A picture is worth 1,000 lols. Click on the screenshot for a larger version
If you can’t see/read the screenshot, it basically says that Encyclopedia Dramatica hosts spyware, and Google Chrome does not trust it as a website. It offers a “back to safety” button, so you can get away from the scary, dangerous site. ^_^
~Sera
Steam is bad? Did I miss something?
So after getting a little addicted to playing Global Agenda and writing a few pieces on the subject for Massively, I started to notice this really odd wave of comments that actually confused me — people who refused to play GA because it was Steam exclusive. They didn’t want to install Steam or deal with it, because they felt it was getting in the way of their gaming experience.
Some of the comments they had about it were absolutely venomous, such as how it hogged system resources, performed bad installs, updated games slowly, and was generally unwieldy. When I was reading their comments, I felt like I had gone back in time to the year 2004, when Steam first came into mainstream use with Half-Life 2, and the first “Steam Controversy” was born.
In fact, just as I’m writing this article, I went over and checked the Wikipedia entry on Steam. Holy shit, talk about being biased. If Wikipedia is to be believed, Steam is a buggy piece of crap that ruins video games, steals money from developers, and demands the sacrifice of first born children to the “My Games” tab before a game can be run.
Yet, even as I’m typing, Steam is running comfortably in the background, doing whatever it is that it does in the background. When I want to run a game, I open Steam, double click on the game, and it runs. Beyond that, Steam offers me some amazing, amazing, amazing deals on games that I’d like to play. Deals that go above and beyond their 10% discount on a game when you pre-order it. From the Steam Holiday Sale alone, I was able to buy nice gifts for all of my friends, add 10 more games to my arsenal, and not spend more than 100 bucks for all of it. The amount of money that I’ve saved through using Steam as my distribution service is just amazing.
So, let me try to wrap my head around some of these reasons for why you shouldn’t use steam.
1. It hogs system resources
So I pulled up the ctrl+alt+delete service menu to see just how much memory Steam takes up when it’s running in the background. Just so you all know that I’m not making crap up, I put the screenshot off to the side here. Click it if you need it blown up, as I know it’s pretty tiny. But, even with the visual evidence, let me break it down for you.
Steam, in this photo, is taking up 8,680k of my memory. Compare that against Skype, which is taking up 12,236k, iTunes, which is taking up 32,976k, Thunderbird, which is taking a hefty 46,308k, and Google Chrome, the “lightweight browser” that’s taking up a whopping 53,328k over two processes. For one instance of Google Chrome, I could run Steam six times. So don’t tell me that Steam is hogging your precious resources, unless you’re running on a really, really small amount of RAM. I’m running on 2 GB, personally, and Steam does not impact how my games run.
Shit, the only reason I was running iTunes in this screenshot was because I was playing Burnout: Paradise. And even while running iTunes, Steam, Google Chrome, and Thunderbird, Burnout: Paradise still ran at 60 FPS with everything turned on high. Don’t tell me Steam ruins how your game runs.
2. Steam ruins installs
I have 36 games on Steam. Not one has misinstalled in the entire 4 year history of me using the program. Either I’m incredibly lucky, or Steam isn’t a rabid misinstaller.
Oh, and if you’re talking about how Steam automatically updates games when the developer pushes out a patch, then that’s not Steam, that’s the developer. If it updates and breaks your game, I’m sorry, but it really doesn’t happen as often as you want to say it does. Once again, over my entire history of using Steam (and having 3 different computers, each with a different setup) I’ve never had a game break from an update on Steam. Ever.
3. You need to be online to play Steam games
If you’re on dial-up, then this is a legitimate gripe. It does suck that you have to be online to play a Steam game, as Steam forces game authentication every time you run the game. However, for the rest of you silly geese who are on broadband, what the fuck are you complaining about? Sure, this might suck for those of you who have bandwidth caps in other countries, but I don’t see Steam pulling down that much bandwidth when I’m playing. It’s very light on the bandwidth if you’re not playing an online game.
If you’re in the US, you most likely can’t gripe because we really don’t have bandwidth caps around here. I’m constantly connected to the internet thanks to the wonderful advent of cable internet. I’m always online. If I wasn’t online, I’d pretty much go insane.
Lastly, if you’re bitching about adding Steam and you’re adding it to play an online game, like Global Agenda, then go fuck yourself. ”I have to be online to use Steam” is not a valid excuse when the game you’re playing IS ONLINE ONLY ANYWAYS.
4. You can’t sell Steam games back to the retailer or to someone else
No, and you can’t sell PC games to GameStop either. If you don’t want to use Steam because you want to sell your games, then just don’t use Steam. But for online only games (like Global Agenda) then you really can’t resell the game anyway because it’s tied to your account. Once again, go fuck yourself. *smiles and thumbs up*
5. Steam is a trojan horse
Thanks alot, Direct2Drive, for making this really shitty comparison. Sorry that your download service doesn’t offer a community panel, IM and voice chat services, automatic updates that don’t suck, and competitive deals.
Steam is not a trojan horse. If anything, steam (and integrating games into Steamworks) lets developers utilize Steam’s anti-cheat platform, their auto-update functionality, matchmaking and lobbies functions, and the very cool Steam Cloud which lets you keep your game saves and profiles online and take them wherever you go. As long as you’re logged into Steam, you get your games and your saves. Very cool.
So, if you’re still into hating Steam, then you’re still pretty much stuck in 2004. If you still really don’t want to use the program, then my advice is to just not use it and shut up about it. Go off to Direct2Drive or go shop at GameStop — you still have those options.
As for me, I’ll be enjoying the Steam Cloud and my legion of affordable games.
~Sera
So, in an effort to remove some tension and stay away from the horribly serious topics for a while, I thought it would be a good time to go over some of the games that have crossed my path lately. I’ve actually been in a bunch of different games from all different genres, so I might as well take some time and tell you about some of them. You might even want to pick a few up for further inspection!
Burnout: Paradise — When Paradise was released, I really gave it a hard time. It took such a different path from the other Burnout games, and it removed some of my favorite features, like impact time and revenge rules. It also offered a really large open world, which was great until I found out that when you fail a race, you have to drive back across Paradise City to try it again. That sucks.
However, after picking it up for my PC for the awesome price of 7.50 during the Steam Holiday Sale, I must say that I’m really enjoying it more than a 7.50 game. The open world of Paradise City is actually a lot of fun, especially when you know it well enough to make your own paths and use shortcuts to your advantage. Some of the jumps and stunts that I’ve done have been simply breathtaking, plus it’s always a good time when you get behind the wheel to completely ruin your opponents.
Shattered Horizon — Another game that came into my possession during the Steam Holiday Sale, Shattered Horizon is Futuremark’s first foray into actually making games instead of making stupidly complex benchmark programs. And, of course, when a game comes from Futuremark, you know it’s going to take hardware to the extreme.
Shattered Horizon only runs in DirectX10 mode, so it’s good for me that I have a system that can handle it. The game is essentially Counter-Strike with a major twist: You’re in space, stuck in in the aftermath of a major lunar calamity. A lunar mining corporation placed a charge on an unstable piece of the moon, shattering it and sending shards of rock all over Earth’s atmosphere. Earth can’t launch manned shuttles up to save the stranded miners and lunar police due to the debris, but they did send up weapons and supplies just before the debris shrouded the planet. Thank God they sent guns instead of food, right? Otherwise this game would be crazy boring.
The game lets you fight in zero-g with a single gun that acts as multiple guns, like every good lunar walker should have. You can stand on ceilings and use your jetpack to fly around with ease, all to confuse and scare your enemy. Even cooler, you can turn off your suit’s electronics to avoid detection from other players, but you lose your targeting systems, you move at the speed of molasses, and you have no sound simulation. All you can hear is the sound of your own breath and heartbeat while you float in space… and that’s a scary, scary feeling.
I have mixed feelings on this game. It’s done well, but it doesn’t exactly keep inviting you back for more. It’s fun to pick up and play a round or two, but then you just end up walking away feeling… meh. Although, with inventive design like this, I’d like to see Futuremark’s next entry.
Bayonetta: I’ll keep this very brief. Gameplay = One of the best action titles I’ve ever played. Ever. It moves like a dream. A seamless dream. Storyline = I wish she’d shut up and stop making me cringe. Less stripper talk and slutty poses, more shooting. K thx.
Global Agenda: It’s Team Fortress 2, only in the future and with customizable classes. Score. I like being able to pick different weapons to customize my loadout for each mission, and I like being able to tweak the skills of my character via a talent tree to make me good at the stuff I like to do, and not so good at the stuff I’m not a fan of.
Darksiders: I honestly expected God of War, and what I got was an open world brawler game. That really opened up the game for me, and so far things are quite enjoyable in the little bit I’ve gotten to play. I’m not a fan of the one button weapon combos, but I do like that I can switch weapons as easily as jamming another button on my controller.
And that’s pretty much it. So readers, what have you been wrapping your hands around recently?
Via Wikipedia: “Within feminist theory, patriarchy refers to the structure of modern cultural and political systems, which are ruled by men. Such systems are said to be detrimental to the rights of women. However, it has been noted that patriarchal systems of government do not benefit all men of all classes.”
If there was ever a term in feminism that I really disliked, it would be the term “patriarchy.” Then again, when your initial beliefs were founded on fighting for the rights of women, it makes sense to use such a term. However, in our day and age, the term is withering and dying as feminism changes and evolves.
Now, as I’ve said before on my blog, I’m no good at being a feminist. I find too many of the practices to be unfairly constricting to everyone involved, and I believe that by highlighting differences in groups that we only reinforce those existing group lines. (However, that’s simply my opinion, and all readers, as per my usual stance, can disagree freely with that.) However, at its heart, I agree with what it seeks to do — advocate equal rights for women and and others. I simply disagree with how it goes about it.
Take, for example, this great post over at The Border House by guest contributor Latoya Peterson. Before you even click on that link, let me tell you what it’s about. It’s all about getting equal rights for all in the workplace, using the current sadistic “eternal crunch time” situation going on at Rockstar Games San Diego. It’s about taking away the corporate pressure to work insane amounts of time in a week while you cut benefits from workers to save money and make games faster. It’s bad business practice as you’re paying out too much money for overtime hours while you destroy your employee’s work ethic. You’re essentially losing money and killing morale just to get a game out faster — dumb idea.
So, really, who would disagree with that article? I certainly don’t, and I’m sure anyone in the gaming industry would love to have easier hours, good benefits, and a work environment where they enjoy what they do and can do it a good pace to improve product quality. Easier hours lets people go home and spend time with their families, and it’s great for everyone. This article is a series of great ideas, and I can’t say enough nice things about it…
…except the title. ”The Patriarchy Hurts Gamer Guys Too: The Rockstar Labor Controversy, Game Developer Wives and Work/Life Balance.”
What the hell is going on with that title? Who the hell is “The Patriarchy?” Where are they so I can smack the shit out of them? Are they some evil set of bloodsucking men who seek to keep women forever out of the gaming industry by setting a series of impossible goals in their workplaces (because, obviously, men are well suited to dealing with that sort of crap while women are brittle flowers who will wither at the simplest touch. *gags self after saying that for penance, even if I was being sarcastic*)
It’s that sort of vocabulary that just makes me want to avoid all of feminism like the plague, even when I agree with the basic idea. Of course, there’s that other part of the article where Miss Peterson asserts that women are unfairly targeted by these sorts of work hours because they have families to go home to.
While workers of all genders are subject to crunch time, it tends to have a disproportionate impact on women in the industry, who are expected (in a personal sense and a cultural sense) to balance their jobs with family commitments. It is in this way the industry privileges male employees and young employees – those without commitments or a wife (in the institutional sense of the word) at home find it a lot harder to commit to increasingly inflexible schedules. The women Consalvo interviews noted that male counterparts also felt pressures, but more women were likely to leave their positions to spend more time with family.
That part also makes me want to uppercut something. The assertion there is that young employees and male employees benefit from insane hours because they don’t have other commitments. While it’s true that young employees may not have that set of home commitments, they have dating instead. And it’s really hard to get a family together if you’re stuck at work and not finding people to date.
As for the “male employees benefit from insane hours” part, bullshit. If I was a father, I’d like to be home with my child instead of stuck at work, and I’d like to be home to help my wife so she’s not overloaded as well. As the latter parts of the article state, these unfair work conditions impact everyone unfairly. Doesn’t matter who you are, what color your skin is, or what gender you ascribe to — everyone gets hurt by these types of work environments.
And, as for women being “targeted unfairly by these practices,” double bullshit. Saying things like that makes it sound like a woman can’t handle it when she totally can. Those parts of the article seem to read as if they assume that women are more likely to be in a relationship then men, and women have more work to do when they get home than men. If that’s the case people, perhaps you should talk to your spouse and try to share responsibilities a bit more evenly. Plus, as I said above, everyone is targeted unfairly by these practices. Even the article says that at the end.
So, my question is thus: Why can’t we say that from the beginning? Why must we dress up the whole article’s beginning to demonize men and show how they’re unfairly targeting women when the ending makes it clear that no one (including men) benefits from these types of practices? Why must we diversify like this instead of unify? Why can’t we come to grips with the fact that it’s people being stupid to other people? I doubt that anyone in any of these positions explicitly sits behind their desk, twirling their mustache (as all evil people have mustaches, even women, true story) while sneering, “I’ll do away with those pesky women, and their little dogs too!”
So… in short… fuck the term Patriarchy. Call it what it really is — poor leadership.
~Sera
So there seems to be this interesting wave going through the blogging community regarding the state of gaming journalism. It seems to be the usual “gaming journalists aren’t real journalists because they have opinions” tomfoolery that seems to rise and fall every once in a while. It’s not the first time that this subject has come up, and it certainly won’t be the last.
But sitting down to think about it got me on an interesting train of thought — one where I actually began to think about gaming journalism against topics like “real journalism,” aka, news, and journalism that focuses explicitly on media forms. Not “the media” mind you… journalism that centers on the entertainment industry or perhaps books.
Now, mind you, I’m in a very lucky position. I have training as a “real journalist” thanks to my college writing track and I work for a MMO news website where we take pride in our integrity and, for the most part, post our news articles (not our op-ed columns) without bias. We say what happens, we try to make it interesting to read, and that’s it.
Yet, even with our stances, you wouldn’t believe how many times we’re accused of being opinionated in our news posts, or how many times we’re yelled at by a reader for “manipulating” them with yellow journalism. And that leads me to the problem that separates our news from other media outlets — fanboyism.
Make no mistake — we’re a culture founded on being competitive. Pac-Man and Donkey Kong to World of Warcraft and beyond, we love trying to one up one another. We’ve always taken our competitions to more meta-grounds, such as our irrational need to proclaim one game as “vastly superior” to another. (See: World of Warcraft vs. Aion vs. Warhammer vs. Whatever Floats Your Boat. The odd need to proclaim a game as shit.) I personally thinks that this taints our view of our media in two ways: from the staff side and from the reader side.
Let me, first of all, back up Brian “PsychoChild” Green’s assessment of my sister site — Joystiq. When they wrote up their notice that Near Death Studios was going under, their post was a little caustic for a rote news article. (Especially when you compare it to Massively’s coverage, and we’re sister sites.) Obviously Randy Nelson was using Joystiq’s standard style of being slight cheeky and acidic in every post, but it seems to resonate harshly in this article. These are the times when fanboyism is very clear and very unwelcome in a journalistic style. Now, I can’t fault Randy… what he wrote is simply the site’s style and he stuck to it. It works for them and it gains them readers, but it does certainly taint the idea of rote journalism for the rest of us.
However, the side that people aren’t noting or talking about is the stupid shit I have to listen to every day when we at Massively try to do our jobs professionally and to a more neutral standard. When we talk about all of the games that surround us, we get accused of being biased simply because we talked about X game. If we talk about a smaller game, obviously we’re being paid off by a developer to talk about it, such as when we cover Eskil Steenberg’s Love. Other times, if we cover a story that negatively affects a company, we’re being the big evil media site who’s out to smash the little guy.
Honestly, when I and the rest of the staff pick up a story, we do it because we believe it to be newsworthy and of interest to our target audience. The two key tenants of our target audience. Hell, we even make sure that we’re trying to talk about all games in the industry, even the ones that people don’t exactly love to death. Why? Because that’s what being fair means — we give page space to everyone. Is it always equal page space? No, because not all games generate news at an equal rate. Yet, because our audience reacts with a very competitive edge and hates to see anyone offend their game of choice, we are accused of “assumed bias.”
In short, what I’m saying is that the nature of our very culture taints how we read our news. Because of how opinionated we get as a culture, when others talk rationally, we see that as opinionated out of a defensive mechanism. It’s really unfortunate.
As to comparing our journalism to physical news coverage or entertainment news, it’s extremely hard. Physical news coverage doesn’t have the same level of opinion contained within it. You can’t say, “Man, I loved it when they covered that presidential election. That presidential election was the best sequel ever.” People don’t have that same type of reaction to the news. News happens, you talk about it to others, and that’s that. You can’t undo what actually happened. (You can spin it, however… and that’s what so many “real media” outlets are being accused of nowadays — heavy spin.)
As to entertainment news, once again, we don’t have that same type of rivalry with movie companies. You usually don’t say, “Shit! Guillermo Del Toro is way more badass than Peter Jackson!” or “Lord of the Rings really kicked Harry Potters ass. Harry Potter shouldn’t even be in the fantasy genre. Who the fuck subscribes to that shit anymore?” What happens is that people go out, view the movie, form an opinion if they liked it or not, and go on their way. Case closed. They don’t compare and contrast (even the critics) nearly as much as we do in the gaming industry. We, in the industry, feel that every freakin’ game needs to be compared to some other game in that genre and how it’s either X much better or X much worse. And I’m not saying we do it as critics… players do this every single day without even thinking about it. We’re all freakin’ critics around here. Competitive critics who have to be right.
But even the entertainment news has problems… how many times do we call them “Rag Magazines” when they pry into the personal lives of actors and actresses? How much is that media industry stained with useless gossip that most people brush off as petty?
So let me finish out with this clear cut statement — stop fucking comparing game journalism to other forms of journalism, as if you’re putting other forms of journalism on a pedestal. They all have their problems and it all comes down to people, as a group, calling every form of media “opinionated and biased.” Someone says the gaming media is tainted with opinion and bias. Someone else says mainstream media is full of spin and mistruths. And someone else calls entertainment media a bunch of petty star chasers or unreliable critics.
Guess what everyone? All this tells us is that we’re all opinionated and we’re all biased. Whoops.
~Sera
