If you're in the least bit interested in the e-sports scene, you would have heard of the issue between the International e-Sports Federation and female gamers. In short, the federation, in attempting to bring e-Sports up to the level of conventional sporting events, separated its competitors by gender, and, because they did not have a Hearthstone league for women, banned female gamers from participating.
Needless to say, the Internet exploded in a rage akin to a million nuclear bombs dropped onto the organizers of the tournament. The organizers have since rescinded the ban, but it still leaves a sour taste on the gaming community and female gamers.
What is interesting, and not to mention, amusing, is the statement that in order to be like conventional sports, where male and female athletes are separated, the organizers have opted to take a similar approach. In a bizarre turn of events, the organizers have decided to pick the games that each gender should play. That means that, if you are a girl, you are not allowed to play Street Fighter, but can play Tekken, while guys are not allowed, according to the organizers. So sorry, Tekken Tag players, you are just not 'man' enough.
I'm sure everybody understands why guys and girls do not compete against each other in most sports and it's obvious why that does not apply to gaming. Does separating the sexes work though? There are statistics that show that the percentage of male and female gamers are nearly 50: 50, but how much of that are competitive games vs casual games, I do not know. But currently, it is a fact that fewer female gamers enter competitions. Would it be as exciting with less competitors? Perhaps that might encourage more female gamers to step forward, since fewer competitors means a better chance of winning, but that doesn't apply if you don't even give them a chance to compete. Hafu, a female Hearthstone streamer and competitor mentioned in a podcast her discussion with other female gamers and their idea that an all female league actually makes it less threatening for them so perhaps the idea of separating the leagues might really promote esports.
Games are becoming more mainstream though, and games like Hearthstone are particularly well received by all ages and genders. But at the end of the day, when it comes to gaming, it shouldn't really matter who is at the keyboard, but the level of the play. (Yes I understand when it comes to e-Sports, there's image and manner to take into account, but that's a discussion for another day.)
Friday, July 11, 2014
Saturday, June 28, 2014
The Free-to-play Fallacy
Mobile games... How many times have we read on the news of children 'accidentally' spending a fortune on a 'free' game to the shock of their parents? Considering that cases that come to light probably involve a significant the sum of money, how many cases of 'accidental' spending are there in reality?
Make no mistake, apps are designed to make money. Most free apps make money either through advertising, option to purchase for added features, or, as in this case, micro-transactions, and it is this monetization model that can be an issue.
Micro-transactions, or the option to buy perks, cheats, or speed boosts to get through the game faster, are becoming extremely popular, especially with Farmville-like games, for example, Smurf Village. These games, commonly referred to as cow clickers, tend to give the players very limited activities each game session and the player has to wait, possibly for hours as you get further into the game, before they get more activities to participate in. In order to speed things up, there are options to pay to instantly build stuff, or buy game currency so a player does not have to spend the time to earn it.
Patience is not a common trait among gamers, especially younger ones with more time on their hands. And if parents do not have the proper measures on place, they can spend a lot of money to get through to the next objective, not knowing the value nor the amount of money they are truly spending. Given how the app stores work and the safety measurements in place, these cases should be rare, but people somehow trust their children with the passwords to their accounts with their credit card details attached. And even if that's not the case, a child can be tempted to cry and whine to his parents to buy it for him. And who's to say that it's not actually the parent himself who spends, regrets and then blames it on his child to get a refund?
These games are designed and tweaked to a point where players are tempted to spend money to get ahead, yet are not put off by the slow pace of progression. And therein lies the problem. It's arguably exploitative, especially to certain vulnerable people. Considering the fact that free-to-play games tend to make the most from a very small percentage of its players, this could quite possibly be true.
And it's not just cow clickers. Any free-to-play game, or any game with micro-transactions built in, for that matter, can potentially be exploitative, locking content behind 'energy levels', whereby you need to wait or pay before the next level, or currency walls, i.e. you slowly save up in-game currency or, you guessed it, pay, to unlock the next level or upgrade your character. Game difficulty can even be tweaked such that it's impossible to complete without paying for upgrades. How often have I played a game with micro-transactions and have that nagging feeling that I'll never complete the game because I'm not going to pay.
As parents, it is our responsibility to police our children and educate them on their gaming and spending habits (duh). As gamers, we need to realize what and where we're spending on as well. Quite often, the amount spent on a free-to-play game in order to make decent progress can easily cost more than buying a retail game outright. Of course, it's hard to determine if a phone app is worth our time, but perhaps by not spending time and money in exploitative ones the moment we are sure, we can bring down it's popularity? Well, we can dream, can't we? Perhaps we can start by letting people know of such exploitative games and avoiding them.
If you know of any app with detestable business practices, especially the famous ones, feel free to post in the comments. And thanks for reading!
Make no mistake, apps are designed to make money. Most free apps make money either through advertising, option to purchase for added features, or, as in this case, micro-transactions, and it is this monetization model that can be an issue.
Micro-transactions, or the option to buy perks, cheats, or speed boosts to get through the game faster, are becoming extremely popular, especially with Farmville-like games, for example, Smurf Village. These games, commonly referred to as cow clickers, tend to give the players very limited activities each game session and the player has to wait, possibly for hours as you get further into the game, before they get more activities to participate in. In order to speed things up, there are options to pay to instantly build stuff, or buy game currency so a player does not have to spend the time to earn it.
Patience is not a common trait among gamers, especially younger ones with more time on their hands. And if parents do not have the proper measures on place, they can spend a lot of money to get through to the next objective, not knowing the value nor the amount of money they are truly spending. Given how the app stores work and the safety measurements in place, these cases should be rare, but people somehow trust their children with the passwords to their accounts with their credit card details attached. And even if that's not the case, a child can be tempted to cry and whine to his parents to buy it for him. And who's to say that it's not actually the parent himself who spends, regrets and then blames it on his child to get a refund?
These games are designed and tweaked to a point where players are tempted to spend money to get ahead, yet are not put off by the slow pace of progression. And therein lies the problem. It's arguably exploitative, especially to certain vulnerable people. Considering the fact that free-to-play games tend to make the most from a very small percentage of its players, this could quite possibly be true.
And it's not just cow clickers. Any free-to-play game, or any game with micro-transactions built in, for that matter, can potentially be exploitative, locking content behind 'energy levels', whereby you need to wait or pay before the next level, or currency walls, i.e. you slowly save up in-game currency or, you guessed it, pay, to unlock the next level or upgrade your character. Game difficulty can even be tweaked such that it's impossible to complete without paying for upgrades. How often have I played a game with micro-transactions and have that nagging feeling that I'll never complete the game because I'm not going to pay.
As parents, it is our responsibility to police our children and educate them on their gaming and spending habits (duh). As gamers, we need to realize what and where we're spending on as well. Quite often, the amount spent on a free-to-play game in order to make decent progress can easily cost more than buying a retail game outright. Of course, it's hard to determine if a phone app is worth our time, but perhaps by not spending time and money in exploitative ones the moment we are sure, we can bring down it's popularity? Well, we can dream, can't we? Perhaps we can start by letting people know of such exploitative games and avoiding them.
If you know of any app with detestable business practices, especially the famous ones, feel free to post in the comments. And thanks for reading!
Saturday, June 21, 2014
Linux - Ubuntu 14.04 and Gaming
I recently installed Ubuntu 14.04 LTS on my desktop alongside Windows 8.1 and was surprised how smooth the installation went and how the Linux OS was able to detect and provide drivers for my PC components. Perhaps the last time I installed a Linux distro was before Ubuntu tried to reach a wider audience or it was because my components were older, but it seems that Ubuntu is trying to provide proper drivers (whether official or open-source community developed ones) packed into the OS installation. This makes it really simple for someone like me who still don't understand how to 'compile the kernel' to get into Linux.
The 'app store' makes it easy to get software for Ubuntu. I still remember the hoops I had to jump through just to install an instant messenger on Ubuntu many years before, plus totally screwing up a display driver installation.
Things are so much simpler now. As for games, just a simple install of Steam from the Ubuntu One 'app store' and I have games ready to go. The selection is limited, and not all games that I buy on the Windows platform come with a Linux version, but at least I have some games, mainly Valve and Indie titles, but games nonetheless and I have more games from Humble Bundle as well.
It was pretty simple getting most games on Steam to run. Indies like Papers Please and FTL: Faster than Light ran without a hitch. I couldn't get Serious Sam 3: BFE to run at first, but switching my graphics card driver from the open source one to the proprietary one solved the problem. The Xbox 360 controller worked right out of the box, so to speak, for The Witcher 2, which is pretty impressive.
More online distributors are placing focus on Linux. Among them, perhaps one of the first ones would be Humble's bundles. With Steam development of the Steam OS and GoG's coming support for Ubuntu, the day when Linux users can stop relying on Wine for games might be approaching. That, and the fact that some Linux destros are striving to be more user friendly, we might see more people using the open source OS. We're still seeing a lack of games, especially that from the free-to-play department but that might change as SteamOS kicks off and the free-to-play titles already on Steam possibly taking an interest if there are enough people adopting Linux.
Anyway, thank you for taking an interest in my experience with Ubuntu 14.04. Are you using Linux? Will you ever consider playing on Linux with Ubuntu or SteamOS? Let me know in the comments!
The 'app store' makes it easy to get software for Ubuntu. I still remember the hoops I had to jump through just to install an instant messenger on Ubuntu many years before, plus totally screwing up a display driver installation.
Things are so much simpler now. As for games, just a simple install of Steam from the Ubuntu One 'app store' and I have games ready to go. The selection is limited, and not all games that I buy on the Windows platform come with a Linux version, but at least I have some games, mainly Valve and Indie titles, but games nonetheless and I have more games from Humble Bundle as well.
It was pretty simple getting most games on Steam to run. Indies like Papers Please and FTL: Faster than Light ran without a hitch. I couldn't get Serious Sam 3: BFE to run at first, but switching my graphics card driver from the open source one to the proprietary one solved the problem. The Xbox 360 controller worked right out of the box, so to speak, for The Witcher 2, which is pretty impressive.
More online distributors are placing focus on Linux. Among them, perhaps one of the first ones would be Humble's bundles. With Steam development of the Steam OS and GoG's coming support for Ubuntu, the day when Linux users can stop relying on Wine for games might be approaching. That, and the fact that some Linux destros are striving to be more user friendly, we might see more people using the open source OS. We're still seeing a lack of games, especially that from the free-to-play department but that might change as SteamOS kicks off and the free-to-play titles already on Steam possibly taking an interest if there are enough people adopting Linux.
Anyway, thank you for taking an interest in my experience with Ubuntu 14.04. Are you using Linux? Will you ever consider playing on Linux with Ubuntu or SteamOS? Let me know in the comments!
Saturday, May 31, 2014
Fireside Card Back Requirements
Blizzard introduced Fireside Gatherings for Hearthstone along with a card back reward. There are people who are keen on getting the card back, but are either unable, or unwilling to join a Fireside Gathering. According to Blizzard, there are 3 criteria to obtaining the card back:
1) 3 people on the same subnet
2) 3 matches played against another player on the same subnet
3) played against friends or players near me
Besides these criteria, some other requirements I've heard are having to unlock all heroes, having to win against the expert decks, having to play your free arena run and so on. So I decided to try and get my card back on own and test out these ideas even though some people probably already have the answers.
I set up 3 accounts:
1) my main on a desktop - all heroes unlocked, all expert decks beat, arena played, lvl 18
2) on a laptop - all heroes unlocked and that's all
3) on an ipad 2 - only tutorial completed and so only has the mage hero
3 games were played out fully between accounts 1 and 2, without conceding and both accounts got the card back. 3 more games were played out fully between accounts 2 and 3, again, not conceding and account 3 got the card back as well. Needless to say, all 3 accounts were logged on throughout (the ipad was set to not turn off the screen).
And so we conclude, only completing the tutorial is required to get the card back besides the criteria Blizzard announced, that is (I'm not sure if you can play against a friend without clearing the tutorial but if it's possible, maybe just starting an account is fine?).
There are still a lot of little things about this game that might confuse or amuse a new player. It does make for an interesting experience though so if you happen to have the tiniest interest in collectible card games in the vein of Magic: The Gathering, you might want to give it a go.
Just to share a fun game I had today.it I played a warlock against a paladin. He had a large minion out which I promptly played Corruption on, which basically marks a minion for destruction at the end of his turn. Knowing his minion will die when he ends his turn, he played a Faceless Manipulator and makes a copy of it (the Faceless transform into another copy of any minion you target) and proceeds to buff up the copy. I was about to tell him 'well played' when he hit end turn and both copies of the minion die after which he promptly left the game. Turns out the Faceless Manipulator copies everything, even buffs and enchantments. It was a funny experience and I'm glad I learnt it by seeing it happen to my opponent and not having it happen to me.
1) 3 people on the same subnet
2) 3 matches played against another player on the same subnet
3) played against friends or players near me
Besides these criteria, some other requirements I've heard are having to unlock all heroes, having to win against the expert decks, having to play your free arena run and so on. So I decided to try and get my card back on own and test out these ideas even though some people probably already have the answers.
I set up 3 accounts:
1) my main on a desktop - all heroes unlocked, all expert decks beat, arena played, lvl 18
2) on a laptop - all heroes unlocked and that's all
3) on an ipad 2 - only tutorial completed and so only has the mage hero
3 games were played out fully between accounts 1 and 2, without conceding and both accounts got the card back. 3 more games were played out fully between accounts 2 and 3, again, not conceding and account 3 got the card back as well. Needless to say, all 3 accounts were logged on throughout (the ipad was set to not turn off the screen).
And so we conclude, only completing the tutorial is required to get the card back besides the criteria Blizzard announced, that is (I'm not sure if you can play against a friend without clearing the tutorial but if it's possible, maybe just starting an account is fine?).
There are still a lot of little things about this game that might confuse or amuse a new player. It does make for an interesting experience though so if you happen to have the tiniest interest in collectible card games in the vein of Magic: The Gathering, you might want to give it a go.
Just to share a fun game I had today.it I played a warlock against a paladin. He had a large minion out which I promptly played Corruption on, which basically marks a minion for destruction at the end of his turn. Knowing his minion will die when he ends his turn, he played a Faceless Manipulator and makes a copy of it (the Faceless transform into another copy of any minion you target) and proceeds to buff up the copy. I was about to tell him 'well played' when he hit end turn and both copies of the minion die after which he promptly left the game. Turns out the Faceless Manipulator copies everything, even buffs and enchantments. It was a funny experience and I'm glad I learnt it by seeing it happen to my opponent and not having it happen to me.
Thursday, May 29, 2014
Game Reviews and ReReviews
I recently started playing Path of Exile again after receiving an email regarding their 2 week charity race event. Playing hard core with extra game mechanics in the form of Ambush (special loot boxes that spawn enemies you have to kill before unlocking) and Invasion (randon boss enemies that are normally not found in a given area spawning) makes it much more interesting. I also found 'corrupted' side areas with enemies having special modifiers (lighting attacks, totem filled areas that buff enemies and so on) to clear. All these modifications really change up the game play even without having to reach end game.
It makes me wonder how much games (free-to-play or otherwise) can change given time and how reviews can get outdated so very quickly. Can a gamer who wants to play an old game still rely on old reviews to judge whether he'll be interested? Updates are happening all the time, more so now that practically everyone has access to the internet, and if reviews to free to play games get updated, would it be fair to games that are buy-to-play? The new loot system, for example, improves Diablo 3 a lot, even without the expansion. (but it doesn't matter since D3 had great reviews?)(on the other hand, the consensus of players was that D3 was bad before the loot 2.0 patch.)
Free-to-play games though, are, well, free, so we can just play it and judge for ourselves, so does it really matter? Well, it can be argued that the time invested before knowing whether a game is bad could potentially cost more. Unfortunately, besides looking to hard core players of the game in question, it's hard to get a good review, and even then, the opinions of these gamers will definitely be biased. Perhaps one day, people will figure out what to do, but until then, the forums and patch notes will be an OK way to understand the quality of a game that's been out for a while.
It makes me wonder how much games (free-to-play or otherwise) can change given time and how reviews can get outdated so very quickly. Can a gamer who wants to play an old game still rely on old reviews to judge whether he'll be interested? Updates are happening all the time, more so now that practically everyone has access to the internet, and if reviews to free to play games get updated, would it be fair to games that are buy-to-play? The new loot system, for example, improves Diablo 3 a lot, even without the expansion. (but it doesn't matter since D3 had great reviews?)(on the other hand, the consensus of players was that D3 was bad before the loot 2.0 patch.)
Free-to-play games though, are, well, free, so we can just play it and judge for ourselves, so does it really matter? Well, it can be argued that the time invested before knowing whether a game is bad could potentially cost more. Unfortunately, besides looking to hard core players of the game in question, it's hard to get a good review, and even then, the opinions of these gamers will definitely be biased. Perhaps one day, people will figure out what to do, but until then, the forums and patch notes will be an OK way to understand the quality of a game that's been out for a while.
Saturday, May 10, 2014
Nature of MMORPG and 'Addictions' - for non-gaming parents
MMORPG, or Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games, are a genre of games where large numbers of players can play together in a single game world. Players can see other players' characters, or avatars and can group together to complete game objectives. In fact, there are game objectives that only groups of players, of even up to 40 people, can complete. All these objectives normally have 'loot' or 'gear' rewards - weapons or clothing that enhance the abilities and looks of a character, and tend to be a testament of the skills of a player. Because of the fact that a lot of these gear can only be collected by defeating a 'boss', i.e. a powerful computer controlled character, and only by the efforts of a large group of people, players tend to gather together into 'guilds' or 'clans', basically an online team. As such, friendships are made and bonds are built.
This is a strong reason that players are 'addicted' to a game. In actual fact, he has to play at a certain time for a certain period only because his whole group is there and he cannot leave the team because they really do need him, especially if he is playing a major role that cannot be easily replaced. Quitting a game might be hard for them as well because gamers do feel a sense of responsibility towards his friends. Even though he might be sick of the game, he might just stick around to help his friends.
MMORPG makers sometimes add special events to the game during the year. For example, during Christmas and New Year, there might be special objectives to complete with special rewards that can only obtained during that time period. So you might sometimes find people unwilling to do anything else but stick to their computer during the holidays. To take it further, certain games have 'daily' objectives that have to be done everyday consistently in order that the player may be able to keep up with his friends so they can do the group objectives together.
All these reasons make people who play MMORPGs to seem like game addicts. It might be hard to let them know that time could be better spent elsewhere. While it might be difficult to understand, we can see their gaming schedules as a former of duty. If your loved one is not playing excessively, typically, they might have one or two days a week where they have to group up with their friends to tackle those group fights, which probably lasts hours. Work out with your loved ones to understand when are the days that they have to be online and work on having them spend their time on other things on the other days. We need to understand that they have a responsibility and truly have difficulty stopping during this 'group time' because it affects a large number of people.
With regards to 'daily' objectives, these might be time consuming, but generally, it might be not. Give them a little time each day to complete them and hopefully, they'll get sick of it and move on to a weekly schedule. Such 'obligations' tend to be concentrated at the start of an 'expansion' cycle, that is, when the next 'episode' of the game is released, somewhat like a new season of a drama series.
For parents, it is probably not a good idea to expose children to games like these that restricts and controls a gamers' time. Most gamers are in control, but for younger children and people with addiction tendencies, years could be wasted. There are many other great games that we can direct our children to, and we should be able to find one they can enjoy without having to invest too much time.
This is a strong reason that players are 'addicted' to a game. In actual fact, he has to play at a certain time for a certain period only because his whole group is there and he cannot leave the team because they really do need him, especially if he is playing a major role that cannot be easily replaced. Quitting a game might be hard for them as well because gamers do feel a sense of responsibility towards his friends. Even though he might be sick of the game, he might just stick around to help his friends.
MMORPG makers sometimes add special events to the game during the year. For example, during Christmas and New Year, there might be special objectives to complete with special rewards that can only obtained during that time period. So you might sometimes find people unwilling to do anything else but stick to their computer during the holidays. To take it further, certain games have 'daily' objectives that have to be done everyday consistently in order that the player may be able to keep up with his friends so they can do the group objectives together.
All these reasons make people who play MMORPGs to seem like game addicts. It might be hard to let them know that time could be better spent elsewhere. While it might be difficult to understand, we can see their gaming schedules as a former of duty. If your loved one is not playing excessively, typically, they might have one or two days a week where they have to group up with their friends to tackle those group fights, which probably lasts hours. Work out with your loved ones to understand when are the days that they have to be online and work on having them spend their time on other things on the other days. We need to understand that they have a responsibility and truly have difficulty stopping during this 'group time' because it affects a large number of people.
With regards to 'daily' objectives, these might be time consuming, but generally, it might be not. Give them a little time each day to complete them and hopefully, they'll get sick of it and move on to a weekly schedule. Such 'obligations' tend to be concentrated at the start of an 'expansion' cycle, that is, when the next 'episode' of the game is released, somewhat like a new season of a drama series.
For parents, it is probably not a good idea to expose children to games like these that restricts and controls a gamers' time. Most gamers are in control, but for younger children and people with addiction tendencies, years could be wasted. There are many other great games that we can direct our children to, and we should be able to find one they can enjoy without having to invest too much time.
Saturday, May 3, 2014
Take Two Tablets and Call Me in the Morning
So I've been spending quite a bit of time on my iPad 2, gaming. Before I get called a casual gamer, let me say that, yes, I did play games like Candy Crush and some of the tower defense stuff on my mobile, but these few days were spent with XCOM: Enemy Unknown and Hearthstone. XCOM is pretty much the same game released on PC and the last gen consoles, minus some cinematic and without the expansions, but it works surprisingly well with touch controls. It was recently released on android, though it's a shame it's not compatible with my Nexus 7. As for Hearthstone, some might argue it's a casual CCG, and perhaps it is, but still, for a PC game to translate so well to a tablet is amazing. (Actually, not really. It was obvious right from the start Blizzard designed even the PC version to work with touch controls. Probably so it can be played on those Windows 8 PCs with touch screens.) Oh, and I'm excited to start on FTL for the iPad.
This has actually made me excited to see more games, especially turn-based ones on tablets. Heroes of Might and Magic, Civilisation, Age of Wonders, all these games have the potential to work on mobile or tablets if effort is put in to make it work. The lack of a 'hover over' and 'right click' might take some work, but XCOM could make a good reference, and FTL as well. But you better not take it the way of Dungeon Keeper, and do not make it free-to-play. Keep the games as they are.
Most of the games mentioned require at least an iPad 2 to function, but that's already pretty good. It's a bit harder to develop for Android because of the large number of configurations for Android devices, but hopefully, more of these games and be ported over with more compatible devices. As the specs of these devices get better with each coming year, more already released games will be playable with proper porting.
Despite the possibilities, I'm still conflicted and a bit fearful sometimes. Will all the porting take time away from developing new games, and will devs choose to just throw out a lazy port to make a quick buck, or choose a free-to-play model that totally pisses off the fans? Unfortunately, the possibilities of screwing it up are just as endless...
This has actually made me excited to see more games, especially turn-based ones on tablets. Heroes of Might and Magic, Civilisation, Age of Wonders, all these games have the potential to work on mobile or tablets if effort is put in to make it work. The lack of a 'hover over' and 'right click' might take some work, but XCOM could make a good reference, and FTL as well. But you better not take it the way of Dungeon Keeper, and do not make it free-to-play. Keep the games as they are.
Most of the games mentioned require at least an iPad 2 to function, but that's already pretty good. It's a bit harder to develop for Android because of the large number of configurations for Android devices, but hopefully, more of these games and be ported over with more compatible devices. As the specs of these devices get better with each coming year, more already released games will be playable with proper porting.
Despite the possibilities, I'm still conflicted and a bit fearful sometimes. Will all the porting take time away from developing new games, and will devs choose to just throw out a lazy port to make a quick buck, or choose a free-to-play model that totally pisses off the fans? Unfortunately, the possibilities of screwing it up are just as endless...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)