On March 25, 2008, Microsoft decided to deal with the problem of Gamerscore cheating through a number of punishments ranging from having your Gamerscore reset to zero and being labeled a cheater to outright banning from the service. The moves made by Microsoft were quite well received; nearly no one felt any sympathy for the cheaters. However, many felt that more could be done.

AceAttorney is one of a number of individuals who have taken it upon themselves to build a site called Xbox Cheater Watch, a site that documents and lists confirmed and suspected cheaters. “A lawyer by day, and avid gamer by night,” AceAttorney describes himself as “more of a PC game enthusiast before the original Xbox was launched,” but has since become a huge fan of the platform. In an interview, I asked him about his background and such trivialities as his favorite games; turns out, like many other gamers, he doesn’t favor any one particular genre but is currently enjoying Rainbow Six: Vegas 2 and TiQal. What, then, led him to create Xbox Cheater Watch?

“The innovative Gamerscore system has really done a lot for gaming, in providing persistent rewards and incentives for playing any game on the Xbox 360. Unfortunately, cheaters have done a disservice to the gaming Community by diluting the value of the Gamerscore system. So when I read over at MajorNelson.com that cheaters were going to be dealt with in a drastic way, it really piqued my interest. I was glad in seeing a shakedown of these cheaters being implemented by Microsoft, and I wanted to know exactly who was being punished. After realizing that no one really had a list of the cheaters, I figured, ‘Why not compile one myself?’”

Indeed, why not? In the comments section of each update to the site, praises are being sung about the man and his efforts to bring about some form of vigilante justice. Response has been remarkable.

“The site offers unique content, which is nearly entirely user-driven – and we’ve had a lot of content submitted from readers within the last few days since we’ve launched. The site has also made the top 100 Blogs of the Day over at Wordpress.com almost every day. The interest in what we’re doing is incredibly high right now.”

But what about the opposition? Surely, a site of such high visibility and controversial elements must be generating a bit of criticism from the cheaters, if no one else.

“As far as backlash,” AceAttorney responds, “there have been a handful of immature reactions to the site. These criticisms (and I use that term lightly) which tend to be simple rants against the crackdown of illicit gaming behavior, are far outnumbered by positive responses and reactions from the Community. I’ve been reading what people are saying about the site in various forums, and more gamers seem to be in favor of seeing who Microsoft has actually taken action against.”
Gamers are, by nature, social creatures. After all, the primary purpose of a game is to create a space for competitive interaction among peers. It should really come as no surprise that such a large number of gamers have found unity in their opinion on cheating – an activity that is as socially unacceptable as an activity can possibly get. Ostracism is inherent; no one wants to play with a cheater. AceAttorney, however, is an extreme case. Although not alone in his endeavor, it does take a certain kind of person to put himself out there in such a way. What is it about cheating that pushed him this far?

In his own words, “What troubles me about cheating is that it makes what many gamers work so hard for worthless. In other words, when a gamer places time, energy, and dedication to accomplishing certain goals, attaining these goals come with an certain level of bragging rights, and even a sense of pride. When a cheater bypasses the efforts that are required by the Achievements, he essentially robs the honest gamer of these things. The resulting devaluing of the entire system by the cheating is what bothers me most.”

There’s no doubt that gamers’ feelings about Gamerscore can run deep. Pride, honor, value; a range of passionate emotions towards something that is, essentially, a meaningless collection of arbitrary accomplishments. They are, simply, a list of tasks you don’t even have to do! Even within the context of the game being played, they are meaningless. But is this gaming, itself? On some level, when stripped to its core and deconstructed, all gaming is essentially meaningless. Looking beyond the emotions involved in gaming reveals a set of repetitive tasks that have no context in any other situation. This applies to all games, not just video games. The Super Bowl is just as empty as a high school football game when removed from its context. In the end, it’s about having fun; something that is taken away from the concept of Gamerscore when cheating is applied. However, the idea remains that Gamerscore represents a pointless pursuit and that there is a number of gamers who ignore it more than anything. In such cases, Gamerscore cheating seems to be a victimless crime. Who then, if anyone, is really being hurt by the cheating?

As AceAttorney sees it, “I definitely appreciate everyone’s sentiments in the matter. Sure, some people couldn’t care less about their Gamerscore, but from my discussions with gamers and from the research I’ve done, most people find some value in that little pop-up, audio recognition, and Gamerscore point increase for accomplishing a certain goal in a game. When most people really think about the value of the Gamerscore system, and the threat that cheating poses to that value, I think they realize that everyone is a victim of the type of cheating we’re talking about. So I would probably have to disagree that there is a large dichotomy of thought with regards to the value of the Gamerscore system.”

If Gamerscore is truly devalued by cheating, than the hope is that the punitive actions Microsoft has taken against cheaters is enough to dissuade them from cheating in the future. Unfortunately, however, it seems to have done little.

According to a self-confessed cheater who identified himself as SilentSpartan in an interview via email, “A few months ago I had stopped going for Gamerscore completely. I just began playing for fun and no achievements. But slowly but surely realized why I had been going for achievements in the first place. Its like an addiction. It gives you a point to actually play the game. Now most people are probably thinking ‘Ha, you said play the game when your just going to cheat for the achievements anyway.’ Even when cheating I still play the game and have fun doing it. So to answer the question as of now, Yes I am going to continue cheating.”

This answer doesn’t surprise AceAttorney, however, who explains that, “It’s a sad statistic that most criminals end up committing crime again even after being caught and punished. It’s the ‘repeat offender’ phenomena, if you will. I can’t say that I’m surprised that cheaters who were busted by Microsoft don’t immediately become honest gamers. After all, they still have the tools, knowhow, and are likely still involved the same network of cheaters. But what this entire shakedown accomplishes is that honest gamers are deterred from becoming even first-time offenders. Microsoft laid it down pretty hard, but I’m pretty sure it’s going to help keep the number of cheaters down. If it were up to me, I don’t think I would change anything in how Microsoft has dealt with the cheaters – it makes a lot of sense on every level.”

Criminals? Really? I just have to wonder if this is a fair comparison when considering what’s going on. Is cheating your Gamerscore actually serious enough to consider it a crime? According to this post on MajorNelson.com cheating is, absolutely, a violation of the Xbox LIVE! Terms of Use. It seems like some pretty harsh language, but Microsoft is well within their rights to do whatever they want with those who break their rules; something to think about the next time you use The Konami Code on Contra.

There is, however, a negative side to AceAttorney’s actions, and it has everything to do with harsh language.

Player harassment has long been documented in Xbox LIVE!. In fact, I feel that the true blight of Xbox LIVE! is the overwhelming number of rude, crude, racist, and homophobic remarks, and general stupidity that abounds on the service. It is a huge discredit to the service to allow such behavior to go on, yet the generally agreed upon method is to simply ignore it! The argument that Gamerscore cheating in any way devalues the gaming experience is completely flaccid when compared to something as annoyingly aggravating as the discourse that goes on in voice chat in a typical game. There’s been more said in a typical day about the language that is heard in voice chat than I can ever recall being said about the Gamerscore cheating “problem”. As such, do sites like Xbox Cheater Watch encourage player dissonance?

A confirmed cheater who identified himself as ColdRaccoon in an email interview explains, “After my score had been reset I got many messages saying ‘HAHAHAH UR BACK TO ZERO CHEATER!!!’ Many harassing messages and others concerned at what happened to gamer score.”

SilentSpartan echoes this same reaction from players, “Fact of the matter is people get harassed online all the time whether it be Gamerscore related or hearing someone is going to ‘rape your mother after the game’ before a match starts. The Gamerscore thing never comes into discussion much. Most of the time the only people who really get angry about the fact that I cheat are people that actually go for achievements and do not cheat. But also some people are intrigued and want more information on how they themselves can. Unfortunately I would say more of the time its ‘You gay you stupid f**king cheater!’ then the ‘How do you gamesave?’”

As for AceAttorney’s opinion on the harassment, “There’s no place on Xbox Live for the harassment of gamers, no matter what. While I can absolutely understand a person’s distaste for cheating, abusing cheaters by harassing them is not a good way of expressing that frustration. Down in San Diego, there’s a Wild Animal Park, where people can take tram tours through animal reserves, and view “wild” animals from a distance. That’s sort of what I’m going for with the site. Keep your hands and feet in the tram, and please, don’t interact with the animals.”

As you can see, the general consensus on whether sites like Xbox Cheater Watch are encouraging player harassment would seem to be “no more than usual”. Somehow, that doesn’t seem any better and Microsoft is chiefly responsible. The problem, as I see it, is simple greed. Citing the notion that people can change and that everyone deserves “a second chance”, Microsoft has elected not to outright ban these players. Why? Because banned players don’t pay $50 a year to join a service they can’t use. The majority of them are still some of Microsoft’s best customers – often buying a game at launch, even if only to be the first to unlock the achievements and offer their services to the community at large. Achievement unlockers for hire, many offer to unlock the achievements in a particular game for another player for a small fee. Even going so far as to advertise within their profile on Xbox LIVE! with statements like, “I can do Halo, I can do Gears of War“, etc. They’re hardly discrete about it, but you have to know what to look for; hence the creation of Xbox Cheater Watch.

As for the cheaters’ feelings on Xbox Cheater Watch, SilentSpartan responds, “I feel sad more than anything. I can see how people think that going for Gamerscore or cheating is pointless…..but making a website to point out the cheaters…thats really sad in my opinion. I guess the admin’s of these websites just have nothing better to do. The only real problem I have with the site xboxcheaterwatch, if you read in the comments of my name people accuse me of also being a liar. I have not lied to anyone on xbox about anything. It ticks me off that when being called a ‘cheater’ now other traits are coming with it that shouldn’t be.”

At least ColdRaccoon seems to want to repent, “I think that site is just there to make fun of the cheaters and gives the chance for the lower Gamerscore fools to point and laugh and send rude messages. On that site it said I got caught cheating for rapalas fishing when like 10 other people have a 1000 in it. I guess I was targeted for something. The cheating is over and its time to kick back and enjoy gaming.”

Note, however, his intense pride for Gamerscore. Even after having his score reset, he still believes his accomplishments are greater than those who refused to cheat simply because his score was higher. Is this why cheaters cheat? Is it simply a matter of bragging rights?

SilentSpartan states that, “When I first gamesaved the thought going through my head was not ‘Man, can’t wait to cheat on some games.’ I was really just thinking ‘Cool, a shortcut for achievements.’”

ColdRaccoon’s reason for cheating is similar, “The reason I started cheating was the whole achievements that asked for too much. Let’s say I wanted 1000 in the game and the last achievement is playing the game for 100 hours, why wouldn’t you cheat when you can get that achievement in 2 mins. It was also the whole first place thing. I really wanted to become first place in Canada for Gamerscore and I did.”

As for AceAttorney’s feelings on the matter, “People cheat to raise their Gamerscore for the same reason people increase their Gamerscores without cheating. They appreciate what a high Gamerscore looks like on their Gamercard, and all of the other benefits that come with that. I read a post in a forum by one particular cheater the other day – he said that he just didn’t want to spend all the time required to earn Achievements, and that he didn’t want to have to play though a bad game just to earn the Achievements associated with that game. I don’t claim to know every motive behind cheating, but it’s starting to look like it’s very closely associated with old-fashioned greed.”

But is it worth it? Harassment, distrust, the risk of banishment, even losing the legitimate points you’ve unlocked without cheating; was any of it really worth this much trouble?

ColdRaccoon believes so. “I guess ya, I had a lot of fun doing different games I wouldn’t even play to get achievements. It let me play a variety of different games. I was hoping to gain more Gamerscore.”

As of this writing, ColdRaccoon’s Gamerscore is 290, presumably gained legitimately. SilentSpartan remains “uncaught” with a Gamerscore of 132,601.

Special thanks to bs angel over at HawtyMcBloggy.com for directing me to Xbox Cheater Watch.

Truth be told, I can’t really play the game for more than an hour at a time and usually only once every couple of days.  I do a few quests until I get my fix for this type of game and move on.  Sometimes, you’re just in the mood for a little hack ‘n slash dungeon crawling and this game is certainly very rewarding in that area.  In fact, it’s too rewarding.

First of all, the time between logging in and engaging in battle is incredibly short — that’s a good thing.  You don’t want to be wandering around, looking for something to do in a game like this — that leads to boredom, and boredom is poison to a massively multi-player online game.  Second, nearly every creature you slay drops “loot”, and it’s usually something you want:  weapons, armor, gold, potions, etc.  Getting something for nothing — a principal the game was founded on — is pretty hard to argue with, so, most people don’t.  We just keep playing our free game that gives us a free, quick fix of something to do that makes us feel good.  How could that possibly be bad?

When training an animal, positive reinforcement can be a very effective method.  By rewarding the animal immediately following the preferred behavior, you increase the likelihood that the animal will repeat that behavior.  This leads to a lifetime of reward-based behavior where the animal will constantly, eagerly repeat the preferred behavior in order to get that reward.  Of course, we — humans — would like to believe that our brains are far too sophisticated to ever be conditioned in such a way.  The truth is, however, nearly every one of us is just as susceptible.

On June 25, 2007, the American Psychiatric Association released an official statement saying that it “does not consider ‘video game addiction’ to be a mental disorder,” but then went on to say that it didn’t completely rule out the possibility that confirmation of such a diagnosis could come by the year 2012.  So, while the APA is still out to lunch on whether or not video game addiction is a real disorder, video game developers have been banking on it.

Numerous deaths have been attributed to games like EverQuest and World of Warcraft.  Players find themselves hopelessly trapped in a vicious cycle where the satisfaction of leveling up and gaining new items becomes less rewarding as they come to expect it more and more.  Because of this — and especially when they don’t immediately get what they crave — the players feel compelled to continue playing in order to increase their chances of receiving a reward and regaining that satisfaction they once felt.  Notice that I said, “especially when they don’t get it”.  If absence makes the heart grow fonder, than depriving a junkie of his fix can cause him to climb through the roof in search of just one more hit.  They simply cannot resist the urge to continue on until they get what they are looking for — and in some cases, they never do.  Found slumped over in their chair, the game still flashing on the screen; some players simply take it too far and pay a terrible price for a lesson they’ll never learn.

While I don’t condemn it, I certainly don’t condone it, either.  Obviously, a measure of self-control needs to be in place within the player to ensure such tragedies don’t occur.  A parent can easily intervene when he or she senses their child is crossing a line, but what of the adult that should know better?  At some point, shouldn’t the developer be held accountable?  After all, a tremendous amount of work goes into researching and coming up with ways to keep the game compelling for veteran players; surely, the developer understands a concept as simple as positive reinforcement.  Surely, they understand what it takes to make a game addictive in the first place.  Doesn’t that mean they know what’s going on?  Doesn’t that make it their responsibility?  And if so, can there be better restraints in place?  How does a developer ensure that a player isn’t playing to death without ruining the overall experience of playing the game for those who know when it’s time to take a break, give it a rest, go outside and investigate that giant fireball in the sky that we all call “The Sun”?

Although not immediately visible, World of Warcraft features a clock in the interface that shows the current time so that players can get a sense of how long they’ve been playing, but it’s still up to the player to know when to stop and eat or simply take a break.  Also, the game contains a feature that allows parents to set a limit on their child’s playtime — although this feature is somewhat moot in light of an adult playing the game.  Therefore, while a time-lock that ejects the player from the game for a certain period of time may seem excessive, it could save a few lives.  In such a case, how wise would it be for the developer to forcefully stop players from playing their game?  The developer would be facing the very real possibility that such a feature would upset the players and risk losing them to a competitor.  In light of this, shouldn’t the player — in this case, the paying customer — be the one who has the final say over how much or how little they can play the game they paid for?  Would a forced lock-out even be legal?  Furthermore, depending on how secure the lock is, it may be easily hacked out of the game by a particularly industrious player — completely negating the idea of a lock in the first place.  Is there a compromise that can be reached?  It doesn’t seem likely than answer will be easy to come by.

While I don’t pretend to be an expert on the subject, I can certainly say that I’ve gathered a fair share of empirical evidence to support some kind of personal belief that video game addiction is somewhat real.  And even if it isn’t real at all, I can at least say that I understand the mechanism of what would be driving it.  After the third day of my trial subscription to World of Warcraft, I realized the dramatic effect it could have on a person; I realized the dramatic effect it was having on me.

Simply following along with the quests as I found them, eventually I came across two non-player characters who taught me “skinning” and “leather working”.  Suddenly, I was off hunting animals, skinning them, assembling armor, and selling it at auction.  For a week or so, this is what I did.  I continued on, eventually achieving Level 16 as a human rogue while assembling armor and selling it at auction.  It felt really good to see someone buying my armor and watching the gold come pouring in.  I actually looked forward to running around in circles, spending countless hours doing, essentially, nothing.   And then one day, after about 2 weeks of playing 4-6 hours a day, I just stopped.

While wondering what I would do with the gold once I had it, I realized that, more than likely, I’d buy more supplies to make more armor to sell for more gold.  But to what end?  What was the purpose of repeating this madness to infinity?  I had no answer.  I’d found myself at an impasse.  Combined with the major events that were happening in my life — I’m moving very soon and have found myself swept up in the overwhelming task of an ambitious, real-life project — I was simply no longer compelled to play anymore.  I had other things to do.  Whatever appeal there was in what I was doing had faded.  After that, it was simply a matter of closing the game and moving on.

Certainly, the most powerful aspect of World of Warcraft, if anything, is the social aspect of playing with friends.  Yet, despite meeting several interesting people, I just couldn’t see to continue playing when I had so many other games to experience.  It’s been a week since I’ve logged in and I really haven’t felt the need nor desire to return.  Maybe whatever thoughts I’d had about this game being addictive in the first place were never actually there?

Since then, I’ve been dabbling in games like Dungeon Runners, although it hasn’t been the same.  The game overtly relies on positive reinforcement to get players hooked into a lifestyle of grinding and looting without offering much else.  Also, the only way for NCSoft to make money off it is to hope that players are willing to pay real money for access to exclusive servers and in-game items since, again, there’s no subscription required.  As mentioned earlier, the humor is often over the top and has no problem referencing things in the culture as well as other games, but unless you’ve got a hankering for some Diablo-esque looting and leveling up, it’s probably not worth much to you, even for free.  On the other hand, I actually do enjoy playing it, even if it is just for a quick fix of Diablo-esque looting and leveling up.  I’m not addicted, at all.  I swear.

In his most recent post, “How Piracy can Break an Industry - the Brazilian Case”, Tex Pine, a Brazilian blogger and independent game producer working at Interama Games, goes into detail about the problems associated with producing games in a country where hardly anyone buys legitimate copies of games. Pine starts with a brief history of gaming in Brazil and how Nintendo came to identify the South American country, specifically, as a lost cause in terms of battling piracy.

The reason Nintendo makes such dire claims, he states, is due to the impunity of a government that simply does not enforce the law. “We also have good laws regarding homicide, but just 1% of murderers are solved in Brazil. One percent! If Justice doesn’t reach murderers,” he says, “it won’t reach pirates.”

Remaining optimistic, he closes with the hope that by the end of 2020, the rising economic and education rates will vastly improve the status of the gaming industry in Brazil. In the interim, however, Brazilian developers have shifted their priorities and have focused on local markets through free and subscription-based online games. According to Pine in comments on his blog, “Some sell game developing services like advergames production for the local advertising market (Brazilian advertising is considered one of the best in the world!). Others are focused on mobile gaming, trying to export as well as selling here in the main carriers.”

As for how Interama is handling the situation, Pine replies that, “Interama and I are focused on exporting our own titles, not only to North America. Maybe we could do some outsource as well, but the idea now is to create original IP. Just a couple of other developers are doing the same though - one of them is Insolita Studios. After all, it’s very hard not having an internal market.”

As the industry grows in South America, and certainly abroad, it is easy to see how digital distribution can be extremely important to helping the industry thrive. It may even be worthwhile for North American publishers to look at what South American developers are offering and the multiple ways they are working to beat the odds in such a hostile market. As we’ve seen with “Crysis” and the PC version of “Unreal Tournament 3″, piracy is now beginning to threaten even larger developers. With DICE’s next effort, “Battlefield Heroes” turning towards a subscription-based model and offering the game for free, perhaps it’s not too late for the PC gaming industry? Perhaps it’s not too late for Brazil, either.

The premise of the game revolves around Eugene and his friends, who have just invented a word machine for their school’s science fair. Unfortunately, someone has broken the machine and made off with the parts, so it’s up to Eugene and his friends to get it back.

The parts have been scattered out across 37 different stages and it’s up to the player to gather them together. Each stage is set out in a grid formation and the player must build “word bridges” out of a random set of letter tiles that they will walk across. It’s not as easy as it sounds, especially when you have to go left or up. Sometimes you run into tight spaces and it can get tough to come up with words that are long enough to reach your destination as you spread out across the level. Other obstacles crop up in the form of puddles and rocks that you can’t place tiles on. Then, you have the bullies and dogs to contend with. Dogs will grab the parts and move them around the stage while bullies will smash a letter tile — usually the first or last tile — of the words you build, essentially limiting how far you can travel. It gets really tough but you have ways of contending with these obstacles. Bombs can clear paths out of the debris scattered throughout a stage and will also send dogs and bullies back to their starting points. Other powerups include a bunch of balloons which certain characters can use to float to different areas of the stage. These powerups are limited, of course, so you’ll have to use them wisely. Over the course of the game you’ll have to deal with 5 bosses that will really put your vocabulary and spelling to the test, so be ready to face a tough challenge!

The game features colorful, pleasant graphics that kids can identify with but presents enough challenging gameplay that adults can enjoy it too. The story is presented like a comic book, featuring the characters you’ll meet and engage with over the course of the game. The presentation is very well done. I especially enjoyed the fun, catchy music. Jazzy riffs and upbeat tempos help keep the game enjoyable even during those moments of frustration when you just can’t build a word out of the given letter tiles. The game can be educational, too, as it features a built-in dictionary that explains the meaning of words as they are spelled out on the board. Keep in mind, it doesn’t cheat — it won’t tell you how to spell a word, but it can be big help when you aren’t sure if the word you’re trying to spell is a real word or not. This is very helpful for those moments when you don’t seem to have enough letters and find yourself in a real pinch.

Lex Venture requires a PC running Windows 2000, XP, or Vista and at least an 800MHz CPU and 256MBs of RAM. It sells for $19.95. You can purchase the game through the free trial version which you can download through this link. The trial lasts for an hour, after which you’ll have to purchase to continue. I highly recommend checking it out!

If you’re still not sure and you’d rather not go through the download, watch this trailer:

So, instead of working on an article, I’ve decided to post a link to an awesome Flash game called “Shift”.

I used to be really down on Flash games. They were great for a little diversion and only rarely dared to be more than a simple clone of old arcade games, but as they continue to evolve, it’s easy to see how Flash is a great platform for indie developers to show off their chops and get noticed. Just take a look at games like “N”, “Alien Hominid”, and “Fl0w” — all games that have gotten the console treatment since becoming Internet phenomenons. Forget XNA… look to the developers who submit their games to places like ArmorGames.com and NewGrounds.com for the future of independent development on the PC. These games cost next to nothing to produce which really frees up the developer to work on whatever crazy idea he or she can come up with. Take “Shift” for example — a game that, literally, turns the idea of platforming on its head.

“Shift” follows the “run, jump, and collect things” gameplay mechanic that most platform games do, but goes a step further by adding the ability to turn the environment upside down. Hit the shift key and suddenly the ceiling is the floor and that tall platform you couldn’t reach is now at the bottom of a deep pit. Jump in, hit shift again and now you’re standing high atop the platform — easily reaching the key you need to advance to the next level.

The humor is directly derivative of “Portal” but it has its moments and the game is so short, you don’t even mind. How short? It shouldn’t take an average player more than ten minutes to reach the end. (My personal best: 331 seconds)

Agree? Disagree? Your homework for this week is to try “Shift” and let me know what you think.

Games for Windows and Games for Windows - LIVE are, at best, mismanaged systems. At worst, they represent a unanimous vote of “no confidence” in the Windows and Vista operating systems as a viable gaming platform from the very company that made them. While Microsoft continues to promise improvements on the horizon, thus far, it has been nothing but a lackluster set of features that have been available to PC gamers for well over a decade. Online multi-player — which really came into its own through PC games like “Quake” — was a complicated process at first. Like the first steps of a toddler, it gained support in small bursts. Early on, gaming over TCP/IP — the protocol by which computers communicate through the Internet — required a gamer to either know the IP address of a game server in advance or a third-party application such as GameSpy that would search for a list of available servers and launch the game for you. Even then, not all games supported TCP/IP, limiting them to a local-area network via ethernet — or worse, a direct connection through serial ports, requiring a null-modem cable. As online multi-player caught on, eventually gamers began to see server browsers built into their games. “Half-Life”, for example, completely negated the need of a third-party application by having this feature built-in. Another Games for Windows - LIVE feature that comes late to the party is the addition of online leader boards, which “Unreal Tournament” really brought to light as a way to determine who was “the best of the best” at “Unreal Tournament”. By keeping track of kills, deaths, and more, it gave rise to a huge community that took online gaming to serious heights. These features and more — voice chat, for example — are all relatively old hat to PC gamers. The question, then, is, what do we really need Games for Windows - LIVE for in the first place? Well, not all games are created equal….

It seems foolish that a game would come out for the PC and not support any or all of the features gamers take for granted these days, but not every developer has the resources to make that possible. Especially with independent developers, it might simply be a question of removing a feature rather than ship one that’s only partially functional. Even then, there’s no single, agreed upon standard that unites these games and gives gamers a consistent level of quality when switching from one game to another — something that Xbox Live has been able to do quite sufficiently. “Burnout Paradise”, for example, almost completely abstracts the concept of online multi-player by making your friends a mere menu selection away. Want to invite your buddy into your game for a quick race around town? Hit a button, select their name from a list, and that’s it. Assuming he or she accepts the invitation, moments later, you’re both in the same game, racing, chatting, etcetera. Of course, this has as much to do with how “Burnout Paradise” handles the Live network as it does the Live network itself, but it remains a consistent part of Live across all games that support it. Games for Windows - LIVE seeks to make this same experience as robust and easy-to-use for Windows XP and Vista gamers as it has been for their console counterparts, but the adoption rate has been utterly miserable. Currently, the only games that even support the LIVE service are “Shadowrun”, “Halo 2″, “Viva Piñata”, “Gears of War”, “Juiced 2: Hot Import Nights”, “Kane & Lynch: Dead Men”, “Universe at War: Earth Assault”, and — two games that are as yet unreleased — “The Club” and “Hour of Victory”. Enthusiasm for Games for Windows - LIVE remains exceedingly low. Meanwhile, Valve has been breaking new ground with Steam and finding ways of improving an already great system.

Steam began life as a content delivery and distribution network — a way of distributing patches and ensuring client software was up-to-date so that gamers had a consistent set of rules, maps, and features. PC games often require patch updates to fix bugs or add features — and in many cases, to patch the new bugs introduced by the new features. As a way to streamline this process, “Half-Life” developer, Valve, developed an application that would download and install the patch updates for gamers automatically — although it was not quite yet as robust as what Steam, the application, would eventually become. Being that online multi-player was greatly important to Valve and that there was a growing concern over unscrupulous gamers who were using hacked versions of the game to cheat, these patch updates gradually increased in frequency to combat the problem. Along with the occasional bug-fixing and performance improving patch updates were the addition of modifications like “Counter-Strike”, which also require occasional patch updates and remain extremely popular. Because of the need for increased functionality, Steam eventually outgrew its original purpose and has since become a way of selling and distributing games as well as becoming a social-networking application for a large group of PC gamers. It offers a clean interface that remains consistent across games launched through it and many other important features, such as: leader boards, voice chat, buddy lists, and events management. You can see who’s online, invite them to a game, and have fun. In almost every way, it is better than Games for Windows - LIVE. Naturally, game developers would want to take advantage of something as robust as what Steam and the Steam Community offer and Valve has decided to give it to them — for free.

Enter Steamworks: a set of publishing and development tools that give developers a way of easily incorporating Steam’s features into their games while giving publishers a way of selling and distributing their games online. It offers real-time sales tracking, an encryption system, auto-updating, regional control, multi-player matchmaking, voice chat, social networking, and even a way to include an “achievement” system which can add new life to a game by giving gamers a set of challenges and obstacles to overcome on top of what is already offered in-game — a very popular feature of Xbox Live and Games for Windows - LIVE. The best part is that these tools will be available to developers whether or not they elect to publish and distribute their games through the Steam network, thus ensuring that games will work seamlessly with the Steam application. It works with Windows 2000, XP, and Vista — although, currently, there are no plans to make it available to the Mac or Linux platforms.

While this is great news for PC gamers, there is no way this can be good news for Microsoft, who has failed to show any real devotion to the PC in regards to the Games for Windows - LIVE service. It continues to struggle along and still doesn’t include the extremely popular Live Arcade while Steam is available now and already supports a large number of games. However, it is worth remembering that Steam did not always enjoy its current level of gamer acclaim. It was harshly criticized when it first launched and even received “Computer Gaming World” magazine’s “Coaster of the Year” award in 2002. It still garners a large amount of hatred for forcing gamers to update their games and authenticate online — a process that can be painfully slow when the servers are busy — even if the gamer only wants to play a single-player game, but it has shown to be a valuable part of the PC gaming experience. As can been seen, Games for Windows - LIVE has a long way to go towards convincing PC gamers that it is worth anything, but given the same chance Steam had, the possibilities are endless. Even so, with the potential of Steamworks, it may already be too late.

In “Thule Trail” you’ll have to brave nasty weather, car problems, and crazy drifters as you travel over 2000 miles to the Atlantis Music Festival. Manage food, fuel, and entertainment wisely or you’ll end up stranded in the middle of nowhere — or worse, held at the mercy of your own bored, road-weary friends with nothing more than a pellet gun to defend yourself with. Enter mountain biking and snowboarding competitions to earn some extra cash, pick up some hitch-hikers, and even get a chance to see the world’s largest pickle!

The whole thing plays off as a modern-day version of “The Oregon Trail” and even uses the same retro art style of the classic computer game. It’s a free, Flash-based game. At the very least, it was a neat way to kill some time, but I thought it was a lot of fun.

“Mass Effect”, rated “M” for Mature by the Entertainment Software Ratings Board, is not a game for kids. Released in North America on November 20, 2007 for the Xbox 360, this single-player, action-oriented role-playing game is set in the year 2183, some time after humans have begun establishing extra-terrestrial colonies. The player’s role in the game is to explore the vastness of space in relation to helping solve mysteries and resolve a conflict that has arisen between humans and certain alien races. Along the way, you meet a series of characters that will help and/or hinder you. You will also be presented with a number of opportunities to engage in sexual intercourse with some of these characters; however, it will require a certain amount of effort first — the player must actively build a relationship with these characters over the course of the game. In fact, you might even completely miss these opportunities altogether as they are hardly the focus of the game. Some of the characters are alien, some are human. The sex scenes are presented as a series of quick cuts of body-profiles in various positions. They last for a few moments — barely more than a minute. Nothing overtly gratuitous or pornographic; the sort of scene you might see in a PG-13 rated movie or on prime-time television. Of course, this is what you would learn simply by playing the game. To have an opinion on the game without actually playing it, all you need do is host a show on Fox News.

In the Fox News show, “Live Desk with Martha MacCallum”, MacCallum introduces “Mass Effect” as being marketed to kids and teenagers and featuring full digital nudity. She then states that, when asked for comment, Microsoft’s reply was that there are various parental controls in place to keep children away from the content of the game. MacCallum then introduces Cooper Lawrence, a self-help author, to weigh in with her expert opinion on the game. She backs up MacCallum’s claims and then launches into a diatribe about sexism in video games and how women are rarely treated as more than objects of desire where the object of the game is for men to sleep with as many women as they can. Following that, Geoff Keighly, from Spike TV, counters these statements — pointing them out as false and that the sexual content of the game is brief and hardly anything like what is being described. He also points out that the main character of the game can be male or female, although this doesn’t impress Lawrence too much, as she begins citing statistics about the ages sexes of video game players. The scene breaks down for a moment and then MacCallum ushers them away to talk to another panel of experts who only manage to parrot what was being said and adding more ignorant, derogatory remarks about the content of the game — even going so far as to refer to the game as “Luke Skywalker meets Debbie Does Dallas”. The most notable moment of the entire broadcast was when Geoff Keighly asked Cooper Lawrence if she’d actually played the game. Lawrence responded, “No.” She had never even played the game.

Sometime after the broadcast, Electronic Arts, parent company of BioWare, the studio that created “Mass Effect”, requested that Fox issue a correction, retracting their statements about the game. In a letter addressed to Teri VanHorn, producer of “Live Desk with Martha MacCallum”, Jeff Brown, EA’s Vice President of Communications, highlights the serious errors made by Fox News and outlines a well-argued case against what had been presented in the segment, which he describes as “a new level of recklessness”. He compares the game to shows run on other Fox media outlets and other shows such as “Family Guy” and “The OC”. Finally, Brown ends the letter with the statement, “This isn’t a legal threat; it’s an appeal to your sense of fairness. We’re asking FNC to correct the record on Mass Effect.”

Describing the “Live Desk” segment as “reckless” is probably the most appropriate adjective there is in regards to what had been said. Publishing falsehoods and raising concern where it isn’t appropriate is more than libelous; it’s destructive to an often maligned industry which has come under attack and constant pressure from various groups in the past despite their best efforts to issue standards and conventions to help parents control the flow of certain types of content to their children. The ESRB, for example, was started with this very idea in mind — to help parents purchase age-appropriate games for their kids. The fact that the ESRB has been supported by a number of government officials and upheld as a standard to follow is completely ignored by an outlet such as Fox. In the “Live Desk” segment, MacCallum claims to use the ESRB ratings herself, yet the expert panel seems to feel that this isn’t enough. Very often — and very troubling for the industry — is that what these experts and groups crave most is government-imposed regulation of the video game industry. Nevermind the idea of keeping kids from buying violent video games, in many cases, these groups would rather see violent video games banned outright. As 2008 is an election year in the United States, it seems very likely that this is going to continue to be a hot issue and that we are likely to see more segments like this appearing on Fox News. However, there is a glimmer of hope.

It didn’t take long for gamers to react to the “Live Desk” segment. After barely giving Geoff Keighly a chance to explain and then completely ignoring Jeff Brown, Fox News and Cooper Lawrence both came under heavy attack by enraged gamers, who took it upon themselves to go to places like Amazon.com and give Lawrence’s book, “The Cult of Perfection”, extremely negative reviews, returning the favor she showed “Mass Effect” by not bothering to review the material before critiquing it. As a result of the controversy that erupted over the segment and the outcry it received from the gaming community, Lawrence admitted her mistakes in an interview with The New York Times. Recognizing that she’d been wrong about the game after watching someone play it for two and a half hours, she realized that the game was not pornographic. Fox News, however, has yet to admit any wrongdoing in the “Live Desk” segment.

Following the story’s evolution — the many twists and turns it took as it ran its course — it’s hard to come away from this without feeling bitter about the state of public opinion on the video game industry and the role large media corporations seem to play in forming that opinion. In many cases — not just this one, and not just Fox News — we see the story, the opinion, and the results formed before it even fully plays out. But does this mean that ethical journalism is truly dead? Perhaps not, but Fox News hardly comes across as a bastion of ethical journalism after looking over the facts in this case.

So basically, I got a little tired of only seeing one post at a time. Although it was a lot more convenient to have the first, latest post right on the index for everyone to read, I felt that people were missing older articles. Also, the archive system on the previous theme didn’t work to my liking at all. Having to flip through every post individually is tedious and unnecessary. I hope you find this new layout much more efficient.

Also new is this “Side Quests” section. I called it “Side Quests” as a tongue in cheek poke at the idea that, while the Weekly Feature article is the main focus of the site, this section is here as something of a distraction to keep the site fresh while I work on the “main quest”.  More or less, it’s here for quick updates and links to things I find interesting during the week when there’s some big news going on, but not necessarily something I want to devote 1,000 words to — 1,000 words being the average I shoot for with weekly articles.

Questions? Comments? Let me know what you think….

This is the audio version of the original article which can be read here.