Just A Game; Don’t try analyzing what you are playing

I posted this before on another page, but I would like to post it here as well. The original article, “Are we what we play?” was published on 1UP.com last year, and I wasn’t too impressed with what I read…

*****

Upon reading “Are we what we play?”, I thought to myself about the games I play and what they say about who I am. Thinking through the various titles I have played over the years, the simple answer arouse, sometimes I just want to be the hero. I like saving the day, watching good triumph over evil, getting the girl in the end, but what does that mean? Nothing, absolutely nothing. Everyone likes to have a feeling of self-importance once in a while, and I myself am no exception. Before video games, children had plastic guns and played “Cowboys and Indians”, before that, children had wooden swords and played “Robin Hood”, etc I think the real issue is that we over analyze everything these days trying to find a hidden meaning, and one of those topics, especially since the mid-90’s has been video games. Let’s take a step back to understand this before we begin.

By the mid-90’s games like Doom and Duke Nukem had raised fears of violence among children, fears that these games would lead to dysfunctional grown ups, which seemed to have been justified in April of 1999 when the two students shot up Columbine High School. After the massacre, news media and concerned parents blasted the video game industry and the use of violence in such games, but many ignored the real issues on the case. Sensationalize the fiction, ignore the facts, and get your face on the television. In 1966, Charles Joseph Whitman grabbed a rifle and killed fourteen at the University of Texas at Austin, and before that in 1927, Andrew Kehoe killed 45 when he set off three bombs at the Bath Consolidated School, which took place in a time before video games. The issue is social pressure and the psychological state of these murders, not their hobbies, and yet this fiction still persists. Have we become so self-obsessed we look inwards instead of outwards at the bigger picture?

If we are going to sit down and seriously discuss the impact of the games we play, why not breakdown some of the more popular titles of the last decade or so and find their deeper meaning and what, if any, impact they have had on society…

Final Fantasy VII – I am one of many players who enjoyed this adventure without paying too much attention to the story. On the surface, it looks like a simple game about a hero and his companions trying to save the world from a great evil, but when you look closer, we see that are team of would-be heroes are eco-terrorists and the great evil, for most of the game, is a large corporation bent on hurting the environment for profit. I will tell you right now, I do not support the actions of radical environmental groups in anyway, and I am also a person who believes in big business and loves a good steak (Mmmmm, dead animal flesh), but that didn’t stop me from picking up a Playstation 1 and this game and spending over a hundred hours playing through it a few times. Cloud Strife, a character beloved by many, spends the first disc blowing up two power plants and attacking a corporate head quarters in a militia style raid, so what does that say about his fans, including me? The truth is that it doesn’t say anything about my social or political beliefs, but there are those misguided individuals who turns to this game as a “Bible” of social doctrine and correctness. These few are not a sign that this game was trying to push a political agenda, so I wouldn’t spend much time debating Square’s beliefs when it comes to the environment or capitalism.

Final Fantasy X – As Final Fantasy VII could have been seen as a tool for discussing environmentalism, Final Fantasy X could be viewed as a social and political statement about religion and society. Surprisingly, in a world where political correctness deems such faiths as Christianity as hateful, this game seems to have flown in below atheist radar, especially with Sin being such an important part of the plot. In the game, our heroes are caught in a battle between science (the Al-Beds) and religion (the Yevonites), finally siding against these theological tyrants to bring about peace. As a Roman Catholic, I should be offended, I should have written a letter to Square-Enix and demanded an apology for attacking my faith in such a way, but instead I bought the game, spent over a hundred hours again playing through it a few times, then went out and bought the sequel. Why didn’t I sit down and examine the morals and beliefs which seem to be pushed by the game’s creators onto a naive audience? Simply because to me it is just a game, and no matter what the story, as long as it has good graphics, good game play and a well developed cast of characters, I am going to play it.

The Street Fighter Series – I can remember my brother and I begging my father to let us buy Super Street Fighter II for the Super Nintendo. My parents were sure that such a game would make their children more violent, but finally they broke down and gave into our wants (I love my parents). I can still clearly remember sitting outside Toys R Us in the family car with my mother and two brothers while my father went inside and purchased the game for me and my twin as a birthday gift. We spent hours upon hours beating each other up as Ryu and Ken, playing through the game hundred of times with various characters, trying to beat our high scores, and yet, even when spending such time around such a violent game, nothing happened. My parents’ fears never were justified, all that came of it was that Street Fighter brought my brothers and I closer, giving us an outlet for the various frustrations we had to deal with in school. In a time where school fighting is now an expellable offense (something I find disturbing), it is good to have these outlets. Does that mean people who play these games are more prone to violent outburst and need to release anger through these forms of entertainment? Not at all, especially since everyone vents their bottled up emotions in one way or another. Some do it through painting, others do it through sports, I just happen to like beating up a computer controlled opponent when things get a little rough.

Call of Duty – Killing Germans, Japanese, Italians with guns and grenades sounds more like post-war racism gone rampant than an educational and enjoyable video game. Some groups are now trying to outlaw the word “Nazi” in public schools, so what does it say when someone plays this and other war themed games? If it isn’t “just a game”, what are the deeper meanings to be found in such a title? Because players can play as both American and Soviet Russian soldiers, does that mean the creators of this title and titles like it are pushing the political beliefs of either group? No. Does this push gun violence or make me want to grab a rifle and start shooting people? Not at all, in fact, being a Canadian, I most likely will never even handle a gun, let alone go around shooting at people. What is the hidden meaning, what does it say about people who play these titles? At most, I would say it appeals to people who enjoy studying World War II history and enjoy playing video games. It doesn’t mean anything for someone to buy this game, play this game, and talk about this game with their friends, so quit worrying about the social impact of war-themed shooters because I have yet to come across any study which supports any claim that Call of Duty or titles like it lead to gun violence. This fact however seems to be ignored by many who keep trying to explain school shootings as a side effect of youths who spend time killing Nazis on the beaches of Normandy.

Need For Speed 2: Hot Pursuit – My first girlfriend loved playing this game, and even after our breaks ups, I continued playing this title. What does that say about me? Do I hold some ill-feelings towards authority, or at the least, highway police? For anyone who hasn’t played this game, the basic premise is that players take famous cars and race them against friends and computer controlled opponents while being chased by computer controlled police officers who try to arrest you for breaking the law. People who play this game, as “not just a game” logic goes, should hate police officers or at least want to race their friends down the highway in whatever car they can afford. Shouldn’t this game be breeding a generation of players who drive fast cars dangerously fast and hate the police? Only a handful of players will buy a Honda Civic and customize the car for racing, and this isn’t because of the game, this is because of social pressure due to popular trends highlighted by the popularity of the Fast and the Furious movies. Once again, people play it because it is fun, not because of any deeper meaning.

In the end, video game players don’t buy a game because of a deeper meaning which will later lead them to commit various criminal acts, they pick it up because of what it looks like, what people say about it, what the price is, etc Working at EB Games and later Toys R Us, I can tell you, I have never been asked by either a gamer or a gamer’s parents what effect, if any, this title will have on their personality or social/political views. Especially among male players, what really matters is what you get to do, be it killing monsters, racing expensive cars, etc, and how big the breasts of the female characters are (come on guys, that is half the reason we buy Dead or Alive, you know it). Sex has more to do with game sales then social/political views, but this really isn’t an issue that many want to raise in a sexually tolerant society, especially with the popularity of “alternative lifestyles”. Honestly, sit back, enjoy and remember, it is just a game.

Geiger throws a fit; Deadliest Warrior hits a new low

Even after the trouble I dealt with following my post about this show’s episode on Vikings vs Samurai, I feel the need to post another. My brother, against my advice, decided to watch the latest farce, Knight vs Pirate. While peaking in and listen from next door, I found it rather hilarious that Max Geiger refused to listen to his co-host Geoff Desmoulin, even butting heads with him over test results. Most notably, when the flintlock musket couldn’t penetrate the Knight’s plate armour. Having seen his “nerd fantasy” destroyed by a test of his own design, he quickly jumped to the defense of “Pirate experts” everywhere, claiming that he himself would have been bested by this shot… Pretty pathetic…

While he was quickly slapped down for his bias by Desmoulin, the “cat was definitely out of the bag” on this show’s historical accuracy. Instead of coming to a reasonable conclusion, discussing the training of one warrior against the other, the weapons which said warrior would likely bring into battle, the tactics used with these weapons in battle, etc we see the Deadliest Warrior for what it is really, a complete and utter farce. The computer technology which this show clings to for legitimacy, is as reliable as match making software was years ago. Even if the programs designer wasn’t skewing the results with his obvious bias, I highly doubt any software could properly simulate an actual battle between warriors. The only way to really have any definite answer to a “who would win” question, would be to have those two actually fight. Since this isn’t possible, a well informed discussion is the next best thing.

What I found funny with last night’s episode was that Pirate’s weapons had shown themselves to be highly unreliably in actual combat. Having studied Canadian history since high school, I should have remembered how “primitive” flintlock weapons were, not simply because of the way they are loaded, but how inaccurate and ineffective they are in actual combat. The standard musket was moderately effective, but nowhere near as useful as the even the most basic rifles of today are. The key issue here is the rifling of modern barrels, as well as the shape of modern projectiles. It is obvious that when deciding who was the winner, Geiger was ignorant to the fact that he didn’t take this into account. A rifled barrel spins the bullet, and it is this spin which gives it is accuracy. The shape of bullets themselves also helps with accuracy, as well as a greater ability to penetrate a target. Musket balls were not only inaccurate because of the way they sat loosely in the musket, but lacked this penetration power. Add in the fact that the ball would bounce around the barrel once fired, and you find that the projectile itself doesn’t have the same momentum leaving the barrel that it would have had fired from a modern gun. Because of this, even if a shot did find it’s mark, it wasn’t uncommon for the musket ball to not do fatal damage. Many soldiers died because of infections due to wounds sustained by projectiles which failed to penetrate. Even hit in the chest, there was a good chance the musket ball would become lodged in bone or muscle tissue. This was definitely not a “bringing a gun to a knife fight” situation when the weapon in question fails to meet the “gun standard”.

Comparing personal projectile weapons, the Knight actually surpassed the Pirate. As discussed above, muskets were highly unreliable, and even Deadliest Warrior’s blunderbuss tests showed that under the wrong conditions, such weapons could not only misfire, but not fire at all. While “primitive”, bows and crossbows were easy to operate and highly reliable. They were far more accurate at longer range then muskets were, and you wouldn’t have to depend on the sheer number of shots to hit a single target. While loading was an issue with the crossbow, a musket was far more cumbersome to operate. You probably would have seen a pirate carrying multiple muskets during a fight because of how time consuming reloading would be. Because of it’s superiority in this area, weapons like the English Longbow had the advantage in combat. It is conceivable that a trained Knight could take out a Pirate at range (especially with armour strong enough to protect from musket fire), easily firing four or five arrows before the musket could be reloaded and fired again. Why wasn’t this taken into account? These are the things Geiger didn’t take into consideration while designing his obviously flawed program.

I could go on and discuss how, much like the Samurai’s weapons, a standard Pirate sword would be ineffective against chain mail and plate armour. I could go on and discuss the tactical advantages of carrying a shield, and I could discuss how Pirates weren’t trained in combat like Knights were, but I think anyone with an internet connection and a five minute Google search could figure that out. I raised the previous points because the “Pirate experts” and Geiger refuse to even acknowledge the most basic form of common sense. Matter of fact, he threw fits and tried to sway his co-host’s opinion by making irrelevant points. No respectable historian would stoop to those lows to prove a point. Not only that, but just like the “Samurai experts” before them, these arrogant and ignorant representatives were given free reign by Geiger to push their fiction on the viewing audience, on top of being given the advantage in choice of weapons. While the “grenado” was a weapon employed by Pirates, it was found in Europe and Asia long before the days of Blackbeard, meaning that anyone could have access to such a simple explosive device. Not only that, but only an idiot would allow this weapon into a serious discussion of the outcome of a fight between these warriors. Covered in plate and chain mail from head to toe, the Knight is fairly protected, so if the Pirate did use this weapon against him, he would most likely do more damage to himself. It is getting to the point where you can predict which side will win in the first five minutes by simply watching which team of “experts” is given this advantage.

In any event, it isn’t just me who is seeing this. Many viewers are outraged, and are expressing that outrage on the Spike TV forum. It has gotten so bad that in a desperate act to salvage any credibility Deadliest Warrior has, they have created a online segment called “The Aftermath”, where the Geiger and Desmoulin try to address concerns the audience has with historical inaccuracies and the blatant mismatching of warriors. I could said on my previous post that putting a Ninja in a fight with a Spartan was a BAD IDEA, and yet they went along with it anyways. Watching the first “Aftermath” segment, I was dumbfounded by what Geiger had said. Aside from adamantly defending his flawed computer program, he pretty much admitted it was a bad idea to pair these two up, and then went out to criticize the viewers who were critical of the previous episode and it’s outcome. Excuse me, but what kind of moron insults his audience? It is Geiger who is living in the world of fantasy. It is obvious to anyone who watched last night’s episode that he not only owns Disney’s Pirates of the Caribbean series on Blu-ray, but goes around on Halloween dress in the best Pirate costume he can find. Each episode is simply a fulfillment of his personal desires and bias, and even Desmoulin’s protests for common sense don’t seem to help keep this show focused…

I don’t think watching Geiger’s “nerd fits” is a great way to spend a Tuesday night. If he wants to push his fiction onto an ignorant audience, he should at least admit his own bias, the flaws of his program and treat those who disagree with his views with even the slightest bit of respect… If not, I hope this show is canceled before it starts making an effort to actually offend people… Pathetic…

Deadliest Warrior Reviewed; More nonsense from people who wouldn’t know better

The still of night is broken by chaos; A once peaceful Japanese kingdom is now facing an invader from parts unknown. The samurai are quickly assembled, called to the defense of their master’s home. These warriors are feared throughout Japan for their prowess with katana, but even with their legendary skills, they are ill-prepared for what they are about to face. The sky is ignited with fire arrows, raining down on the feudal lord’s land, bringing the first wave of destruction. Boats resembling dragons and other hideous beats would bring warriors covers in chain mail and animal hides, terrifying the peasants and even the feudal lord’s front line soldiers. Even the most disciplined fighters would flee, cut down as they ran by spears, arrows and axes, and utter chaos would ensue. The samurai, thought to be fearless, would be startled, even scared as their weapons couldn’t even penetrate the armour of these towering giants. The once peaceful lands would now be painted red with blood… Or what would have been the case if East met West on the field of combat…

I made the mistake of sitting through a full hour of Spike TV’s newest show, Deadliest Warrior, and I have to say I was very disappointed, as well as insulted. Much like previous “Versus” shows, this one fails to take into account historical accuracy and even common sense (the size, strength and reach of the warrior, as well as the range of his weapons). Even with weapons analyzed, the build-up seemed to be all a “show” when watching the “simulation”. I will admit, before watching this show, I was ready to call this battle a toss up when considering the strength of the viking warrior compared to the skill of the samurai warrior. Once I saw that their tests showed the katana nearly useless against chain mail armour, however, the fight was already over in my mind. Even with this knowledge, even knowing how ineffective samurai weapons were against viking armour, which they showed with their own tests, these idiots somehow concoct a computer program which “proves” that the Japanese warrior would be the winner if he met this brute in combat. Where were the real historians? Where were the truly scientific tests to prove their point? It is amazing that this stupidity passes as educational entertainment…

Do these people have any historical education or any sense of reality? Well it seems one of these “experts”, Max Geiger, isn’t an educated scholar or even an “arm chair” historian, but a game designer. Well that isn’t what we want in a show which should be based on historical accuracies, someone who has dedicated their adult life to fulfilling childhood fantasies which belong in Japanese manga rather than a classroom. “Experts” like him probably cite such “relevant” sources like Akira Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai or the Rurouni Kenshin series, rather then doing any serious research. Do a quick Google search if you want, try Wikipedia, and you will find that much of what is said about the samurai is simply fiction. This idea of absolute loyalty is a sham, and while there are notable examples, like Kusunoki Masashige, these warriors would usually choose the side of their immediate superiors, or even forgo that loyalty when loyalty to other lords, like the Emperor, was seen to be better for them. As mythical as the samurai code is, it is more or less a confusing set of rules, wrapped up in a very broad cultural concept (can they really define honour?), created to demand some sort of respect from those not educated enough to realize that this military organization was no different than those found in other parts of the world. At least the vikings were “honest” about their evil deeds…

Neither Geiger, nor the samurai experts brought on the show seemed to even understand what a viking was. For those looking for a quick education, Barbarians – The Vikings is a great starting point. There is a reason these people practically ruled Europe for three hundred years, they were superior to those they met in combat. According to the historical accounts, at the Battle of Stamford Bridge, one unarmoured axe-wielding viking defeated over forty heavily armed and armoured Saxons before being killed. They were also far more intelligent than the oafish brute they had portrayed on the show. Vikings engineered ships which were far superior to those found in Europe at the time, capable of both shallow water and open ocean sailing (also very fast, which helped these raiders attack and plunder towns, then get away before the local militia arrived). Archeologists have also discovered soaps which vikings used to clean and bleach their hair, as well as grooming tools to maintain their appearance (the “stupid smelly viking” is just as fictional as the show’s depiction of the samurai… pathetic). Once again, a simple Google search like the one I performed after watching this historical garbage quickly educated me on who these “noble savages” were…

Aside from the combatants (one which trained extensively with mock fights during peace time, the other which was raised in harsh conditions and molded by conflict since childhood), the comparison between the choice of weapons and the fighting style of both warriors should have convinced even the most Japan-obsessed fans that the samurai wasn’t up to taking on a viking. As one commenter and history major, combatter wrote,

…Samurai were deadly and very skilled. However, their fighting style was based upon range of motion and speed. Their swords and armor were light and fast. Samurai armor was designed to turn away glancing slashes from a katana, it could not stand up to the powerful thrusts and hacks from a Nordic sword or axe. Also, a saber-like sword such as the katana would be ineffectual against the superior armor of a viking- which was designed to turn away all but the most powerful thrusts from a point- slashes from a katana would do nothing against viking mail not to mention their helmets.

As I stated before, even in their own tests it was found that the katana was ineffective against against the viking chain mail, and yet not only did these “experts” refused to take this into account when performing their computer simulation. Not only that, but as many who have commented said, the weapons were not even properly sized up. Vikings had bows, which weren’t displayed, vikings had war hammers, which were also ignored, and samurais were rarely seen, if ever, with kanabos (a fact which was left out of this simulation because of an obvious bias). Take into account that naginatas were pushed to the sidelines when spears proved far more effective in ranged combat, becoming a weapon mostly used by women in defense of the homestead when their samurai husbands were away, and it goes to show that these samurai “experts” are more or less well-trained historical amateurs. How is it that this show was so poorly put together? How can it be that no one could take one of those computers and perform a simple Google search to seek actual information instead of relying on some arrogant Japanese poser and his steroid-abusing friend (I doubt the samurai were that big, especially without the help of performance enhancing drugs) for the facts…

I have to say that this doesn’t surprise me. It was obvious that Geiger and the samurai experts were overly obsessed with Japanese culture, and the fact that they ignored their own findings to produce a conclusion which they wanted, showed how garbage this show is. Arrogance and stupidity doesn’t make you right, and it sure didn’t help the Japanese soldiers during the Guadalcanal campaign in World War II (the only instance where “samurai” were in combat with foreigner fighters). These men, armed with katanas and trained in samurai combat, were outmatched by raw recruits carrying rifles with bayonets in close combat, showing just how vulnerable these “legendary warriors” were. If an ill-equipped and ill-trained American soldier can do it, I don’t see how a viking couldn’t. This idea of racial superiority and their romantic view of Eastern culture doesn’t go far with me, and simply because they want it to be so, doesn’t make it so. Next week’s episode, Spartans versus Ninjas doesn’t even make sense (one being the perfection of a trained warrior and the other is trained to do their best to avoid an actual fight, striking from a distance instead), but this all doesn’t seem to matter to the show’s hosts. This seems more like an exercise is fulfilling a geek’s “wet dream” and bashing Western military history then an actual educated look at the combat effectiveness of each individual warrior…

Simply more garbage on a garbage network; a show designed by beta-males for beta-males… The kind of men who were beaten, tortured and killed when the vikings tore through Europe centuries ago…

Street Fighter IV and Online Gaming; Next-Generation, Same Problems

This isn’t a regular post, not my regular politically charged or socially themed, so if you are looking for the latest information on the latest ACORN scandal, or more Joe Biden gaffe coverage, Michelle Malkin has everything you are looking for. If you still want to read…

I will admit that I was one of the “lucky” ones who had pre-reserved a copy of the Collector’s Edition of Street Fighter IV for the Playstation 3. I have been an avid gamer for years, especially Street Fighter, and the release of this new title was a “must have” for me. One of my fondest childhood memories is waiting in the car outside of the Toys “R” Us in the West End of Ottawa with my mother and brothers as my father ran inside to pick up Super Street Fighter II for the Super Nintendo. I can remember the hours my twin and I spent battling in versus mode, perfecting strategies and practicing moves. I spent many more hours playing the dozens of sequels with friends and family members, even spending a fair bit of my earlier years at the University of Ottawa in the games room playing its Street Fighter games. My love for this series was the reason I had gotten a Sega Dreamcast a few years back, it was the only console with Street Fighter III Third Strike and Capcom vs SNK. I just love Street Fighter, simple as that, and anyone who knows me can testify to that.

I can’t count the hours I have spent over the years practicing combos for Ken Masters, Ryu’s rival and a consistent member of the Street Fighter roster, and I don’t see that changing with the release of this new game. I have already spent a few practicing jump-in combos, standing combos, trying my best to work in his “target combo” (the stand MP,HP from SFIII has returned, now under a “proper” name), but I will admit that my skills aren’t up to par with some of the more persistent fighters online. Already I have been beaten by a few “professionals”, but I have been lucky enough to bump into a few again and school them, most recently this morning with an over aggressive Cammy White player who couldn’t find a way around a player who would block pop-up attacks. I can go on about the kind of fighters you will find, but let’s try addressing two issues in particular which have begun to bother me; Professional fighters and working against online issues.

Kotaku reported the other day that a British boy had set a Guinness World Record for most consecutive wins in the game with 108 victories. While this does sound impressive to the uninformed, it doesn’t mean much to someone who has spent serious time around the series, especially in the arcades. After a day of economics classes, I would blow off steam in the University’s games room on both human and computer opponents. These expert street fighter players do seem intimidating with their combo skills, the way they seem to use even the most awkward characters effectively, but if you paid enough attention, you would see they weren’t as impressive as once thought. Anyone who has played a fighting game knows that certain strategies will not work against computer opponents, although they are extreme effective against humans, and vice versa. Standing over a pool table, holding my cue, I could see that after scaring off other students, these professionals would be put to shame by a computer opponent with relative ease…

It isn’t simply computer opponents though. My success in the arcade was due to not having any real “arcade experience”, that I have brought in an “foreign” strategy, something they hadn’t seen before. Taking my quarter and my pride, I would pick characters they hadn’t seen other players use, characters they thought inferior, and yet I would win, at least for a while. Take Capcom vs SNK 2, one of the more popular titles in the games room. When I first started playing, most other players would use Hoahmaru, Hibiki, Rugal Bernstein, M. Bison and/or Ryu, each character only being used in a particular way, using only certain moves and strategies which were similar to other players. Watching these repetitive mirror matches really sucked the fun out of the game, with each fighter trying to out do his opponent with the same plan of attack, resulting in a victory to whoever could pull off the moves the fastest. My pick of Sagat, Ken, Terry Bogard and/ or Iori Yagami seemed to confuse my opponents, and not having fought these characters or my strategy before, many were taken down with relative ease. My success with the “poking” strategy, as well as combos I had perfected with the home version, worked so well that in the following weeks and months, my opponents would adopt my strategy, switching their roster of characters to match my better ones. Even then, switching one of my characters with another would offset them, confusing them enough for me to win a few fights. While I was laughed at, my use of Balrog against some of the better players in the games room proved effective as the boxer’s reach extended far beyond that of Sagat’s. They laughed until they began getting frustrated and confused…

SFIV online right now is very much the same thing, seeing as the majority of fighters will pick Sagat or Akuma, abusing a single plan of attack with relative success. While I was first taken back by this, spending sometime in the game’s training mode, facing off against a computer Akuma had revealed to me an “Akilies Heel” to the “Raging Demon’s” attacks (a hint for those being bogged down by his multi-hitting Shakunetsu Hadoken, remember “rock, paper, scissors” of the Hadoken, Shoryuken and Tatsumaki Senpukyaku). Sagat is another matter, but strategies against him vary depending on whether your opponent is aggressive or defensive. You will see the occasional fighter picking an “odd ball” character, someone like the Sumo Wrestler Edmund Honda, but the majority of the online ranking battles are done with only a handful of the game’s twenty-five characters. I find this rather disgusting, but then again, as new strategies are discovered, some people will choose different characters to adapt to the changing online competition, which allows for more variety in who you fight.

Another problem I am seeing is the simple abuse of the game being online. Having played games over the internet for years, I know a lot of the tricks myself, having seen many of my opponents use them against me. I call recall my days playing Counter-Strike online with my friends, fighting opponents who would “teleport” around the map, striking in ways we couldn’t defend against. I could swear to God that I had unloaded an entire clip on an opponent who was running in place, only to find that he vanished as I mysteriously died. You see the same thing in SFIV since the Playstation Network (PSN) doesn’t weed out those with bad connections. Over the PSN, you will find many of these fighters using their slow speed and your fast one to their advantage. The idea is that when your connection sends signals to them, telling their system what your character is doing, their system sends information back at a much slower rate, giving them an unfair advantage. Your opponent jumps, and the game freezes, and by the time it unfreezes, you have just been dealt serious damage, unable to even block the undetectable assault. It isn’t even that hard to do yourself, especially if you are sharing an internet connection with a computer using a peer-to-peer (P2P) program, giving you that “winning edge” through abusing lag. I have had the displeasure of fighting a few of these fighters already, and I will say it really sucks the fun out of the game. You feel more like a training dummy, and I didn’t drop serious money on a game to go through that. Just like in the days of Counter-Strike, when some of these cheaters would use slower modems to maintain this advantage, it is almost as if they know exactly what they are doing, not caring that it isn’t a fair fight. If I wanted to feel that used, I would have been an Obama campaign worker…

It isn’t just that though, some players will cheat you out of a hard earned win by quitting out of a fight right before you can claim victory. This morning I was fighting a Gouken player in a best of five, and while he was a bit frustrating in the first round, by the time the second round was over, I had nailed down his strategy and begun to easily turn the tables on him. Nearing the end of the third round, with already two in the bag, onto my third win and victory, I see that he stops fighting. At fifteen percent health I assumed he was taking the “samurai” way out, letting me finish him since he had realized I was too much. Well I was in for a surprise when I found out he was taking the cowards way out by quitting the match before my win. This has happened a few times already, one fighter quit after being decimated in the first round of a best of three, while another had run off when he saw that even using Akuma wasn’t enough to fight me. It is understandable if it is a drop in connection, or if there is understandable circumstances (I had bailed when fighting two of the “lag masters” mentioned above this morning), but this was done to preserve their battle ranking. Pathetic, and it is downright disgusting when you yourself aren’t playing this game. When you see enough of these players, it gets to the point when one’s ranking is meaningless. Who knows how many of those high ranking players crawled their way up the ladder by using such dishonourable means. Downright pathetic…

*****

Aside from these issues, I could discuss the fact that the game doesn’t allow you the ability to have a rematch. Almost as bad as Mortal Kombat vs DC Universe where some fighters would run around, get their quick win and run off. I have been beaten by players who I didn’t feel were my equal, but without the ability for a rematch in ranked battle, it becomes one frustration after another. It would have been nice to have that chance to take another swing, even at the cost of ranking, just to make sure it wasn’t simply dumb luck that did you in. Many a time already I have been bested by players who simply lucked out, having a moment of lag which has given them the time to defend against my attack, damage which has been stolen from me by an unstable connection. I was beaten by a Gen player simply because of a “lag burst” which had turned my hard practiced Shoryureppa into a simple Shoryuken. Not having landed that Super Combo cost me momentum, turning the tide of the fight due to a missed attack, resulting in me losing the match. Dumb luck is all it was…

And to those players reading this, trying to figure out why they do lose those “nail-biters”, why sometimes things never go right when they spend hours practicing only to keep losing, that a lot of it has to do with luck. It is true that no matter how good you are, there is always someone better, but sometimes it is just simple chance. Anyone who remembers Golden Eye 007 for the Nintendo 64, and Perfect Dark which followed shortly after, sometimes the match was decided by where you spawned, what weapons you were closest too, what areas could be properly defended, etc This was even more important if you were playing “Licensed to Kill” mode, where one shot is it, especially since an assault rifle is far more effective then a semi-automatic pistol. Sure there is a fair bit of skill involved, but in my long experience in gaming, even with all the practice, even with your fingers moving around the control pad faster than your opponent, sometimes a lucky shot, a missed attack, running out of ammo at a crucial moment, a game glitch, or another unforeseen circumstance leads you to defeat. Luck does play a significant part in whether you win or lose, and those who deny it are either inexperienced or simply lying to themselves. I could go on and on about the errors in some of these games, but I am sure we all have our stories…

I know it can be a hassle, and I know that sometimes the game is more frustrating than fun, but remember that you aren’t the only one going through it… And after all, it is only a game right?