Click here to go to the archives main page.
Other popular tags: Sony, Xbox 360, PS3, Activision, Microsoft, EA, Nintendo, Wii, PC, fail, DLC, Xbox Live, Modern Warfare 2, Xbox, Girls, journalism, Review, video, Ubisoft, Valve, Xbox Live Indie Games, gaming, Kotaku, DRM, UK, DS, Left 4 Dead, PSP, XNA, Disregarded Demographics
Shod-dy
-Adjective
1. Of poor quality or craft
2. Made of inferior materials
3. Full of fail
The second and most recent Fallout 3 DLC titled The Pitt has been pulled from the Xbox Live marketplace a mere day after its release. The decision was made due to many complaints of the download being full of game-breaking glitches such as freezing, mapping errors and boundary problems.
I personally have had no interaction with any Fallout DLC and so have not experienced the rage that many of the faultless gamers will have endured. The Pitt is priced at 800MS points ($10), and I for one like to have my content to be at least in a functioning form before I am charged for it. Fallout is already host to a plethora of smaller glitches, this is the last thing it needs.
The DLC is already up and ready for re-download. But if I were you, I’d wait and let other gamers be the testers. At least one Fallout wiki contributor (and, one assumes, avid Fallout fan) seems to be experiencing game freezing still.
Bethesda’s statement:
We are continuing to look into the issues people are experiencing with The Pitt for Xbox 360. As of now it looks like the file for the English version on Xbox Live was somehow corrupted. We are currently working with Microsoft to remove the existing file off of Live to prevent any further downloads. Our plan is to replace it with a new file as soon as possible. We hope to have another update for you shortly.
Via: GamesIndustry.biz
PS: One might say that The Pitt is… in the pits. Ho ho ho.
We did a thing in your thing so you can do something whilst you do the same thing in a hilarious meme related way. We also talked about:
All that and more in this week’s surprisingly tasty podcast.
I finished Far Cry 2 last week and needed something to ease my lust for more gaming so I went and bought myself the very highly acclaimed Fallout 3. From gameplay footage and talking to friends, I got the impression it could go either way with me.
I went into the game with a (relatively) open yet cynical mind. I knew the animation would annoy me and that the RPG-ish elements might get tedious, but sadly it’s neither of these parts that is really starting to frustrate me.
It’s the bugs. Not the critters that roam the Wasteland, but the game breaking, annoying as hell, “aww crap I’m stuck in the scenery” bugs. For a game so polished in every regard, I was very, very surprised to have to be reloading my last save within literally 30 minuets of loading up the game. I went to sit my G.O.A.T. exam to determine the type of person I am (very cunningly disguised character customisation), sat down and was stuck. The test didn’t start and I wasn’t allowed to stand up. Read more →
After recently completing Fallout 3 (or what apparently passed for a conclusion) I’ve been thinking about the growing popularity of adding a system of supposedly moral choices to games. We’ve seen it a few times over the past year or so with not only Fallout 3, but in games such as Bioshock and GTAIV which provide opportunities to make decisions based on the player’s own moral compass. I’d like to take the chance to explain why this rarely works in the way the designer seemingly intended, using the above three games as examples.
In order to add a moral system to a game, a designer has two basic questions to ask of themselves: should the player be made aware of the consequences of their actions, and to what degree should their moral decisions affect the game’s mechanics? Before answering these questions we need to think about what it means to make a moral choice, and the differences between moral systems based on guilt and regret versus legal systems based on punishment. In order for a choice to have any true morality attached to it, the person making that choice must take into consideration their own values and beliefs, applying them regardless of the situation. A good example would be internet piracy; the decision to pirate or not is almost entirely based on the moral values of the individual in question.
Moral choices inserted into video games rarely follow this formula. Fallout 3 was a prime example: killing an innocent person or giving clean water to the sick was never a moral decision. The player is aware of direct gameplay effects that result from their decision such as access to certain quests or the support of a particular NPC. By devaluing the player’s choice in this way they are no longer making decisions based on their morality, they are making a clear choice between two in-game paths. The much vaunted ‘moral’ system becomes no more a matter of morality than the decision to go left or right in Gears of War.
Bioshock was another game guilty of adding a misleading set of decisions which were branded as moral in nature. For those who aren’t aware, players are presented with young female NPCs called Little Sisters. The Little Sisters hold a precious resource that can only be accessed by capturing them at which point a choice is made whether or not to kill or save the girls. Killing results in a higher initial boost to your resources where saving provides only half the reward. Clearly a moral decision right? Wrong. The game very quickly makes it clear that by saving the girls you will curry favour with another NPC who will routinely leave you a greater number of resources than would be gained through killing. This fails even to offer the choice that Fallout 3 provides, distorting the in-game morality to the point where there is no choice – just an answer to an in-game question.
This brings us to the last game I mentioned: GTAIV. Ignoring its flaws and focusing on its use of morality, GTAIV is probably the most accurate depiction of moral variability. GTAIV offers the player a choice to kill one of two characters at several different points. The player is not made explicitly aware of what rewards might await them depending on their decision, unlike the previous games. Thanks to a fantastic script and voice acting, it manages to portray the characters whose lives are in your hands with enough depth for you to feel that you know a lot about them as people. Further, what few in-game rewards you do get still have to be worked for and are not merely dropped into the player’s lap. By keeping the player in the dark about the consequences of their actions, the purity of their moral choices are maintained. I found that I made decisions based simply on who I thought was the most decent human being and resulting in a much more engaging experience.
In short, the more you tie in-game rewards to a player’s actions, the more you cheapen the moral status of those actions. It’s the contradiction at the heart of trying to give a player a greater connection to the games they play by inserting moral choices. If designers take the time to write decent dialogue and develop the characters that players interact with before determining the fate of those characters based on the player’s morality, we could see more profound experiences in games. Sadly all we’re offered at the moment are a series of crude equations.
Oops. Just a few short days ago, Bethesda’s Pete Hines had an interview with ShackNews where he said a few things he may come to regret.
Shack News: [...] What kind of copy protection will be included on the PC version of Fallout 3?
Pete Hines: Pretty similar to what we did for Oblivion, which was–we basically don’t do any–we do the mildest form possible.
Now, not wanting to call anybody out, but it has come to light that the game is shipping with SecuROM 7, not exactly mild by any stretch. But it gets worse, as the Bethesda forums have started making some rather unnerving mutterings.
the person on the phone informed me that you have to uninstall any cd writing programs or image programs like nero, roxio, sonic, alcohol, daemon tools etc and only have the default windows cd writer on your computer…Saying that securom recognizes these as piracy tools basically. They also said if this doesn’t work then you have to contact securom yourself about the issue.
The error you get basically calls you a criminal, and Bethesda are apparently helpless to stop it. Still, at least there are instructions on how to (hopefully) fix the problem. Let’s just hope nobody notices this slight oversight in what should be an awesome gaming experience.
It’s worth keeping in mind that the situation is still rather unclear, and that nobody is complaining about the number of installs this time. It may well be the case that the only people having problems at the moment are (rightly so) people with pirated copies.
Via: reddit
Fallout 3 has seen its release cancelled across India by Microsoft according to GamingIndians.
Often games aren’t released in India due to poor sales or high costs, but MS have decided to use “cultural sensitivities” as their reasoning. Seemingly unaware of ALL THE OTHER GAMES out in India right now, such as GTA or even Postal.
Microsoft constantly endeavors to bring the best games to Indian consumers in sync with their international release. However, in light of cultural sensitivities in India, we have made the business decision to not bring Fallout 3 into the country.
What “cultural sensitivities”? Perhaps Microsoft are referring to all the people culturally sensitive to wanting to play decent games? Is there some hidden “kill all the Indians” level we are unaware of?
Via: CVG
The Daily Mail, paper of the dead or dying, have put up an article entitled “Al-Qaeda’s terrifying vision of a devastated America in the wake of a nuclear attack” and used Fallout 3 concept art.
Let me first say; BWHAHAHAHAHA
From the article:
Washington is laid to waste. The Capitol is a blackened, smoking ruin. The White House has been razed. Countless thousands are dead.
This is the apocalyptic scene terrorists hope to create if they ever get their hands on a nuclear bomb.
The computer-generated image below was posted on an Islamic extremists’ website yesterday.
It appeared as rumours swept the Internet that the FBI was warning that an Al Qaeda video was about to be released urging militants to use weapons of mass destruction to attack the West.
The information was said to be coming from ‘groups that monitor Islamic militant websites’.
[...]
Last night FBI sources said Al Qaeda was desperate to get its hands on a weapon of mass destruction, be it nuclear, chemical, or biological.
So far that is only a dream… or, as this picture suggests, a nightmare.
I would love to have something smart to say, but I think this just speaks for itself.
iTunes