Category Archives: PlayStation

E3 2013 Conference Review

Because you can’t have an E3 conference review without Nintendo, I’m putting today’s Nintendo Direct up against Sony and Microsoft’s conferences. I don’t see it as a disadvantage since a load of games shorn (mostly) of awkward executive banter can only be a good thing.

Without further ado, in the order in which they were shown…

Microsoft

The Xbox One had the most to prove after the disastrous reveal and preemptive clarification of the awful DRM policies, and while this showing won’t make that shadow go away, Microsoft did allay some fears. Not all, but some. Presentationally, Microsoft needs someone with charisma, who you could imagine successfully selling a used car; J Allard and Peter Moore are sorely missed when you’re forced to watch the automatons up there now.

But apart from that, Microsoft’s comfortably topped the other two for games, which is the important thing at these shows. New games from Swery and the Panzer Dragoon chap bring credibility; Insomniac is a nice coup, albeit not up there with Bungie in my book; Quantum Break, which looks like a serious Ghost Trick, intrigues; and, of course, there’s a new Halo, which gets bonus points for referencing Journey; Battlefield 4 looks like matching its superb predecessor; Metal Gear Solid V looked amazing, albeit multiplatform. Those are just the ones that tickled me; there were plenty more.

It’s just sad that Microsoft had to end on a sour note by saddling the hardware with a £429 price tag. That’s £4 more than I balked at paying for a PS3 back in 2007 – and I won’t be paying it for an Xbox One either. So once it has the DRM patched out, a substantially smaller second model released, and gets a couple of price drops, I’m right on board.

B-

Sony

Sony’s a weird one, as it was the conference that left me with the most positive impression, but one that doesn’t last when you really look at what was shown. Its success was down to the messaging, the flawless capitalisation on Microsoft’s missteps. Does the fact that it’s maintained the status quo by not setting out to control what we can do with our games really deserve to be the factor that ‘wins’ E3? I think it shows how low our expectations have become if it does.

(I must say, however, that I haven’t seen a crowd reaction in a press conference like the one to the announcement of no used game DRM. I hope Microsoft was watching.)

Final Fantasy XV and Kingdom Hearts III are nice, but Square Enix has forfeited the presumption of quality. We need a couple of releases of PS1/PS2 Squaresoft calibre before I’ll be buying its games regardless of reviews. And as I said, Bungie is a coup and Destiny looks great.

But where was Naughty Dog? Where were all those other great first-party studios? Where was The Last Guardian? Where was anything for the Vita? See what I mean about some notable omissions? I felt like I saw more games at the PS4 reveal back in February, and I pretty much did see as many Vita games.

A solid showing, then, but mainly on the PR front. Thankfully for Sony, that message was good enough to secure my day one preorder.

C+

Nintendo

In shunning the E3 dog and pony show – an approach that has served the company well at the Tokyo Game Show for years now – Nintendo may have set out to lower expections, and I can see why. Mario Kart, Mario, Pokémon, Smash Bros, Donkey Kong Country, The Wind Waker. Notice a pattern? As much as I love Nintendo’s characters, the line-up is depressingly conservative, lacking even the creativity of the GameCube days, where Nintendo published interesting takes on new or forgotten franchises rather than wearing out ideas within a couple of years of their debut.

Nintendo is seemingly a shadow of its former self. Wii U is a sales disaster, third-party support is non-existent, and unlike equivocal successes like the N64 where Nintendo could be counted on to provide classics to make the purchase worthwhile, that’s not happening here. I can see why Nintendo didn’t want to shine the spotlight on this line-up, because it’s worryingly thin.

I’m excited about Bayonetta 2, though, so that’s something.

D

Retrospective: Silent Hill

Much of my gaming time over the last couple of months has been spent compensating for this generation’s dearth of creativity by delving deep into the back catalogue, saying goodbye to hardware backwards compatibility by enjoying some of my overlooked classics on the PS1 and PS2. One of these was the original Silent Hill, perhaps not afforded the credit it deserves in the wake of its admittedly better, more widely ported sequels, and certainly in the shadows of Resident Evil in the PS1’s survival horror canon, but one worthy of revisiting.

Silent Hill

As you’ll see above, it’s also responsible for possibly my favourite screenshot ever. (Courtesy of the Silent Hill Wiki.)

Despite its formidable reputation, I didn’t find Silent Hill scary. Its reputation for creeping psychological horror seemed overstated, with nothing that had me cursing it beyond a couple of cheap jump scares – an unexplained window breaking or sound of unseen objects clattering to the floor. Perhaps it’s too difficult nowadays to look beyond the rough edges and see a vicious creature torn from a tormented psyche when they look more like melted cake ornaments. Low-poly ones at that.

Shorn of what is arguably its raison d’être, though, Silent Hill is still worthy of your time. Firstly, a well-documented bug in the PS3’s backwards compatibility and some mixing issues aside, it’s one of the earliest games to have impressed me with its sound design. Akira Yamaoka’s dissonant soundtrack complements the Lynchian weirdness wonderfully and, along with the unsettling industrial sound effects, is by far the aspect of the game that has aged best.

When Silent Hill was re-imagined as Shattered Memories, it dropped combat entirely. This led me to believe that the combat, so often the weak point in games that aspire to more than action, would be terrible, but it’s really not. Ammo is scare enough to be valuable without discouraging you from pulling the trigger when necessary, and relying on melee combat is actually a realistic proposition. Simply by not having combat be a total drag, it outdoes most survival horror games, which is intended to be higher praise than it might sound like.

Not a life-changing classic, then, but another example of a clever, original franchise that has devolved into shooting and jump scares in this generation. People banging on about the depressing frequency with which this has happened may be getting tiresome, but you know how publishers can make us desist? Stop doing it.

PlayStation 4 vs Xbox One

Although I’ve resolutely been a multi-console owner since at least the 32-bit days, firmly believing that it’s impossible to get the full picture without having access to every game on the market, this is the first time I can remember a generation having such a clear frontrunner for where the best gaming experiences will be found.

In fact, I’ve tended towards the Xbox consoles for the last two generations, opting for the better online experience and typically stronger versions of third-party titles, keeping the Nintendo and Sony boxes for the more interesting first-party games.

PS4 and Xbox One logos

Like many gamers, though, I’ve found myself disillusioned by Nintendo and Microsoft in the home console field. The Wii was a disappointment and the Wii U a non-starter, and the Xbox 360 has been on autopilot since Kinect launched, Halo 4 being a solitary bright spot in period that hasn’t been much better than the non-existent years 4-7 of the original Xbox. Microsoft apparently doesn’t know how to close out a console.

Perhaps Sony is actually suicidal, the only one who hasn’t realised that traditional consoles are dead and therefore heading for catastrophic losses, while hardcore gamers are stuck in their ways and unable to see the conventional gaming model collapsing around them.

Part of me thinks the latter is true and that the AAA model is unsustainable, but that’s another story.

It’s bizarre that Nintendo and Microsoft seem to be surrendering the hardcore market so meekly. Admittedly, the rewards are colossal if you manage to be the one who cracks the code and turns a gaming console into something as essential as a DVD player or DVR, but it’s gamers who supported this industry through thick and thin, and the market was certainly healthier a decade ago when they were being catered to with original, challenging games and there were more than half a dozen publishers.

But let’s not forget that it’s early days. Neither console has many games revealed and Microsoft’s promises of software support are aggressive, as they’ll need to be against Sony’s fleet of world class studios. Sony clearly has the edge in raw power – and that coupled with the aforementioned developers is a formidable mix – but that hasn’t ever guaranteed success in the console market. The industry’s history is littered with superior hardware beaten by its weaker but better supported, better marketed competition. Then again, the last time Sony was so clearly in the driving seat going into a new generation, so on the ball about giving gamers what they want, saw domination like we haven’t seen before or since.

All we know for sure is that this E3 is going to be spectacular.

All consoles need suspend/resume

One of the announcements at the PS4 unveiling that I’ve seen get little media coverage is that it will follow in the footsteps of the DS, PSP, 3DS and Vita by supporting suspend/resume across all games. I suspect the reason for the muted response is simply that people don’t realise what a useful feature it is, and I think it’ll be hard to go back once we’ve got used to it.

PS4 suspend/resume

Strangely, this is a feature that became dear to me immediately before Sony’s announcement, when the reveal of Mario & Luigi: Dream Team led me to dig out the first game on my beloved Game Boy Micro. Years of snapping shut whatever iteration of the DS I’m currently playing has made partaking of an RPG on a handheld without it feel less practical, more difficult to fit into snatched moments of gameplay. As excellent as they are, the ports of the 16-bit Final Fantasy games with their requirement of seeking out save points in towns and dungeons just aren’t designed with modern gaming habits in mind.

Even with my increased willingness to play a long-form game when sat down in front of the TV, finding a suitable place to stop playing feels like it takes annoying liberties with my time, making it impossible to drop out at a moment’s notice without losing progress. Other media don’t do it. Most DVD players remember the position you left off if you switch off during the movie, and TV habits are now built around pausing live TV and resuming recordings where you last stopped them. And now games won’t either.

I’ve seen it written elsewhere that the PS4’s respect for its users’ limited gaming time is its best feature, and I’m inclined to agree. It’s an area where the PS3, with its 20-minute firmware updates, mandatory installations and 500MB patches that lock you out while they download, failed spectacularly, and it’s great to see Sony learning from its mistakes. It’s going one better, not even making downloading the whole game a requirement before you start playing. It never made sense to me that you couldn’t start playing the first level until you’d downloaded the final one, which you might not need for 20+ hours, and now a system’s been designed around fixing that oversight.

While the games were fairly uninspiring at this point – I can’t be the only one who laughed at how they followed Killzone 4, inFamous 3 and a racing game with a speech about “creative risks” – full credit to Sony for the design of the system. The PlayStation 4 looks friendly both to develop for and to play on, with genuinely innovative features that make me, not entirely liking the move away from dedicated gaming systems, want to jump in.

Your move, Microsoft. How many ads are you going to cram onto the dashboard this time?

Thoughts before tomorrow’s announcement

So in all likelihood we’ll be looking at the first of the next-gen consoles by tomorrow. Sorry, Nintendo, but it’s true.

I’d forgotten how exciting all this can get. There’s news to talk about, specs to argue over, and fanboys getting far too emotionally invested. I expect the usual sieve-like memories as gamers gush over the graphical prowess shown off in CGI trailers and imagine that developers will use this newfound hardware power to make things run at 60 frames per second, only to be disappointed when neither happens. Again.

Sony

Now I’m assuming that we’ll get some glimpse of the PlayStation 4 tomorrow. If we don’t, a lot of the media is going to be looking very silly, and the initiative is with Microsoft. I don’t expect that, though. Just like glimpses of The Last Guardian, new hardware announcements have to happen some time, and this generation has gone on quite long enough.

Although I’ve happily played for both sides this generation, it’s clear from my collection – 105 Xbox 360 games to 30 on the PS3 – that the 360 has been my console of choice. Unless the PS3 version of a game has been demonstrably better (Portal 2) or once, as in the case of Dark Souls, out a desire to keep both instalments in a series on the same platform, I’ve plumped for the 360 editions of multiplatform games. Controller preferences, a better online experience and generally superior 360 ports made that an easier approach.

Now that we’re on the verge of a new generation, though, I find myself much more excited about the prospect of the PS4 than whatever Microsoft announces in the next few months.

In the last couple of years I feel like we’ve had a glimpse at what a console landscape dominated by Microsoft would bring. Kinect integration everywhere; dashboard updates whose main function is seemingly to put more adverts into a service you’re already paying for; an increasingly dull first-party line-up that consists of four or five franchises on a rotation you can set your watch by; more and more functionality hidden behind a service that, though good, is increasingly hard to justify for £40/year; restrictions on developers that want to offer free DLC. Word on the street is that, as a rule, Microsoft will only allow DLC to be free when it’s offered as such on rival platforms, and I think that is the best possible evidence of the importance of competition.

At this point in the previous console cycle, Sony was insufferable. The astonishing arrogance that came out of the domination of the PS2 era and culminated in that price tag and a console that wasn’t a complete failure, but was certainly a disappointment based on previous sales performance. That coupled with two consecutive tonkings in the handheld space give me the feeling that Sony has learnt some humility.

The talk is that the PS4 is built on familiar architecture, not the powerful but esoteric nightmare that was the PS3. It sounds like it’s built to be straightforward to develop for, rather than as a vanity project for Sony’s hardware labs. That hardware allowed for spectacular first-party productions but meant multiformat development still suffers next to other versions of the same games. This time, if the rumours are correct, platform parity is much more likely, and we can still count on the talent of Sony’s affiliates to push boundaries more than I suspect we will from Microsoft’s, who have been gutted over the years while Sony’s have expanded.

Take these things on board, and improve the user experience of the PS4 – no important functionality sloppily implemented at a later date (trophies) or not at all (cross-game chat), no mandatory installations, and no downloads that lock you out of doing anything while they unpack – and I feel like Sony has a good chance of rising back to the top this generation. It was quite rightly chastised last gen, and in a climate where conventional gaming has more competition than ever for people’s entertainment time, a resurgent Sony, focused on producing a fantastic, powerful games console above all else, is a very good thing.

The dark side of blocking used games

I don’t tend to buy games used unless it’s unavoidable, which I suppose makes me fairly indifferent to the fearmongering that comes along frequently regarding the eventual prohibition of playing used games on consoles. Now that this could actually happen, I’d like to draw attention to my caveat in the previous sentence: unless it’s unavoidable.

The last used game I purchased was the original Darksiders, which was a couple of years old at the time and not available new anywhere, as far as I could see. I wanted to play the game because of the good things I was hearing about its sequel, so I got a copy on eBay for around £5. I’d have happily paid £10, £15 for a new one, but that wasn’t an option.

Availability of back catalogue games is a serious issue (see also: Pirates or Preservationists?), even beyond the way that the generational march and decline in backwards compatibility cuts us off from running yesterday’s games on today’s hardware. It doesn’t happen with film, where just about any major movie from the dawn of cinema up to the current Oscar contenders is or shortly will be available to play on a shiny disc, and the same goes for music and books. I can find The Beatles, Beethoven and Jane Austen readily, even separated from them by decades or even centuries.

The next-gen consoles will likely offer all retail releases as downloadables for those who are so inclined, treating the symptom of availability, if not curing the disease that my PS4 likely still won’t play my PS3 games. Hopefully, by the time we’re looking at the next next generation, it’ll be possible to log on to each system’s respective online service and download a minor gem from 2013 that I might have missed the first time.

There’s one problem, though…

Download prices

I don’t trust the platform holders to loosen the reins on digital pricing in the way that Valve has done with Steam. They’re too beholden to keeping retail partners happy to let publishers sell a game for 75% off mere months after release. Stories already abound of digital-only games being stuck to rigid price tiers or limited in what free content they can offer, as the platform holders – Microsoft in particular, it must be said – are out to monetise everything.

Or maybe I’m wrong, and cutting the used game market out will allow for more aggressive pricing of digital games. If books, music and movies going digital has taught us anything, after all, it’s that publishers are keen to pass the benefits on to consumers, right?

The money men won’t see the value in selling games for deep discounts, for not sticking to the American model where the RRP/MSRP is not so much a suggestion as a commandment. It’s not like here where new games are routinely £10 or more under the recommended price on day one. Who actually pays £49.99 for a new Xbox 360 game?

A few exceptions due to licensing aside, every Xbox Live Arcade and PSN game released for their respective platforms is still available. They’re usually still the same price as they were on day one, which kind of proves my point, but at least the issue of long-term availability of games could be close to being solved. That said, my experiences with always-online games haven’t been good, and I can’t help but think back to the odd enforced disconnections, like when I’ve moved home and had to wait to be hooked up, when I’d suddenly find my £50-a-time ways to pass the time being unavailable when I most need them.

Hopefully this turns out to be nonsense, because a console that can’t work offline from Microsoft makes the choice of which next-gen console to buy first much easier.