Okay, so almost nothing about video games here... Deal.
The dilemma that I face, and that pretty much everyone in the US will face is in regards to the word "upgrade". I'm narrowing the scope of this upgrade to cell phones specifically, because I'm considering my carrier (Sprint, the slowest and oldest, most worthless network available) and my device.
Most people in the US own or will own a portable communications device. Then they will inevitably take it for granted. Let's narrow the scope down to that point. I'm looking at replacing my crappy Blackberry (model# is irrelevant as every Blackberry is pretty much junk) with anything else. Having used almost every platform (Symbian, Sony-Ericsson, Windows Mobile, Blackberry, and some others) save for Android, I figure it's now time to give Android a fair chance.
I'm writing this article to help my brain grapple with "4G". The "fourth" generation of cellular data service. WiMax and LTE, both touted as 4G solutions, really aren't anywhere near the 4G specification (1Gbps over wireless), but are both designed to be expandable.
The real dilemma is that upgrading is such a dubious and vain idea. Solomon the wise would probably call upgrading anything a "Chasing after the wind". There are many theories to when the best time to upgrade will be, but they're all just theories and subscribing to any of them means that you're going to be immediately wrong. I think I can successfully boil these down to three categories, and, since I tend to write on the fly with minimal correction, we'll see how I do.
Category 1: Early adoption.
The is getting new tech immediately when it becomes available. It tends to be a lot of fun, but also somewhat expensive. You get to experience all the newness of technology with all the pains of generally poorly tested materials.
Why is this relevant today?
Well, because we're on the verge of new technology being implemented throughout the nation. Most network providers are scurrying to come up with suitable '4G' networks. Sprint is using WiMax, while everyone else is going with what is generally believed to be the superior LTE system. An early adopter may jump directly onto the Sprint network seeing as they're implementing everything about 6 months to a year before anyone else trials LTE. The early adopter will get to play around on Sprint's new '4G' tech for about a year before they have the opportunity to experience buyer's remorse! Hmm....
Category 2: Wait and see.
The middle road. This is almost the same as the early adopter, but they wait to see how the early adopters fair before taking the plunge in tech. Generally it means waiting a few months after a product releases before even getting their grubby mitts on it. These wait and see people will often wait for the first price drop before they go for major purchases. The financial and strategic risk is lower, and they still get to look like the tech goons previously mentioned.
Why is this relevant?
Because in order to be a "Wait and see" about this technology shift I'll have to wait about a year using devices that no man should ever have to use (Remember, I have a blackberry... ugh...). Sprint's WiMax may be pretty fast, but AT&T and T-Mobile's 3G networks are actually upgradable to almost the same speed as WiMax. Interestingly, T-Mobile is supposed to have some phones coming out using their HSPA+ technology, which runs at around 21Mbps (faster than my braodband connection at home!). However that's a theoretical maximum and speeds like that are rarely seen, though many claim to be getting 10Mbps. The worst part is that these technologies are going to slowly mutate from what they are now into who knows what with only the underlying technologies being similar. Currently there are basically two 3G standards, GSM and CDMA. Soon there will still be two but much like the MPEG4 specification it's anyone's guess what actual technology will be the best or worst at any given time. There will never be an end to the waiting or seeing that one will do for at least the next three years, minimum.
Category 3: We'll get there when we get there.
If it ain't cheap and in my hand now, I don't care. These people are generally spendthrifts (usually in a very good way) who don't see a need for, or don't get excited over tech. They probably still don't text message people and can't use their phone for more than saving a few phone numbers and dialing out.
This approach minimizes financial and technical risk. IE, if a phone is relatively good in quality then someone is who picks it up for free is probably going to be satisfied with the product. Unless it's a blackberry. Blackberry phones are all the exact same thing, just with different sizes and some are shinier than others.
Why are these people relevant? Probably because they drive the 'low end' market. They're also the people that keep Nokia, LG and Motorola (and all the other dirt cheap phone makers) in business. The real advantage of being Category three is that you NEVER need to worry about features or the future. If you get calls and have to charge your phone once or twice a week you're more than happy. It's an almost stress free life for you, kudos. :)
Where am I? I typically sit between Category 1 and 2, depending on which device is involved. With computers I'm usually Cat1. When the i7 dropped I was all over its glory. With phones, I'm closer to Cat2. I'm not interested in holding the latest shiny POS and proud of it. I'll let some other people try them out for a few weeks and once I've read that it's really a quality product, I'm in (did this with the first iPod Nano. Once I heard that a few reviewers ran over it with a car and it survived, heck yeah!).
Currently I'm very interested in the Evo 4G and the Samsung Epic 4G. They work on the newest Sprint network (which is due to show up some in the Twin Cities by the end of 2010). I'm torn. Sprint is the currently the slowest available network. They're 4G is probably also going to be the slowest next gen, but it's here NOW. Not later. The other perk (as I understand it) is that Sprint is using the 4G network as DATA ONLY and the 3G network as voice, so, like AT&T, you can call and use data at the same time. Which is a big plus, and the main reason I didn't want to leave AT&T a couple years back.
I suppose I could just go buy an Evo and see how I feel about it. Not like I don't have 30 days to return it if it sucks. :D
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Another demo. Castlevania: Harmony of Despair
Let me preface this with the fact that I love Castlevania. Aside from a few of the 3D games I think most of the Castlevania games are dang near a perfect 10. Between Super Castlevania on the SNES and Symphony of the Night on PS1 (or Saturn import) I can't tell which is the more perfect game. I love 2D adventures and Castlevania serves up some of the best (Super Metroid still being my favorite).
Okay, so I've been waiting for Harmony of Despair for a few months. I heard they were making a MULTIPLAYER 2d Castlevania and I was pretty well ready to throw down whatever they asked to play this game.
Last night I loaded up the demo and, well, it wasn't good. The first thing I noticed is that I had a goal in the complete opposite corner of the castle and 30 minutes to get there. The next thing I noticed is that I didn't know where I was because I was looking at about 1/4 of the castle. After a great deal of frustration I would find that I could change the zoom by clicking in the right stick. In multiplayer this would be useful to see where everyone is, but in single player I don't see the point. Other than the fact that the boss is shooting lasers out of its mouth all the way across the castle (watch out!).
The demo only allows you to play as Alucard, which is pretty cool since Alucard is pretty much the most bad-ass non-Belmont available throughout the series. I would think they would save him for an unlockable, but whatever works, right?
The gameplay is about as Castlevania as it gets. You can double jump, scoot back, all that, even your downward kick attack (sadly, no gravity boots for super jumps). Pressing down and attack briefly turns you into a wolf, and you can take vapor form, but I couldn't find a use for it. The control maps is almost identical to SotN as well, save that your right hand action is now "Y" and the "B" button is reserved for an equipped spell. The gameplay is just as tight (at least for Alucard) as any other Castlevania. That's a good thing.
Once you've explored the castle a bit you'll find that monsters now are fewer in number, are slightly more powerful, and are no longer restricted to the room in which you found them. This becomes particularly frustrating any time ghosts or Amalaric Snipers show up since they're already difficult to kill.
The next thing you'll find is that you'll have to pull the right trigger to open chests. I don't know why, but you do. And then you'll go into the start menu and find out that the helmet that should be saving your noggin can't be equipped. Nothing can. You have to find a room slightly like a save room to equip anything or swap out your items. While this makes almost sense in a practical way (since Alucard and his buddies shouldn't be able to carry around 87 swords, 36 sets of armor, 45 helmets, and a handful of shitake mushrooms in the first place) but damned if we haven't been spoiled by all the other games! At least let me eat the roasts when I find them!
And before you start thinking of how to make this game 'practical' let me just say that it's not supposed to be practical in any way. If it were practical there couldn't be a half-vampire double jumping around a structurally unsound castle infested with Devils and Mermen. Hell, if I found myself with a whip that slayed zombies and the like you better believe I'd eat the ice cream sitting quaintly in the corner after vanquishing the possessed bookshelf guard.
It may not seem like much, but not being able to equip on the fly really takes away from this game. Perhaps it's something that add to the multiplayer experience, but I have yet to play with anyone. To tell the truth, I got completely stuck in the castle after exploring for ten minutes. I found every dead end and impassibly high wall, got frustrated and turned off the machine. Then turned it back on and killed zombies in Dead Rising in a vain attempt to make up for the time I lost NOT killing undead in Harmony of Despair.
Harmony of Despair is 1200 MS points, or $15 in the US. That's half the price of a DS Castlevania game and I still can't see buying it unless a few friends had already taken the plunge to see if the multiplayer is even worth it. And being that I'm probably the biggest fan of Castlevania in my various circles that will likely never happen.
Okay, so I've been waiting for Harmony of Despair for a few months. I heard they were making a MULTIPLAYER 2d Castlevania and I was pretty well ready to throw down whatever they asked to play this game.
Last night I loaded up the demo and, well, it wasn't good. The first thing I noticed is that I had a goal in the complete opposite corner of the castle and 30 minutes to get there. The next thing I noticed is that I didn't know where I was because I was looking at about 1/4 of the castle. After a great deal of frustration I would find that I could change the zoom by clicking in the right stick. In multiplayer this would be useful to see where everyone is, but in single player I don't see the point. Other than the fact that the boss is shooting lasers out of its mouth all the way across the castle (watch out!).
The demo only allows you to play as Alucard, which is pretty cool since Alucard is pretty much the most bad-ass non-Belmont available throughout the series. I would think they would save him for an unlockable, but whatever works, right?
The gameplay is about as Castlevania as it gets. You can double jump, scoot back, all that, even your downward kick attack (sadly, no gravity boots for super jumps). Pressing down and attack briefly turns you into a wolf, and you can take vapor form, but I couldn't find a use for it. The control maps is almost identical to SotN as well, save that your right hand action is now "Y" and the "B" button is reserved for an equipped spell. The gameplay is just as tight (at least for Alucard) as any other Castlevania. That's a good thing.
Once you've explored the castle a bit you'll find that monsters now are fewer in number, are slightly more powerful, and are no longer restricted to the room in which you found them. This becomes particularly frustrating any time ghosts or Amalaric Snipers show up since they're already difficult to kill.
The next thing you'll find is that you'll have to pull the right trigger to open chests. I don't know why, but you do. And then you'll go into the start menu and find out that the helmet that should be saving your noggin can't be equipped. Nothing can. You have to find a room slightly like a save room to equip anything or swap out your items. While this makes almost sense in a practical way (since Alucard and his buddies shouldn't be able to carry around 87 swords, 36 sets of armor, 45 helmets, and a handful of shitake mushrooms in the first place) but damned if we haven't been spoiled by all the other games! At least let me eat the roasts when I find them!
And before you start thinking of how to make this game 'practical' let me just say that it's not supposed to be practical in any way. If it were practical there couldn't be a half-vampire double jumping around a structurally unsound castle infested with Devils and Mermen. Hell, if I found myself with a whip that slayed zombies and the like you better believe I'd eat the ice cream sitting quaintly in the corner after vanquishing the possessed bookshelf guard.
It may not seem like much, but not being able to equip on the fly really takes away from this game. Perhaps it's something that add to the multiplayer experience, but I have yet to play with anyone. To tell the truth, I got completely stuck in the castle after exploring for ten minutes. I found every dead end and impassibly high wall, got frustrated and turned off the machine. Then turned it back on and killed zombies in Dead Rising in a vain attempt to make up for the time I lost NOT killing undead in Harmony of Despair.
Harmony of Despair is 1200 MS points, or $15 in the US. That's half the price of a DS Castlevania game and I still can't see buying it unless a few friends had already taken the plunge to see if the multiplayer is even worth it. And being that I'm probably the biggest fan of Castlevania in my various circles that will likely never happen.
Deathspank, just the demo, thanks.
First up is Deathspank:
I was pretty excited for Deathspank since it's a cheap hack-n-slash slash RPG that was supposed to be rather witty. I downloaded the demo and fired it up. I was almost instantly disappointed. The first thing I was treated to was a woman talking endlessly about some legend. At first I couldn't decide if she was being serious or sarcastic. I decided she was being serious because, well, there was no voice acting involved in her speech. I've heard more voice inflection in the original Resident Evil. The game didn't get any better after that...
The gameplay is pretty cookie cutter and the story is about as thin as anyone could possibly write a story. And that's all fine because I was there to play a simple hack-n-slash game with some comedy. If the gameplay was great then that would be a bonus, but nothing I'd expect from a cheap downloadeable game.
Okay, the game is starting, I don't have to listen to that terrible dialogue anymore. Run around, shoot crap. Save in an outhouse. I'm on board with that. Then it's off to talk to some witch. Oh, no! It's that voice again! But this time it's worse because the voice actor... nay, person for Deathspank talks in a monotonous hero voice the entire time. It sounds a lot like they're trying to go for The Tick from the animated series, but with a monotone voice. I think William Shatner would could have given this guy any number of pointers to improve his game.
I got through the VERY PAINFUL conversation which was filled with what could have been great puns and ironies if they had any voice talent. Perhaps the director is to blame, I don't know. I went off on the first mission and when I came back I had to shut down the game because I just couldn't take listening to their semi robotic voices any longer.
The gameplay was nothing noteworthy. Each of the action buttons was linked to a weapon. One or more (I'm assuming) can be assigned a purple "Weapon of Justice" that, when the justice meter is charged, you can activate its ability, which is generally some sort of kill field. Weapons can have the classic elemental affinities and you are able to find "1000's" of pieces of armor and weapons throughout the game.
I would not play this game if it were free.
I was pretty excited for Deathspank since it's a cheap hack-n-slash slash RPG that was supposed to be rather witty. I downloaded the demo and fired it up. I was almost instantly disappointed. The first thing I was treated to was a woman talking endlessly about some legend. At first I couldn't decide if she was being serious or sarcastic. I decided she was being serious because, well, there was no voice acting involved in her speech. I've heard more voice inflection in the original Resident Evil. The game didn't get any better after that...
The gameplay is pretty cookie cutter and the story is about as thin as anyone could possibly write a story. And that's all fine because I was there to play a simple hack-n-slash game with some comedy. If the gameplay was great then that would be a bonus, but nothing I'd expect from a cheap downloadeable game.
Okay, the game is starting, I don't have to listen to that terrible dialogue anymore. Run around, shoot crap. Save in an outhouse. I'm on board with that. Then it's off to talk to some witch. Oh, no! It's that voice again! But this time it's worse because the voice actor... nay, person for Deathspank talks in a monotonous hero voice the entire time. It sounds a lot like they're trying to go for The Tick from the animated series, but with a monotone voice. I think William Shatner would could have given this guy any number of pointers to improve his game.
I got through the VERY PAINFUL conversation which was filled with what could have been great puns and ironies if they had any voice talent. Perhaps the director is to blame, I don't know. I went off on the first mission and when I came back I had to shut down the game because I just couldn't take listening to their semi robotic voices any longer.
The gameplay was nothing noteworthy. Each of the action buttons was linked to a weapon. One or more (I'm assuming) can be assigned a purple "Weapon of Justice" that, when the justice meter is charged, you can activate its ability, which is generally some sort of kill field. Weapons can have the classic elemental affinities and you are able to find "1000's" of pieces of armor and weapons throughout the game.
I would not play this game if it were free.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)