want to defend games rather than just sigh and shake my head at the industry.  So, see you in 2014...or sooner, if I get my act together!  Let's see if the Wii U, the PC, or something brand new takes center stage.

Sell Now, Fix Later: The Growing Problem of Unfinished Games

Okay, before I get started with this entry, I want to apologize for the infrequency I have been posting lately.  I recently lost my old job and have returned to school, so needless to say, it's been an adjustment period.  I've also had my hands in other projects, like my book or a sexism project in regards to video games for the sake of a friend of mine.  Anyway, enough apologies.  I may be a bit more infrequent for the next few months, but I do have some more posts in the pipeline so...please be patient with me.  Now, on with the post and your inevitable hate mail.

Sell Now, Fix Later: The Growing Problem of Unfinished Games

I'm going to say something that will probably earn me a good deal of flak.  I don't like Skyrim.  Before anyone throws hate mail my way or "You just haven't played it enough" or what have you, let me retort with, I spent sixty hours playing the game.  It's addicting, certainly, but...I can't really say I had FUN while playing it, just that I couldn't exactly stop.  I went from the start of the game to the end of the story missions, finished the civil war, and by the end was greatly disillusioned with it because Skyrim is an unfinished game, shoved out into the market because the developers thought it was "Good enough."

"Good enough" is not good enough when it comes to a $60 game.  Make.  It.  Better.

            What do I mean by that?  Well, in the modern game industry, the advent of consoles which regularly connect to the internet has spoiled video game developers somewhat.  You see, thanks to the ability to patch a game online, many developers feel it is alright to skip some of the crucial stages of QA testing in their games, shove it out into the world at large, and if there are problems down the road they can just release a patch for it.  While I know that releasing a patch is a huge hassle much of the time and does require a fair amount of manpower, this kind of nonsense would not fly ten years ago.  Ten years ago, a game with as many bugs and glitches as Skyrim would be laughed off the cutting room floor, not lauded with 9/10 and 10/10 scores from reviewers and given countless game of the year awards.  See, as consoles have grown closer and closer to PCs, an unsettling number of them have started to treat their games like PC games.

It's a good game, but...no.  Glitchiness should not get a free pass.  9/10 for a game with an insane amount of glitches is unacceptable, even for an Elder Scrolls game.

            There was a time when console video games could not be that glitchy.  One or two glitches might be acceptable if the developers missed them and they didn't obstruct gameplay, like the famous Final Fantasy 6 reviving General Leo glitch or the duplicating items glitch in Dark Cloud 2.  However, if a video game had noticeable problems just running normally then it would receive a lot of flak from reviewers and gamers alike.  For me, personally, Skyrim on the PS3 froze to the point where I had to manually restart my console about 6 times during my play through.  Many monsters would one shot me at full health, even if they were tiny.  I had, on two separate occasions, Dragon corpses draped over different houses in different cities that refused to disappear and which ragdolled and got trapped in the scenery.  Characters who could get trapped, both by scenery and IN scenery.  And overall just poor design on certain sections of the game.  Yet, despite all these problems, and these were in the most recently patched version, Skyrim's perfect "legendary edition," people still threw around awards of 10/10 for the game.  When the game was released in 2011, there were dozens if not hundreds more glitches, some of which made the game unplayable after sixty hours or more.  This kind of glitchy, unfinished console game would never even find release, save for the most unscrupulous of developers pre-2006.  The fact that it's a port of a PC game is little excuse, especially considering how high profile it is.  Be more critical, game journalists!  Skyrim did not deserve all those 10/10 scores it got.  I personally didn't like it, but that's personal preference.  I could see it being a solid 8/10 or a 7/10 because of all the options and the capacity for fun through organic gameplay...but with all the glitches, it did not deserve all the praise it got.  Just because a game has a massive amount of content does not forgive the fact that the game is unfinished in places.  In fact, "You can overlook a few glitches due to the amount of content"  should not be an excuse.  If anything, the amount of content raises the bar higher because if you can give us this much content, we expect it to all work.

You laugh, but this is kind of distracting...immersion breaking...and just unacceptable in a "game of the year" title.

            Here's the thing.  PC games have had this issue for a while where even seminal games can be plagued by glitches.  System Shock 2, I have no Mouth and I must Scream, Deus Ex, etc. have all had glitches that needed patching or which were just left in game, some of which were game breaking.  However, PC games are a different breed than console games.  PC games allow free modding, so that even if a developer abandons a game to glitchiness, the fans could program in a work around.  This is not possible with console games.  If you're going to release a console game, you have to recognize that internet access 24/7 is not all that likely, so patches will be harder to send out, and that there will not be a modding community, so you can't simply throw up your hands when an error comes in and say, "It's good enough.  Ship it with the glitches, we'll sort it out later."  Even for PC games, I think this is giving a bit too much leeway.  When you have to pay sixty dollars for a game, brand new, then it should work for you without fail.  It should be a finished game.  No one pays ten grand for a car that's missing wheels or missing an engine when it's been advertised as complete and no gamer should pay full price for a game that clearly is not finished.  "Good enough" is not an excuse.

I love Splatterhouse, but...get ready to rage as it glitches up over and over.  A game like this should not have been released, at least not for full price, even if it's dirt cheap now.

            Yet, in the current generation, this happens more and more, even with games that aren't patched.  I could definitely keep kicking Bethesda, since Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion also had glitches and Fall Out 3 and New Vegas were prone to freezing a fair bit, but let's look at some games that aren't PC ports.  Splatterhouse for the PS3 and Xbox 360.  I love Splatterhouse.  For all its flaws, it's very fun.  But even I raised an eyebrow and sighed when I saw the ending.  There was a massive sound glitch where the entire audio track, music, sound effects, voices, the works, just stopped working during a cinematic.  This happened several times, where audio would fail, video would get choppy, or where I would die just because of a game glitch.  I love Splatterhouse, but it should not have been released as it was.  The developers had to have known about this issue and they should have fixed it.  There's no excuse for it.  Or Pandora's Tower.  I've already gushed about how much I adore Elena and Pandora's Tower for the Wii.  But even I yelled at my game when it started to glitch out.  You see, at one point in the game, the player can through one of two towers, which are connected.  One tower, randomly chosen, causes the game to freeze.  If you reload the game and choose the other tower, you're usually fine.  But every other time I tried to go into these towers, the game would freeze and I would have to reload.  And judging from forums about the game, this kind of glitch is just one of many. This is hard to miss, given the nature of the glitch and the game's pacing.  How could QA have screwed up so badly?

See that chain?  That's the glitch gateway.  After running down it to enter the last tower, prepare for a game freeze.

            Now, I'm not an idiot here.  I know that glitchy, unplayable console games have been released in the past, such as the LJN licensed games on the NES, however look back on those games.  They typically saw very poor sales and were reviled by the gaming community.  Compare that to Skyrim or even Pandora's Tower.  Skyrim has sold millions of copies and even been named game of the year, while Pandora's Tower has been ported to the US after the massive fan campaign, Operation Rainfall.  These are high profile titles in the gaming community.  And their mistakes are just getting overlooked.  This is something I cannot stand.  We paid full price, so we should get a finished game.

            I can be sympathetic up to a point.  Sometimes, developers think they've caught all the mistakes possible.  They think they've fixed their game to the point where it's not "Good Enough" but that it's actually "Complete."  Then it ships, a player does something the developers weren't prepared for, and a glitch is discovered.  This is a real possibility, especially with older PC games like Deus Ex or even newer games, like Aquaria or FEZ.  And it's not restricted to AAA developers, as the previous two games were indie titles.  When that happens, I understand that it was probably unforeseeable.  However, in a game like Skyrim, which released with a huge number of bugs, then was re-released as a "Legendary" or "Complete" or "Game of the Year" edition...I have no sympathy.  You sold us a broken game you thought was good, okay, we understand, just do what you can to patch it.  You sold us a game you KNEW was broken and just went ahead with it because of the money?  Screw you.

Legendary Edition, my ass.  These games may have the latest patches, but still have a plethora of glitches.  Try, plebian edition.

            This seems almost like a parody of video game business models.  A parody of Skyrim was featured in an independentfilm by Doug Walker called "Dragonbored."  In this film, a Bethesda stand in released a game called Skyguard, which had a glitch that released the in-game character into the real world.  Impossible?  Certainly.  Funny?  At times.  But then, the film ends with a stinger showing the developer's coder talking to the boss.  They talk about a glitch which sent someone back in time.  The developer's response?  "Go ahead and release it.  We can patch it later."  This may have been a parody, but think about that mentality.  About a developer or publisher caring nothing for your satisfaction as a customer, because they can do something about issues "later" so long as they get your money "now."  This kind of short sighted business decision is scummy beyond compare.  Now, for EA.  We all knew this was coming.  The Sim City 2013 release.  EA released a game that suffered disastrous launch failures, which despite being online only and patched regularly still had numerous glitches, several of which were server glitches directly under EA's supervision, and was ultimately reviled as one of the most botched launches in gaming history.  However, months after the fact, EA called it a success.  Why?  Because they sold several million units and got them working "eventually."  They thought that selling their users a broken game was fine, so long as they got their money now and the users got their finished game "At some point."

Don't worry...we'll fix it eventually.  Unacceptable, EA.  Unacceptable anyone.  Stop selling unfinished games!

            Truthfully, the internet isn't the only thing that has led us to this current embarrassment in game design.  It's the bloated AAA industry.  Lately, the AAA video game industry has become like scummy, short sighted politicians or Wall Street businessmen.  They follow the mantra of "Profits now, who cares later."  They shove their games, broken or not, into our face and expect us to buy them up like good little sheep.  The prices rise, but the quality drops and we continue to purchase their games, regardless.  Longer, more expensive development times means they can afford to do no less.  They don't have time or money for "polish."  The fact that they can get away with it means they don't hesitate to release an incomplete game.

            And really, who is to blame for this?  Well, the companies, obviously, but also, us, the gamers.  We put up with this nonsense.  Every time we buy a Skyrim and give it a 10/10 despite it's numerous frustrating glitches, every time we buy into another EA pyramid scheme, every time we shrug and say, "Oh well, it's good enough" while playing a game, every time we buy a broken game just because of brand loyalty or without looking into it, like good little sheep, we are contributing to the problem.  Developers have gotten spoiled thanks to the idea of a console having free access to the internet.  But then again, so have gamers.  It's why so many people put up with on-disc DLC or why online passes were overlooked for a time.  Because we were spoiled by the internet and forgot a time when consoles didn't have the net.  They only had their games, to stand or fall on their merits alone.  And we need to remember.  I personally connect my PS3 to the internet maybe once a year.  Thousands if not hundreds of thousands never connect their systems at all.  We need to go back to a time, such as when the PS2 launched, where connecting to the internet was the exception, not the norm.  Where games had to stand on their own merits, rather than on what they maybe, possibly, could be once they were fixed.

Still don't believe my warnings?  Well brand loyalty and buying up games like good little sheep gave us Final Fantasy 13-2.  And Lightning returns.  Yeah.  Be afraid.

            The games industry is and has always been a business.  But Jim Sterling put it best.  No longer are game companies trying to create a title that will polarize and attract new gamers.  They are now trying to squeeze as much money out of what dwindling fan bases they have as fast as possible.  Gearbox shoving Aliens: Colonial Marines while advertising with a demo that was a blatant lie is proof of that.  A broken game, shoved out with promises of tweaks, which seem really unlikely, for the masses to lap up.  There was a time when a developer didn't need to release a broken game to squeeze money from a fan base.  There was a time when releasing a game dead on arrival was just that, dead, not dead until fixed.  But as the AAA industry becomes more bloated and ridiculous, I imagine we will see a good deal more releases that are functionally unfinished and which need to be patched.  Patches may be a great thing, allowing a developer to fix their mistakes post mortem, however, I also expect to see games released which are functionally unfinished even AFTER patches or which receive no patches at all.  If they haven't already been released by the time of this posting.

This is the game Gearbox sold to us as finished.  Yeah...remember what happened?  Oh, right.  Fan outrage.

            So, what can be done?  Well, compromise for one.  If you're going to release a game that has bugs or glitches that you know about, scummy as that may sound, give gamers a price drop.  A decent price drop.  A $20-$30 price drop.  That way, they at least know what they're getting into.  Value for less than stellar efforts.  Or, on the flip side, if you think it's good but bugs crop up anyway?  Well, how about some special content for people free of charge?  Some developers do this and while it's not a perfect solution, especially for gamers who play offline, it's at least something.  Hell, some game companies like Nintendo have multi-media sites that can give rewards or game credit as an apology if they so chose to do so.  However, there is one thing we can do beyond simply compromise.  We can stop settling for less.

            Angry Joe and Kotaku both played Saint's Row 4 when it came out and I have been flabbergasted by the excuses they make for the game's many glitches.  When a car clips into scenery?  "It's fine!  It's funny and I can just get out of the car."  No.  A game doesn't function the way it should, you need to raise a little more hell.  "The game froze on me, but it's still fun, so I'll excuse it."  Ummm...doesn't a game freezing make you repeat a section, thus killing some of the fun?  Own up to it!  "The game's so outrageous these glitches almost seem like they were built into it."  Really?  Are you really that desperate to defend what you love?  I love Splatterhouse.  I think it's an underrated game that's really fun.  But I would not pay full price for it.  I waited to buy it on the cheap because I knew it was flawed.  And even though it's fun, I can admit the glitches hurt my appreciation of the game.  Reviewers, gamers, and yes, even developers...stop settling for less.  Stop making excuses for your games.  I know you love them, but part of love is honesty...don't sweep their failings under the rug.  Be fair.

Yeah, these glitches were intentional...it's parody!  Keeeeeeep telling yourself that.  Whatever lets you sleep easy at night.  Seriously, give games a fair shake, both for good or for ill.  If they screw up, bash them, even if you love them.

            What game companies and even gamers forget is that we have the power.  We have the money.  And if game companies want it, they need to do a better job.  My final suggestion is to stop buying games on release day, honestly.  Let the lifetime sales of a game speak for its merit, not just a million over the weekend.  Wait until you know a game is actually finished or worth playing before dropping your money down on it.  Don't follow a brand or a series or a developer like sheep just because they've released hits in the past.  Gearbox, Square Enix, EA, Bethesda, even Nintendo have all released major smash hits in the past but they've also all released unfinished games as well.  Don't settle for "Good enough."  Don't settle for the excuse of, "Oh we'll fix it later, we'll patch it."  Don't defend it just because it's "fun."  If the game is unfinished, own up to it and demand a game that is worth the money you're plopping down for it.