Hey people. Just a quick post to note the good news for PS3 owners. Not only is Mass Effect 2 coming to PS3, but also the new Mass Effect 3 engine to run it. But wait, I’m not finished. Owners of the ps3 edition get an interactive comic that…
Hey people. Just a quick post to note the good news for PS3 owners. Not only is Mass Effect 2 coming to PS3, but also the new Mass Effect 3 engine to run it. But wait, I’m not finished. Owners of the ps3 edition get an interactive comic that allows them to make the choices that they would have had in the first Mass Effect. Read more at Gamerant.com. Hope you all have seen the Mass Effect 3 trailer already.
If like me you are among the many who like the feel of a games controller and own a PS3, you would be happy to know that it is possible to use that PS3 controller of yours on any PC that runs Windows 7 or Vista on either 32 or 64bit. You’ll be happy…
If like me you are among the many who like the feel of a games controller and own a PS3, you would be happy to know that it is possible to use that PS3 controller of yours on any PC that runs Windows 7 or Vista on either 32 or 64bit. You’ll be happy to know you wont have to jump through many hoops either. This solution comes from MotionInJoy.
1. Before you connect the PS3 controller to the PC, first download the following driver for your OS. You can do download version 6.0001, which is digitally signed, here: 64-bit version, 32-bit version.
2. Next plug in the PS3 controller and allow for OS to recognize the PS3 controller. You should have a balloon pop up at the bottom right of your screen if the PS3 controller is detected correctly.
3. After this has been completed, run the .exe in the zip folder. You will be asked during the installation if you “would like to install this device software” via a dialogue window. Click install button in the window and continue.
4. Once this has been completed run the DS3 tool. You should be able to find it in either your start menu, or desktop. It maybe that DS3 tool is already running, if so you should find it running in your notification area.
5. Once you have the DS3 tool open, make sure that the XBox 360 Emulator radio button is checked. Unfortunatly this has to be checked to enable compatibility with games that have the “Windows Games” logo. It allows for easy controller button mapping and a lot of hassle in the long run.
6. Once the radio button is checked, make sure you click the enable button near the bottom. You should be notified that things are going according to plan by the pop-up balloon indicating the installation of xbox drivers.
7. Now your done.
Note: You may find it useful to know that it is possible to calibrate the sensitivity of the controller via window’s control panel. Navigate your way to the Control Panel > Hardware and Sound > Devices and Printers. If all is well you should see your PS3 controller. Right click the icon and click properties. You should find the calibrate button in the called up properties window. If you find any problems with this guide or its just plane confusing, feel free to leave a comment and ask for help.
TheSixthAxis have recently written an open letter to the BBC to complain about the recent Panorama program looking at ‘video game addiction’. After reading the letter I contacted the author so that I could share it here in the hope that more people…
TheSixthAxis have recently written an open letter to the BBC to complain about the recent Panorama program looking at ‘video game addiction’. After reading the letter I contacted the author so that I could share it here in the hope that more people get a chance to read it themselves. Any comments about your opinions are of course welcome.
“To Whom it May Concern,
It is with great concern that I write to you concerning your Panorama program first screened on 6th December 2010 on BBC1. The show was, ostensibly, a look at video game addiction and the problems it can cause. I’m the managing editor of a large UK-based video games website so the subject was of particular interest to me.
I wouldn’t like to claim that video game addiction is not a danger, or a worry. In fact, I wrote an article on the subject last year which was praised by the leading online support group for gaming addiction (http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2009/04/15/gaming-addiction/). As a responsible, intelligent and mature fan of video games, I think that addiction is an issue that should be researched independently so that it may be better understood and so that its sufferers may be better assisted. I am concerned, however, that your treatment of what I consider to be a very real danger is played for shock value rather than to inform or educate.
“Christmas pester-power at its peak” states Jeremy Vine in his opening piece to camera. This implies that video games are the sole domain of younger children when the fact is that almost all biggest selling video games of the past few years have been classified by the BBFC and/or PEGI as being only suitable for those over 15. So it seems to me that video games are only the preserve of young children when it suits the agenda to imply so, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. This is already weighting the coverage in favour of the unfounded claims about the evils of gaming and it sets a worrying tone for the rest of the program.
“I just can’t believe how many people are here, just to buy a game” says Raphael Rowe as his report starts. Surely a statement like this only serves to underlie the ignorance of the reporter who begins his report by forcing faux-shock that the world’s largest grossing entertainment medium is popular. In fact, in the very next voice-over Raphael goes on to point out that: “we spend more than £3 billion a year on gaming, more than we spend on film or music”. Surely this statement, in such proximity to his previous assertion that it was surprising (at least) to see so many people turn out for a premier, demonstrates his inability to comprehend the subject matter? Perhaps it only demonstrates his inability to write a documentary script so we should continue to give him the benefit of the doubt.
The first sufferer of addiction, Joe Staley, tells a sad story of becoming progressively more attached to his console and letting the other aspects of his life suffer. He tells of how his self-diagnosed addiction led to him skipping lectures and removing himself from the social aspects of his life. This is certainly a cautionary tale that it is important for anyone with an existing propensity towards addiction to hear.
Raphael is on hand to voice over that Joe has been excluded from university and “left thousands of pounds in debt, partly from buying games.” This statement, while possibly true, is disingenuous. I could just as easily assert that Joe was left thousands of pounds in debt, partly from buying shampoo. Does that make shampoo manufacturers responsible? Without knowing more intimate details of his spending habits it is deceitful to pin the blame on video games rather than the many other financial constraints met by modern university students.
In fact, those financial issues faced by current and future university students might make an excellent subject for a piece of investigative journalism for a flagship current affairs program put out by a broadcaster which is funded by the people who are still saddled with thousands of pounds of debt, partly from buying television licenses.
The next sufferer we’re shown is given the alias of “Leo” and presents a very different proposition for me. There were a number of hyperbolic claims made about the length of time he has spent playing World of Warcraft. I’m aware that World of Warcraft has been closely linked to gaming addiction in the past and I have no doubt that there have been cases where people play for the lengths of time quoted but I have trouble believing that Leo is one of them.
Twelve hours a day for two years seems like it would interfere with his entry and progression through university as well as his ability to keep a tidy living space and obtain funds to pay for his subscription and buy the expensive gaming PC he uses. Surely allowing these bold claims, seemingly without background research and fact checking is either a means to progress a needlessly shocking agenda or a basic error in journalistic practice? The later return to Leo’s failures to go “cold turkey” are no more believable although I am willing to believe that this is simply due to poor interview technique and Leo’s own ability to present himself well.
The use of the contorted facial expressions of people in deep concentration is another example of presenting the truth in a way that doesn’t seem fair to the overall issue. Those faces could just as easily have been filmed during any precise, involving task requiring high concentration. The art that they’ve been used to create pivots on the very fact that they are taken out of context but perhaps using those out-of-context images as a symbol of a different context is a dangerous misdirection for the audience.
I was interested to see Ian Livingstone involved. He is an industry legend and well respected for his reasonable, intelligent approach to all things. At this point I allowed my hopes to be raised that we were about to see a counter-balance to the stark negativity shown so far, even when Raphael again showed his unfamiliarity with his subject matter by mispronouncing (or just getting incorrect) the name of one of the biggest icons of video gaming from the last twenty years. For reference, the character is called Lara Croft, not Laura. Basic mistakes like this undermine the informed viewer’s trust in the report and only serve to further misinform viewers who aren’t well-read on the subject.
Unfortunately, the reasoned and factually accurate assertion by Mr. Livingstone that there is no published scientific evidence for gaming addiction was proclaimed by Raphael Rowe as being “right, to a point”. My worry with this statement is that viewers might think that the “point” Raphael is referring to is a defined position within a wealth of evidence. In fact, that point is infinite. Ian Livingstone’s asserted fact was not “right, to a point”, it was simply right. As admitted in Raphael’s next sentence when he says that many scientists are trying to get gaming addiction recognised. So it isn’t recognised already. But the seed of doubt has been planted in the viewers mind and Ian Livingstone’s claim has been undermined, in spite of its truth.
The next section, before moving on to a swiftly expedited segment quoting UKIE’s studies that show the many positive aspects of gaming, quotes a statement made by the World Health Organisation. Surely a body to be trusted and revered, except that the quotes were taken from a report which was also not based on any published scientific study. Simply repeating a well-regarded body’s unfounded accusations does not give them any more truth.
The next sufferer, a Chris Dando is painted as an addict who skips school to play World of Warcraft and becomes violent when his ability to play is removed. The implication is that the violence is a result of the exposure to video games. My concern here is with the responsibility shown by Chris’ parents. Not only does his mother openly admit to not being aware of her son playing a video game for up to twenty hours a day, he is pictured in his bedroom in front of a large stack of games and DVDs, many of which carry an age certification presumably above Chris’ own age (although no age is quoted, the assertion that he misses school to play implies that he is of school age so most likely younger than eighteen).
My worry is that the easy target of video games is being used for the sake of progressing the show’s agenda rather than the real and more controversial problem of inattentive parents and a general lack of understanding of a young media by an older generation. I believe that this skirts a very real issue in modern society and gives it free passage while focussing on less-pressing dangers simply because they are easier to embellish.
The next section was undoubtedly the most balanced in the whole program. Professor Mark Griffiths points out that, in his professional experience, there is a small but significant problem with those who have addictive personalities filling that void with video games in much the same way as gamblers or alcoholics might. For me, the most pertinent aspect of this section is that although Professor Griffiths points out that video games are a positive influence for the vast majority of people who play them, there is a problem to be addressed. This segment acts as an all-too-brief call for more attention and research. I would fully support those calls.
The later return to Professor Griffiths as part of the “Skinner Box” segment referencing the operant conditioning of rats is another example of reasoned and intelligent balance but it is given much less time or explanation than I feel it warranted. Surely this expert, with years of experience around many forms of addiction would have been more deserving of screen time than the numerous grainy stock images of lab rats being conditioned?
The segment on South Korea was, frankly, bizarre. The message from Raphael seems to be that it’s unfortunate that the massive cultural movement in South Korea towards “PC Bangs” (literally PC Rooms) is a bad thing and that the young people would be better off spending their Saturday nights drinking alcohol in nightclubs. I worked in a nightclub for six years as a first aid consultant and as security staff and I can assure you that being in a room full of PCs is far less likely to result in violence, substance abuse and injury.
While it is worrying that twelve people have died in relation to South Korean PC Bangs, that figure is probably vastly inferior to the number of deaths related to, for example, cycling accidents. Should we ban cycling? Quoting specifics out of context is disingenuous and misleading.
Again, using the tragic death of a South Korean baby due to the negligence of mentally unstable parents as a springboard for criticising the incidentally-involved game they played is misleading. The parents (as stated by the psychiatrist who treated the mother) were already mentally unstable. The game may have acted as an escape for her from her own depression but it was not a cause for the neglect, it was merely a symptom of it. Is it more difficult to convey that fact than to put so much misdirection into the implication that the death of a baby was caused by a video game?
Raphael even voices over at one point that in South Korea “experts have found that problem gamers often have underlying emotional issues”. Would the time, effort and public funding that went into making this documentary have been better spent investigating those underlying issues rather than shamelessly exploiting the shock value of one of the manifestations of those issues? In fact, the limited time given to the rehabilitation of the adolescent Korean and his family seems to again suggest that the underlying issues were a possible result of the bad parenting he was subjected to by a mother who never talked to her son and “used to hit him a lot”.
To be frank, the whole documentary seemed like a lazy excuse to parade a popular hate-figure. There were a few cursory glances towards the truth and the necessary inclusion of learned experts undermined what was a clear attempt to perpetuate an outdated myth in which “normal” teenagers are encouraged away from the antisocial games consoles and into the warm embrace of alcohol dependency.
The final point driven home by the documentary seemed to suggest that the games industry should be funding research into addiction. While research into addiction is something I would fully support, I would rather it was done independently.
I’m sure that the UK games industry, at least what is left of it after repeated decades of neglect from central government, would be happy to cooperate with any independent research program but until we move away from the lazy stereotyping and the outdated stigma that programs like this Panorama documentary help to perpetuate, I fear that we will never be able to have an open, honest and informed debate about the subject in this country. Surely that is the real tragedy. Surely that would have been a much more worthy target for the attention that the uniquely funded BBC’s flagship investigative platform can bring.
I look forward to a more balanced future of reporting on the subject.
Kind Regards,
Peter Chapman
Editor
TheSixthAxis.com”
Source – TheSixthAxis
As many of you are probably well aware yesterday saw the annual Spike Video Game Awards, featuring a number of world exclusive trailers and previews of next years anticipated new releases. However if you like me, living in the UK, you probably…
As many of you are probably well aware yesterday saw the annual Spike Video Game Awards, featuring a number of world exclusive trailers and previews of next years anticipated new releases. However if you like me, living in the UK, you probably werent up at the early hours of the morning to watch it streamed online, and your probably wondering how you can see these exclusive videos. Well if your like me you would of thought hat you could hop over to the Spike Video Game Awards website and watch the trailers there, sadly you would be wrong. The ‘world’ exclusives can not be watched over here in the UK, fortunately the guys and girls over at Gametrailers.com have got the videos online and they can be watched by us over here in the UK.
Below you will find the exclusive trailers, enjoy!
Uncharted 3 – Drake’s Deception
Batman – Arkham City
Resistance 3
Mass Effect 3
Portal 2
More trailers from VGA 2010 can be found at Gametrailers.com
Go Back to Part One The thing was the industry back then was young itself. Nobody knew what made a good game or bad because none of it had been done before. No norms, rules or traditions that we take for granted in today’s games existed in retro…
The thing was the industry back then was young itself. Nobody knew what made a good game or bad because none of it had been done before. No norms, rules or traditions that we take for granted in today’s games existed in retro games. Like us, with times these matured and evolved over time. Having a badly worded script would be sorely met in today’s high budget gaming. Yet for games which in comparison had hardly any budget back then, it didn’t matter. In part because of limited resources but in most because it wasn’t seen as important. Limitations in the platform meant that we had to use our imagination more then than we did now. Another example of undefined norms can been seen in the change of the gaming manuals. Strange as it sounds, manuals were probably more apart of the game itself than today’s health and safety warnings. One example that crops to mind is the first Zelda game, in which the gamer had to use the manual to complete the game. In a new media just being defined, nobody knew that constituted a good or bad game. Yet game designers now have a better notion if not a formula to follow that leads to a successful game, as much as we as an audience know what we like. More to the point is that we as a maturer audience, in mind if not age, now know what we like now due to the many hit and miss games, as much as designers understand what we like or would like.
In a way game makers did lose naivety at some point and the new and original ideas no longer became new nor original. One could debate game makers back in the day had it easier then, if not because of less technical requirements then the fact that it was hard to redo an old idea, simply because there were none. These days designers, or should I say production staff, another amongst many shifts in game production, have to think more long and hard (no pun intended) to make something original. Making a simple original game for one reason or another became hard and so with pressure from game designers to push their imaginations and more complex ideas further, also came the notion of console might. With the console market become far more competitive with new contenders such as Sony in the 90s saw the console becoming more than a gaming platform. It soon became a company’s symbol of engineering and ingenuity (it was this view that finally saw the console becoming a multimedia center amongst other influences). It therefore seemed only natural that games would grow graphically and also technically. Though as similarly as how I’ve gone off in a tangent, it seemed that maybe we all did: mainstream gamers and game makers.
We all love the high budget and big title that come today and it certainly stands as a monument to how far the industry has progressed. We have moved on since he badly translated Japanese or porn movie scripts. We now have MMORPGs, where farms of servers support millions of plays around the world. And that’s just for one game along such as World of Warcraft. Its what we all love and I am proud to say I am glad for it. Never has there been a time in my life than now where I do not have enough hours in the day to play one game along. In the days of the Sega, I could rent a game, play it to completion, and then return it over a period of a weekend. Yet while we all love our modern games and their feature length cut scenes at heart our youth and its memories are still tied down to these retro games. Yet in this day and age, who is willing to crack out a Snes or Sega and tune their HD TVs in to the right channel?
So is it any surprise that even us, the “old time gamers” and joining the bang wagon of casual gaming found in apps on the Iphone and or flash game? Instead of the hassle of dusting of those huge blocks we call consoles, we find ourselves turning to the likes of handheld platforms such as the Iphone, which like our lovely ancient console, have hardware limitations, take advantage of this retro style. They appeal to our nostalgia which many high budget games cannot do. And so we arrive with a hope skip and a jump to the juxtaposition of the games industry today. Where at one end of the spectrum we have these companies who have been in the business since the beginning, producing high budget and or large production games and those simple or low budget games being made by armature game makers or small time companies. Ironically its these people and small businesses that are now revolutionizing the scene in much the same way those older companies once did at the beginning. Subsequently they are the envy of the older companies, having achieved original and successful ideas. Its an odd case, in which the older companies are so large and robust these days that its seems they cannot achieve the simple and original gaming ideas that got them where they are today. A new game these days need to achieve a significant profit, which entails a large scale project or a star writers or actors. Unlike amateur game designers, they cannot afford to take risks and do the radical. The natural evolution that has built up the winning formula for a game, the kind that is found in a gaming franchise, in way has limited the once nativity they once had when the industry was new and no one had any idea of a wining formula. In part, if its not the iconic retro style that steals our hearts, it is the fact that the do not follow the norm or try to emulate a winning formula to a tea that was innate in the retro games.
It’s with no doubt that retro gaming is certainly a rising gaming form. As the technology has come available for armatures to develop games, its again the lack of resources and limitation of the platforms that have push retro back. But more importantly it has been our nostalgia towards the style that resonates so much towards our childhood memories, making such flashes and small games a resounding successes. The combination of this and originality, it has been a refreshing change of pace to the more robust and serious and complex modern games today.
Go Back to Part One
The thing was the industry back then was young itself. Nobody knew what made a good game or bad because none of it had been done before. No norms, rules or traditions that we take for granted in today’s games existed in retro games. Like us, with times these matured and evolved over time. Having a badly worded script would be sorely met in today’s high budget gaming. Yet for games which in comparison had hardly any budget back then, it didn’t matter. In part because of limited resources but in most because it wasn’t seen as important. Limitations in the platform meant that we had to use our imagination more then than we did now. Another example of undefined norms can been seen in the change of the gaming manuals. Strange as it sounds, manuals were probably more apart of the game itself than today’s health and safety warnings. One example that crops to mind is the first Zelda game, in which the gamer had to use the manual to complete the game. In a new media just being defined, nobody knew that constituted a good or bad game. Yet game designers now have a better notion if not a formula to follow that leads to a successful game, as much as we as an audience know what we like. More to the point is that we as a maturer audience, in mind if not age, now know what we like now due to the many hit and miss games, as much as designers understand what we like or would like.
In a way game makers did lose naivety at some point and the new and original ideas no longer became new nor original. One could debate game makers back in the day had it easier then, if not because of less technical requirements then the fact that it was hard to redo an old idea, simply because there were none. These days designers, or should I say production staff, another amongst many shifts in game production, have to think more long and hard (no pun intended) to make something original. Making a simple original game for one reason or another became hard and so with pressure from game designers to push their imaginations and more complex ideas further, also came the notion of console might. With the console market become far more competitive with new contenders such as Sony in the 90s saw the console becoming more than a gaming platform. It soon became a company’s symbol of engineering and ingenuity (it was this view that finally saw the console becoming a multimedia center amongst other influences). It therefore seemed only natural that games would grow graphically and also technically. Though as similarly as how I’ve gone off in a tangent, it seemed that maybe we all did: mainstream gamers and game makers.
We all love the high budget and big title that come today and it certainly stands as a monument to how far the industry has progressed. We have moved on since he badly translated Japanese or porn movie scripts. We now have MMORPGs, where farms of servers support millions of plays around the world. And that’s just for one game along such as World of Warcraft. Its what we all love and I am proud to say I am glad for it. Never has there been a time in my life than now where I do not have enough hours in the day to play one game along. In the days of the Sega, I could rent a game, play it to completion, and then return it over a period of a weekend. Yet while we all love our modern games and their feature length cut scenes at heart our youth and its memories are still tied down to these retro games. Yet in this day and age, who is willing to crack out a Snes or Sega and tune their HD TVs in to the right channel?
So is it any surprise that even us, the “old time gamers” and joining the bang wagon of casual gaming found in apps on the Iphone and or flash game? Instead of the hassle of dusting of those huge blocks we call consoles, we find ourselves turning to the likes of handheld platforms such as the Iphone, which like our lovely ancient console, have hardware limitations, take advantage of this retro style. They appeal to our nostalgia which many high budget games cannot do. And so we arrive with a hope skip and a jump to the juxtaposition of the games industry today. Where at one end of the spectrum we have these companies who have been in the business since the beginning, producing high budget and or large production games and those simple or low budget games being made by armature game makers or small time companies. Ironically its these people and small businesses that are now revolutionizing the scene in much the same way those older companies once did at the beginning. Subsequently they are the envy of the older companies, having achieved original and successful ideas. Its an odd case, in which the older companies are so large and robust these days that its seems they cannot achieve the simple and original gaming ideas that got them where they are today. A new game these days need to achieve a significant profit, which entails a large scale project or a star writers or actors. Unlike amateur game designers, they cannot afford to take risks and do the radical. The natural evolution that has built up the winning formula for a game, the kind that is found in a gaming franchise, in way has limited the once nativity they once had when the industry was new and no one had any idea of a wining formula. In part, if its not the iconic retro style that steals our hearts, it is the fact that the do not follow the norm or try to emulate a winning formula to a tea that was innate in the retro games.
It’s with no doubt that retro gaming is certainly a rising gaming form. As the technology has come available for armatures to develop games, its again the lack of resources and limitation of the platforms that have push retro back. But more importantly it has been our nostalgia towards the style that resonates so much towards our childhood memories, making such flashes and small games a resounding successes. The combination of this and originality, it has been a refreshing change of pace to the more robust and serious and complex modern games today.
