Rantology: What BioWare did to Mass Effect Andromeda and why you should care.

So, over the weekend BioWare issued an update that they will no longer be supporting single player updates.  This news comes after they have fixed the majority of bugs and glitches in the single player game which includes the facial animations (full disclosure this is not something I personally experienced to the degree that most people claim it to be), and the Hainly Abrams thing which I have previously addressed.  I did write a, as of  yet, unposted review of Andromeda, but I may get around to doing that later this week (btw I gave the game a solid 8/10).  That being said, considering the game is a little under 6 months old at this point I'm going to assume that everyone has finished it and I will be discussing spoilers in this post, but incase that's not enough....

********************************SPOILER ALERT*********************************

Now, with that out of the way one of the biggest things that this hits is from a story perspctive, see for those of you who have completed the story, you'll know that the 5th Ark (the Quarians and other minor species like Drell, Hanar, Elcor, additional Volus, Krogan, and Batarians has arriaved in Andromeda, but is at a currently undisclosed location due to issues, presumably from the Scourge that plagues the Andromeda system, and their pathfinder is dealing with the issue.  Now this brings forward the question of their fate, and the fate of their ark on the surface, but bellow that it makes us wonder if there are additional threats, or if the Scourge isn't what it appears to be and something is controlling it, and what the interest in the Quarian Ark is specifically.  Furthermore, in a post credits scene, a kett known as the Primus, who served as the Archons second in command, is observing Meridian, letting us know that we haven't defeated the kett, especially since we know the Archon was considered a rogue threat who stepped out of line in Andromeda to pursue Remnant technology, as we know the kett only seem to be able to absorb biological material, and not synthetic (possible resurgence of the Geth to fight back at them?)  Finally, the third major question left unanswered is the Remnant, who made them, what their purpose is outside of teraforming, is the AI on H-047c related to them in any fashion?  And while a few smaller questions are left unanswered (specifically in regards to the Angara and Krogan) they are nowhere as near as important to the above, at least in my mind.

While story questions are all important, we also need to realize what this can mean for Mass Effect as a whole.  While Andromeda was never release with a specific plan for the series in mind and meant to be fluid, I doubt anyone ever meant for it to be abandoned, especially considering we have been without a Mass Effect game for going on 5 years prior to its release.Yes, we still have other BioWare games like Dragon Age 4 to look forward to, but they just don't fill the void left in our hearts. Why is this happening?  Well from best I can tell it is because of the overwhelming negative feedback focusing on the glitches in terms of facial animations and dialogue, which while I won't say didn't exist, but were never as large of a part of the game as people (mostly those who hadn't touched the game in my experience) would have you believe.  See, when something like this happens on a lesser known series, or a game that is widely regarded as a cherished title by the masses, it doesn't get the amount of negative attention that a game like Mass Effect would with its rampant fanbase of overzealous players.  For example, Dark Souls has a large number of glitches in their invasion PvP system, ones that will actually break the game and make it impossible to have a fair and balanced game, but the response from the internet is one of disbelief and cries for it to be fixed, not widespread criticism, where Andromeda was laughed at relentlessly for a small glitch that didn't break the game, and by most accounts was less than 1% of the overall experience.  Now I'm not saying they both don't need to be fixed, and say what you will for modern release it now, patch it later culture, but the fact that it is an option to be able to fix it is a good them.  But we can also look to the response from the communities for the efforts to fix their glitches.  From Software spent a large chunk of time investigating and banning players who exploited this glitch, and as of the time of this writing I'm not aware of any patches to fix this issue, only to be met with overall praise from the community for such a proactive approach, while Andromeda was met with disdain and criticism for taking less than 3 months to almost completely eliminate the problem, which I need remind you didn't render entire aspects of the game almost unplayable.

This brings me to my last point of why you should really care.  Andromeda has set a prescendence, and not the one they were hoping to.  What this proves is that with enough complaints, trolling, rampant meme sharing, and overall shitty attitudes to what really was a solid game, you can effectively bury it and a franchise, because when you complain to an extent and harass a developer you are attacking their heart and soul.  Many developers hold these games close to their hearts, as they can be working on them for close to 70-80 hours a week for over 2 years.  These games are their children, their babies.  They care about them and want to see them grow just as much as we do, but the sheer amount of harassment that Andromeda received, especially from people who never played the game (you know who you are), was too much.  This will only serve to tell people that they can keep doing this to other games and series that they either don't like or have some sort of issue they don't like and it is dangerous. Things like this can lead someone to depression, which is a very serious issue, and while I'm not saying we should ignore issues in our games, we should raise those concerns, but we should do them in a constructive way.  Positive feedback is much more beneficial than negative, think of the last time both has happened and what the outcome was for you?  Now apply that same to these games and their devs, and keep in mind that these games are their passion.

We all love video games, there is no question about that, but the thing is how we address them matters so much more.  The issue surrounding Andromeda is a difficult one, but I believe that we need to learn from it so we call all grow, both the community and devs.  See you next time.

Rantology: Having Fun

So the other day I caught myself turning on my XBox One for the first time since I had moved back in April, and while I admit it did take me a shameful amount of time to turn it back on and play it again, I don't regret me decision.  See, I've actually been keeping plenty busy on my other consoles lately, with Mario Kart 8 coming out on switch, Destiny starting their Age of Triumph celebrations (of which I still need to finish off my record book), and other assorted titles filling out the rest of my time with a sprinkling of WoW just to keep me in check.  Now, that's not to say that I regret my decision to have not turned on my console, but I feel I have neglected it for too long.  That being said I loaded up some Halo 5: Guardians, and just dived into my favorite new game mode Warzone Firefight.

Now Warzone Firefight launched sometime last summer, and while I was fully aware of its release, I was too busy playing other games at the time, I don't remember what games, but it was something I kinda wrote off as something I'd get to later, Well now that later has arrived and dear god I don't know what took me so long.  The game mode is absolutely brilliant in all the right ways, the usage of REQs, the team based goal oriented combat, in fact the only negative thing I can say about it is that respawn timers can get too long late in the game, but even that is offset by the weapons you've unlocked to that point.  However, as much fun as I was having I felt dirty for enjoying my time with the game.  I felt like I was somehow degrading myself for playing a game so many fans disliked, a game that was criticized for the removal of local coop so it could achieve a smooth 60 fps, and I will fully admit I was one of those dissenters at first, yet, as the Halo nutjob I am, went out and purchased Halo 5 at launch and at least gave it a shot, and while I like the direction the story went, despite some of its previous misgivings in Halo 4.  As dirty as I felt though, I just didn't care because at my core I was actually having fun.

See that's something that I feel like people have lost sight on in recent years, especially when it comes to gaming.  We all want this huge awesome new IP to launch with open world, and crafting, and all these other things to give us freedom in our worlds because a handful of games did it well and we're constantly under the illusion that that is where success lays, but I've come to disagree with that and instead I put forth a new idea: instead of chasing the heels of previous success, or criticizing something for every graphical misgiving, or a person for their taste, let's just all have fun.  It's really not that difficult of a concept to embrace, all you need to do is if you see someone enjoying something you don't, just ignore it, let it go.  Don't tell them you hate it, don't tell them why it's bad, don't criticize it for what it is or isn't, let them enjoy something.

Oddly enough this isn't the first time I've found myself in this situation either, with many releases over the last couple of years I've found myself either having to defend my interest in the game, justify why I would ever play such a thing, or I've just felt ashamed for playing something that I am genuinely having fun playing simply because the gaming community as a whole dislikes it for whatever reason.  A couple of very recent examples are Mass Effect Andromeda and Ghost Recon Wildlands.  It would be no small secret to the people who know me that I am a HUGE Mass Effect fan, I have art on my walls, clothing in my drawers, hell I even splurged on the $130 Pathfinder backpack, $100 DieCast Nomad ND1, and I'm currently in the middle of purchasing the FigPins.  Needless to say, I LOVE Mass Effect, it's wonderful and I practically disappeared when Andromeda came out this year, starting the game a mere week and a half before I moved, whilst packing mind you.  I loved the game, and had a ton of fun playing it, and while there were things I was looking forward to that weren't there, such as dynamic outposts, being able to land on dozens of worlds, and a larger selection of romantic options.  All those put aside I still enjoyed the game, and had hours of fun playing it despite having to defend my interest in the game due to its glitches and facial animations, both issues that in my playthrough were a maximum of  maybe 30 minutes in a 50 hour experience.

I felt assaulted and wronged because how dare I have fun when a few people put videos on YouTube for reddit and other meta sites to laugh at and criticize the game for it. How dare I enjoy something that let down their expectations, people who didn't play the game and had no interest in it in the first place.  How dare I have fun.  How dare I enjoy myself.  The same issue revolves around Ghost Recon Wildlands.  The reviews came out for it and were less than positive, the game was repetitive, the open world felt like it made the player travel vast amounts for no real reason, and the narrative is too shallow, but I found myself in the same place, having fun.  I've enjoyed my time with Ghost Recon, I love taking down bases, getting into firefights driving around Bolivia, flying up as high as I can and parachuting back down to Earth.  I'm loving every minute of it and I've actually been putting off completing it because I don't want it to be over.

Yet it was in a PSN group chat that I realized I shouldn't feel bad for enjoying something, if its fun then why should I care what people say about it? Lately we've all been obsessing over review scores and graphical improvement, and making sure that everything is tippy toppy to the point that anything but the very best isn't good enough.  People complained about Arkham Knight's graphical and game play issues, but I still had fun, I may have been frustrated at points, but I enjoyed the ride through the game.  People complained about Destiny and it's lack of story content and it's MMO-esque approach to gameplay, yet here we are almost 3 years later with the sequel getting ready to release and new players are joining every day, something must be keeping those players coming back. Another much criticized game over its lifetime is World of Warcraft, being one of the largest games of all time leading up to the 2010 release of Cataclysm that rebuilt the world from the ground up and saw many players straight up leave the game after being so invested for so long, other games stepped in place to acquire some of it's player base like Rift, SWtOR, Guild Wars 2, and more recently Final Fantasy XIV.  Yet many remained loyal to the game for a myriad of reasons, even throughout the Warlords of Draenor expansion, which some refer to as "The Dark Days of WoW".  Yet still, the rush of getting new equipment, enjoyment of friends, and conquering bosses still remained fun to players to world over, these players didn't leave because they were still enjoying themselves in one way or another.

Now none of this is to say we should be happy and content with whatever the industry hands us and just "be grateful we're getting games", but we certainly shouldn't talk down on someone who enjoys something.  As a long time fan of the Koei's Warrior franchise I know very well what a double sided dose of criticism looks like.  It takes a certain sense of mindless grinding to get any sort of real enjoyment out of those games, but that doesn't mean it's impossible, in fact sometimes a mindless grind is exactly what I need to destress after a long day, I find it relaxing and fun, so what.  We all got into this insane hobby around the central idea that games and gaming is fun.  No one started off day one out of the gate as being the best and min maxing every character to be the mathematical best at whatever, we all have our own unique playstyles, and our own unique approaches to everything, so why should our enjoyment be any different. Gaming takes all types, some like graphics, some like stories, some like mechanics, some like to min max and feel powerful, some are just tournament players who dedicate everything they have to being the best at their game, and that's all okay.

I guess what I'm getting at here is that we need to stop getting into petty arguments and judging each other.  We need to sit down and just appreciate gaming a bit more, appreciate gaming for what it is, something we have fun with.  Not everything needs to be an artistic masterpiece, not everything needs to appeal to everything, glitches happen, and someone is going to disagree with you about Ubisofts Spiderman game on PS4, but who cares.  What really matters is that you're having fun, and if you see someone enjoying something you don't like here's a little piece of advice: don't attack them for it (unless of course that thing is discriminatory in any way that is), they're people like you. Let people have fun.

Rantology: Let's talk about this whole Hainly Abrams thing.

It's finally here, Mass Effect Andromeda, the game that I've been waiting and drooling for ever since Mass Effect 3 ended and the online community had died down after the PS4 and XB1 had launched.  Full of all of its fame and glory, the series first title on the next generation of consoles is exciting, fresh, and.....oh shit BioWare went and done fucked up didn't they?  Great, now we have an elephant in the room for my favorite video game franchise, and it's not exactly a well behaved one at that.  For those of you who don't know what I'm talking about you've either been living under a rock, not phased by Mass Effect Andromeda coming out, or just not paying attention to about any sort of game journalism at all, I'm a little jealous of all of you in a different form, because this has become quite tiresome honestly.

So, backstory for those of you who don't know a recently published Polygon article broke down and discussed three example of transgender characters in three different recent AAA titles.  Now normally this is something I'd just put aside and continue playing my game, but I feel like this time around it's worth bringing up as a point of discussion as the industry continues to grow and evolve into something greater.  While the main focus of this will be breaking down Mass Effect Andromeda and Hainly Abrams, I will be touching on Horizon and Zelda as well just for posterity.

Hainly Abrams is a character that you, Ryder/Pathfinder, encounter rather early into the the new Mass Effect game on Eos after you establish the first settlement there.  Her role is minor at best, being the chief researcher on the base she has a handful of lines of dialogue, and a couple of small go here do that quests too.  So she's a VERY small character in the entire game, which literally has multiple planets and dozen of characters that are like her.  Now, and here comes my favorite phrase, THAT HAVING BEEN SAID, that doesn't mean that BioWare expressed her in a positive manner.

She feels like she was added a checkbox character, who does little to draw you in a build a better connection with, and is simply there as a "hey, we have a transgender character" kind of thing, which, if done in a careful manner, isn't necessarily a bad thing, showing their audience that inclusiveness is key and everyone is welcome.  However Hainly just had to get it out there right away for the sake of getting it out there.  To clarify this is done by a common question in the game that everybody asks each other "Why did you come to Andromeda."  Her answer was simple, even if jarringly insensitive to the transgender community, simply saying she wanted to come so she could be who she was, and not stuck in a lab being tortured by people dead-naming her, and while this isn't her exact dialogue you get the idea.

This could have come from any number of different reasons on BioWare's end, maybe an intern brought it up and some slack jawed writer threw her in because they felt it was a good idea and didn't put too much thought into.  But that doesn't excuse the lack of effort that went into her expose, and personally I'd rather they just kind have left it out all together, or bring it up in a different manner, like by maybe making the transgender character part of your crew and something you learn about over the course of the game as you become more and more connected with them they eventually come to confide in Ryder about this to help them solve a personal issue, which could be a number of things that I'm not even going to speculate.  That would be an infinitely better way to handle this issue instead of just blurting it out there for all to see.

Now, this wouldn't be a Rantology if I didn't at least offer a bit of a different perspective on it, and while I'm doing this I would like to remind people who do read this that I'm not trying to be insensitive, unfriendly, or unsupportive of transgender individuals, but I'm simply trying to make some sort of bizarre sense of , if there is some sort, the deeper purpose here (though my money is on just some junior level writer didn't do their homework).  This is surprising, to say the least, especially from the same company that is responsible for Krem who is not only one of the best representations of how to appropriately handle a transgender character, but also respect their boundaries as well.

You see with Krem it's not a one and done conversation with him to learn about his past, he slowly confides in you as you and Iron Bull grow closer over the course of the game, and a lot of the conversation is more focused around him finding people to accept him and not caring about people who don't.  When the inquisitor asks Iron Bull about this his response is actually really simple: Krem is a man and deserves to be treated like the man he is.  It's not such a matter of the inquisitor trying to learn of Krem's past, and Krem doesn't just go out and instantly tell you his story, in fact the only reason you learn it is by asking Iron Bull of his past, and by extension, the Chargers.  Krem is a rare shining light for diverse characters in an industry widely populated by sex symbols, innuendos, chain mail bikinis, and genuine misunderstanding about the representations of sex, gender, and identity in both workplace and expression.

Speaking to the genuine misunderstanding, two other games that are mentioned in the article, and I honestly feel that the author misunderstood both of them.  In Breath of the Wild Link is tasked with entering Gerudo Village, but there is an issue, they only allow in men stating that "This is a town of vai, not voe are allowed".  In order to remedy this you hear a rumor of a man who managed to sneak in to the town and find two individuals looking for him, one outside the town says he travels between the town and previous outpost, and when you find the man looking for him he is confused as to his location but hints the Gerudo at the market talking of a Hylian vai, you later find him on the roof of the market where he insists you use female pronouns and if you do will offer to sell you an outfit, and after purchasing it and equipping it the wind picks up and flashes his beard.

Now, some of you may be wondering why I'm using "he/him", well simply put it's because this character isn't a progressive stance that some have claimed him to be, not he is instead a joke by Nintendo at the notion of transgender individuals by taking a the bathroom example, a Conservative favorite, to its most extreme, or a pervert dressing as a women to get a peek at an all women town.  His insistence on female pronouns only exists to further his guise and continue to be allowed into Gerudo Village.  People have tried to convince me it is a joke at the Gerudos for being unable to identify the difference between genders in other cultures, but this is proven wrong as both the chief and her bodyguard recognize Link as male.  See all of this was most likely done to reflect upon Japans strict principles of gender roles and stereotypes and the overwhelming backlash to the reaction to the reduction of a female link in Breath of the Wild.  This was a major punch-down by Nintendo, and quite honestly something it feels like is overlooked in many eyes because of 1) it gives you "sexy Link", and 2) Zelda is released so infrequently people are willing to overlook these things and give Nintendo/Zelda a pass.

See as much as people want to give Nintendo and Zelda a pass on something like this for a variety of reasons including what I have argued before of Zelda being a "golden game" (can do no wrong), but the truth is often much darker, and while I can only speculate intentions, knowing the culture and companies history gives me a very good idea.  Similarly Horizon Zero Dawn seemed to receive some flak from the article for reasons that I just can't tell?  Honestly I'm having a tough time really understanding trying to understand the point the author took here in her article.  Part of me wants to say she didn't like it but then she goes on to say that Janeva was a significant character in the game and an overall positive for trans inclusion, though didn't like the social norms imposed on the character.

While all of this is understandable frustrating I think the takeaway, from Aloy's perspective at least, is that this is a completely new situation and she has never encountered someone like him before, so her instincts were to refer to him as her.  This seems so appalling to us because our society has overcome these hurdles already and we have a level of social acceptance in the matter.  We know to respect someones gender identity and expression, Aloy doesn't.  Despite the game taking place in the future she has no idea about even the first thing to think in a situation like this.  In our society we completely understand what is and isn't appropriate because we've had these discussions, we've sat down and talked about what is and isn't alright, Aloy hasn't.  Aloy, in all honesty, has been too busy fighting for her right to live and exist her entire life to be able to stop and think about it, and while part of me really wants to sit down and really hammer and nail it into Guerilla about how they approached this topic in Horizon and how they could have been more sensitive about it...I just can't.

I totally understand why this is the case, effectively they're living in a world where everyday is a literal fight to survive the machines and struggles of dealing with the fallout from the older empire.  None of it is easy, and this is such a rare occurrence because of the perceived social implications in their society and I think that's what Guerilla was trying to get at.  The fact that we didn't just arrive at this point of acceptance overnight, and at our core we still have instincts and urges and it's our social doctrine that really overcomes them.  I'm not trying to say that people who are transgender aren't natural or aren't validated, but instead we all have base perceptions about the world around us that, because of our social advancements, can subconsciously control.  So while Aloy doesn't exactly stand on the pinnacle of how to treat transgender individuals, she's not meant to.

Janeva on the other hand is exactly what the industry needs right now though, yes he is surrounded by a strict set of social doctrine that dictates how men and women act, but at the same point in time he is just as, if not more, capable than any other man in the Carja army.  He rose through the ranks with skill and determination set out to show the world he is who he says he is.  While he is surrounded by an air that doesn't explicitly state he is transgender, the connotations and subtext is there, and to add to it he states that he is a soldier, even going so far as saying "No woman can wear Carja armor".  He stands firm to his identity and his loyalty to the Carja, because honestly he could have just as easily just been like, well fuck it, I'm not going to deal with this, and peaced out.

Really what should we take from all of this?  Well honestly its that the gaming industry still has a REALLY long way to go when it comes to being able to appropriately handle gender identity and gender representation.  Additionally we need to be able to take a more objective look and understand intentions of these topics, because quite frankly things are getting either lost in translation or outright forgiven due to the series or media its in.  Mass Effect handled it wrong, Zelda handled it wrong, Horizon handled it...differently, it's hard to say, and Dragon Age did fantastic.  I'm not going to pretend to have all the answers, but I sure as hell can hopefully provide an insightful look onto some of the most recent bits of social commentary on these games.  Till next time.

Rantology: That Kotaku GameStop Article

Okay. sooooooo yea, journalism, not just mainstream but games as well, has a really nasty habit of not doing their research and sensationalizing things.  Specifically I'm talking about a recently published article on Kotaku about GameStop's Circle of Life.  What I want to do here is discuss a few critical things in this article, and bring to light a few facts that were conveniently left out, or not communicated.  First though, I make transparency in what I do a point of personal pride, so with that in mind I'm going to be transparent, and as I've stated before, I am employed by GameStop on a part time basis.  I'm not a manger, I'm not in charge of a store, or a district, simply a Game Adviser.  Now along with that, there is a document I signed called the "Social Media Posting Guidelines" that more or less state that I cannot post about upcoming promotions, company "secrets", inventory, and other things of that ilk.  I'm probably going to be going against that, but the truth is way more important in this issue than that piece of shit corporate sellout document in this case.

Okay, I'm going to leave images out of this as much as I can, since this is kind of a brass tax issue.  I'm also going to quote the Kotaku article directly and offer my insights and personal experience about this.  So if this isn't that funny, I apologize, but I feel this is one of the few times I need to be somewhat serious and address an issue head on.

The article starts off like this: "They may simply be lying to you, fueled by a new program that discourages GameStop salespeople from selling unopened copies of video games.

The program, called “Circle of Life,” gives each GameStop store different percentage quotas for 1) pre-orders; 2) reward card subscriptions; 3) used game sales; and 4) game trade-ins."  The fact is that is simply not true.  Circle of Life is a sales technique that has been used by GameStop for years.  The idea is that the PRO card is the center of it all and drives everything else, it further goes on to say when you buy a new game you want to pre-order it to make sure you have a guaranteed copy you can get when it releases, then when your done playing that game you are welcome to trade it back to us and apply the money you get towards another game, if it's preowned all the better for us, and we encourage you to keep pre-ordering games to keep you coming back.  More or less trades drive value, which drives sales.  It's not a new sales program, and neither are the metrics behind it.  They're just now what we're focusing our numbers on.

"Each of these quotas is based on the store’s total transactions. Pre-orders and reward cards subscriptions are based on the number of transactions, while used game sales and trade-ins are based on the total dollar value of transactions. If a store’s quota for used game sales is 30%, and the store sells $1,000 worth of merchandise, GameStop expects at least $300 of that merchandise to be pre-owned."  Wrong.  This isn't true at all either.  In fact it's so untrue it could be called an Alternative Fact.  These numbers are derived from qualifying sales.  If an item CAN be sold as preowned, then it will ping the numbers, but if its a t-shirt, yea that's not happening.  Same with the PRO card.  If you have a PRO card attached to an order already it wont hurt your PRO numbers, same if the card would offer no value to the transaction.  I've done the numbers, looked at the statistics, and personally performed the experiments on all of this.

"In other words, according to salespeople speaking to Kotaku and elsewhere on the internet, GameStop is incentivizing employees to stop people from buying new games and hardware. " Again, this is simply not true, we're not incentivized to do shit.  We don't see extra money, we don't see less.  Yea, they'd like for us to hit these goals, and it makes us look A LOT better if we do, but as far as I've been made aware there has been absolutely no communication from leadership saying we need to stop selling new product.  What this is, however, is a case of shitty employees and managers seeing this, trying to get their numbers up, and telling people this.  If you trust your local store then continue to go there and utilize them as a resource, but I can assure you, the "official policy" isn't to lie to customers.

"“We are telling people we don’t have new systems in stock so we won’t take a $300 or $400 dollar hit on our pre-owned numbers,” one GameStop employee told me in an e-mail, requesting anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to press. “This is company wide and in discussions with my peers it is a common practice. We also tell customers we don’t have copies of new games in stock when they are on sale—for example, Watch Dogs 2 is currently $29.99 new and $54.99 pre-owned. We just tell them we don’t have the new one in stock and shuffle them out the door.”"  Again, see above.  This is an example of one shitty person in the GameStop hierarchy making it shitty for everyone else, not the company as a whole.

"GameStop staff have told me that corporate managers are monitoring both stores and individual employees, asking everyone to get a COL score of at least 75% by hitting at least three of their four quotas. If a store is hitting their COL targets but one salesperson is not, that salesperson may face punishment or even lose their job, according to company employees." While some of this is true, the fact remains that its not in the official policy that we can be fired over this.  If it was, we would have signed a form to acknowledge the policy changes as is federally mandated by US law.

Really the take away here is that the people who were talking to Kotaku either made a lot of this up, are really shitty people, or have really shitty people directly above them.  Yes the CoL is a thing, no it doesn't mean we're out to get you.  Yes PRO and preowned make up a HUGE portion of our profits, no that doesn't mean everyone is going to try and push you on all of it and make you do the 20 questions dance.  Yes its important for us to hit our goals, but its no more important than you and your job, and even if we do face punishment up to including termination we still have a right to fight back and ask why.  This is all just another one of those desperate stupid post holiday policy changes every store does to make its final quarter look a little better than it actually is and end on a high note.  Why is it so aggressive then?  Well 2016 sucked, and surprisingly enough it sucked for games too.  not much major came out and even the yearly heavy hitters didn't do well, but 2017 is looking to change that.

I could go into this more and talk about how we used to push the warranties and season passes super hard and were judged off them as well, but I'm not, I've said my piece.  I hope you found this insightful and somewhat useful in trying to get a better grasp of this situation.

Rantology: How Nintendo can make the Switch succeed

Ugh, so this really kinda makes me mad, I've been telling myself to stick to reviews and not get into opinion pieces about how the gaming industry can improve itself, but wouldn't you know it Nintendo had to go out, announce the Switch, and make me go back on my word to myself.  Well God-fucking-dammit, if I can't catch a break here we go again.  This is something I like to call Rantology, in other words me spewing on about a subject for who the hell knows how long trying to make it as funny as possible while hopefully offering a potential fix that the gaming industry is then able to use free of charge (though a few free games wouldn't hurt).  So buckle up kids, we're about to get dirty and possibly shove our face in something we really want nothing apart of.

On January 12th Nintendo did a full reveal of their Nintendo Switch, the successor to the shit-laden thrown of the WiiU.   And boy, was it a train wreck.  Now the hardware looks solid and has a solid idea behind it.  A home gaming console you can take with you and play with your friends on the go.  I love it, purely and simply this is the kind of idea that put Nintendo on the top back in the 90's.  Now their execution of it during their live stream, well lets just say embarrassing barely does it justice.  Nintendo fucked up this conference in the only way that Nintendo possibly could have, and now, we have to hope and pray that Nintendo can save the Switch from the same fate as the WiiU.

Well what happened to the WiiU you ask?  Well sit right the fuck down, strap in (and on where appropriate, I don't judge), and get ready for one mild ride.  Ultimately the WiiU failed for being the Wii, but also not being the Wii, and not the PS4 or XB1.  What does that mean?  Well simply put it was something most people saw as something that should have been an expansion for the Wii and not a standalone console.  A tablet that doubles a controller is a really good idea, just not at a $150 price point for a tablet alone, and neither is the idea that only one player can use it, oh and you can't do asymmetrical games with it, oh and it will play original Wii games, but you need to go into an emulator mode, and there's no decent 1st or 3rd party support, and all those old digital games (in the digital fucking era I might add) are getting left out too, and what do you mean its not as powerful as a PS3??????   Yea the WiiU was a let down, and there's really no two ways around that.  Now don't get me wrong I love my WiiU, and Xenoblade Chronicles X is one of my favorite games, but with that being said Nintendo really missed their mark on the console.

What does this mean for Nintendo and the switch?  Well they need to really overcome the failings that happened with the WiiU, or history is doomed to repeat itself, and some of these things, the Nintendo Switch, or what I hope to not have to call it, the Nintendo Shits, is already doomed to do.  First and foremost, the Switch needs to have the same graphic performance as its competitors.  Lets be real, we live in an age of 1080p and 4k, and if you can't AT LEAST hit 1080p in the home (the whole 720p on the go is fine as its a smaller screen and much more reasonable for conservation of battery life) then you need a serious cognitive re calibration (read: kick to the teeth).  Unfortunately, I see Nintendo failing on this aspect.  I don't see them releasing an upgraded dock (for a reasonable price) to upgrade the output to 4k, nor do I see them even making that a priority, which will drive down other areas.

The next HUGE thing Nintendo needs to do, coincidentally, is also the first step of the D.E.N.N.I.S. System: Demonstrate Value.  As if I, the consumer, am one of Dennis' many sexual targets, Nintendo needs to demonstrate their value to me.  And by value I mean justi-fucking-fy the goddamned subscription cost of your online services besides a one month rental of a classic game (that chances are I won't even be able to pick) and just fucking give me like 4 of them.  I mean seriously, how much money will they be out in the long run? Nothing? I mean these games have already made their initial sales when they launched, and most of them don't even hold the replayabilty as they once did due to the limitations of the time when they were made.  Seriously, its not that goddamned hard Nintendo, get your literal head out of your literal ass and give me value in your online subscriptions, or this potentially awesome console or face me not giving you money for them.

Oh, while were on the subject of retro games, I have one more teensy weensy, itsy bitsy request.  *ahem* NINTENDO, IT'S ABOUT FUCKING TIME YOU RELEASE MORE THAN ONE CLASSIC GAME A MONTH.  Seriously.  I can go online right now and get a SNES emulator, and a ROM for each and every game on the system.  For every game that Nintendo holds the rights too for older consoles (and trust me, theres a lot of them) there is zero, zlich, nada, nuffin, none, no reason why they aren't available digitally for a reasonable price (read not $10-$20 and more like $5).  Seriously, unless you want to change the graphics interface looks, in which case you haven't really made a huge effort recently, you have no excuse here.  In fact let me give you one very large reason to do this instead: MONEY.  It will make you money, especially from people like me, who like to play older games sometimes, and have disposable income to purchase them, especially if they aren't $20 for a game I'll play a couple of times for like an hour or two.

Now, this is a big one, and by big I mean huge, like mega huge.  So big it makes yo mama look tiny, and she chased your school bus this morning thinking it was a twinkie.  Third party support.  What does this mean?  Well simply put Nintendo needs to make sure that they not only have 3rd party companies make games for them, but these companies are committed to making games for them.  I mean how much fun is it really if the only games I can play on a Nintendo system are games only Nintendo makes or licenses, and I can't play other huge games like Overwatch, Mass Effect, Batman, and others, all because of Nintendo's dumbass quality control and insistence on the Switch being "family friendly".  Sorry Nintendo, that won't earn you a top place in the current industry.

Finally, and this is probably the biggest, the last thing Nintendo needs to do to make the Switch successful is to not forget about it like we all try to do with our alcoholic, misogynistic, and racist uncles....unless that's just me.  But really, the WiiU fell out of relevancy because Nintendo spent so much time and money on the 3DS that they just kinda forgot it was a thing after pitiful sales and poor release numbers.  With 2 million units preordered world wide Nintendo is looking at a bigger launch than the PS4 and XB1, so they certainly have the momentum, but with some of their release lineups I'm not sure they can last very long out of the gate till we start seeing a good amount of games consistently coming out for it.  Ultimately time will tell, but Nintendo needs to understand that if their sales drop after a month or two, they need not panic, just to commit to their customers and buckle down for the long run.

So really that's it.  I feel like a whore for going back to this whole Rantology thing again, but you know what, I kinda don't care.  Either way the Shits comes squirting out in a month and we'll see how it goes.  Till next time kids.