Seeing as how there seems to have been plenty of discussion of money on Quest Hard lately, I thought it might be time to talk about advertising. This was brought to mind when I saw reports that apparently they are going to integrate Microsoft's Kinect to adverts on the Xbox. The basic upshot being that with a literal way of a hand you could get more info on the product being advertised, or even twitter your "enjoyment" of the advert.
Now I don't own a Xbox but it did get me wondering about in game advertising. I seem to recall that only a few years ago that there was barely a game being published without some form of sponsorship. I remember clearly a Splinter Cell game that started with a FMV of Sam Fisher clearing his sinuses with a refreshing Wrigley's Airwaves.
As another blogger recently pointed out games generally are a single price point product, so it has surprised me that in game advertising seems to have died off. With it pretty much just existing in sports games now (I assume, I am a geek and
therefore don’t “do” sports in any capacity). Please don't misunderstand me I have zero desire for in game adverts, the thought of running past a Coca-Cola billboard in a Battlefield game makes me shudder.
It just struck me as odd that now a lot of mainstream games are trying to squeeze you for every penny with DLC and premium services (yes I am looking art you Call of Duty), that they would seemingly pass up potentially a lot of money. Lets take Call of Duty as an example, because, well, Activison seem to have no issue exploiting their fan base. I would guess that right now there are probably at least a couple of million people playing some form of multiplayer COD. Now that is a hell of a captive audience, and has got to be worth thousands and thousands I'm advertising.
Well just food for thought. Oh and if, in the unlikely even some video games executive is reading this.
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO. This is not a thing that any gamer want, needs or desires. It breaks immersion and ruins any game.



I have sat down to write about the news regarding TF2 becoming a free to play title to find that my good friend and fellow blogger
The 

It is hardly a secret that I am a big fan of Valve’s Steam gaming service. It allows me to get games quickly, at a reasonable price (ok it can occasionally be overpriced) and offers excellent social and matchmaking tools. But I think a lot of people still underestimate both Valve and the Steam service. If anyone could said to “be” pc gaming (or Mac gaming for that matter), then it would definitely be Valve.
escape most businesses. That giving away free stuff will earn you a fortune.
made for free. A shooter that still looks great and will run pretty well on any PC from the last 5 years.Oh and more importantly, a shooter that can only be launched from inside the online game store that is Steam.
I recently wrote a blog about how I thought the pre owned market should be of a bigger concern to publishers than piracy. Well it seems that at least one publisher agrees with me.
hand or you rented it, then thq will kindly sell you one for a few pounds.
Imagine going into a library, taking out a murder mystery novel and finding that the last few pages are missing and you have to log onto the publishers website and pay a few pence to find out who did it. That doesn't happen of course, and we are perfectly free to buy previously owned books, music and films, without restrictions. 

There is a fine line between a good point and click game and a bad one. Most of the better ones are comedic and lets be honest, a bit silly. Monkey island proved that fact very early on.




Project Zomboid has hit my twitter feed harder than a truck full of dice at a D&D convention. However I have up until now ignored it because to be honest I was not sure what everyone was going on about. 



Duke Nukem Forever (DNF) has been in development for a little over 12 years. It came out and was one of the most hated games in recent memory almost instantly.
The first thing that struck me about the game is that the humour is a little penile and often over the top in an offensive way. BUT (and that’s in capitols for a reason) the game is faithful to DN3D. If you go back now and play that old game, its just as cringe worthy and offensive, but we where all allot younger then (most of us) and this sort of toilet humour put big grins on our faces. That coupled with the fact that is was the 90’s when this was socially acceptable made it more tolerable. When you go back and play it you get nostalgia, nostalgia the new one does not bring out.
are slight oversights in the scenery such as stacks of casino chips that you can’t knock over when you get shrunk and predetermined routes that are very much obvious paths. this, i think is partly because the game was planned out a long time before the AI director and open world shooters, and partly because that's what Duke Nukem games are about. its supposed to be obvious and silly.
The look of the game does fit with the previous title, its like some one dragged the original set kicking and screaming through the years and fashion be damned. 
It won’t come as much of a surprise to you when I say I love first person shooters, I play them both single player and online. However some games try and take all that shootery goodness, and put it in the third person, over the shoulder perspective. Now from a single player game point of view, this is fine by me, variety is the spice of life etc. However it’s the online multiplayer that I wanted to talk about. See l have always very firmly believed that online shooters just don't work very well in third person.
of which are not much more than ok online shooters (though both great single player games). I think I have always felt that the extended field of view killed any connection I might have had to the action (be honest that sounded pretentious right?). So I have always stuck to first person shooters, even though perhaps there might be more innovation in the third person (like Uncharted's climbing).
I think it is all down to 3 feet high walls. Or to be more precise that a lot of third person shooter have a cover based system, where you hide behind a sand bags or barriers, popping out to attack enemies. I think in multiplayer spending half the time hiding behind a low wall or similar, such as in Gears and Uncharted, is just not fun for me. Yes it makes sense in a single player, your character isn't some sort of god and the cover allows you to stay in the action, and not run back around the corner when you are in trouble.
This is an article that is specifically relevant to mmovoices.ning.com i have posted it here as a general interest article.
Civilization is something that has evolved over a period of thousands of years, maybe millions depending what history you subscribe to. the way humanity has come together and build community on top of community, ignoring our difference's to eventually get to where we are today is so astounding that it has reduced some philosophers to tears on more than one occasion. 
so when i loaded into ‘Civ 4’ i was a little confused and as i failed to find a tutorial i had no idea what to expect from the game. As anyone who has played it can testify its something of an oddity. it is basically a board game and your choice of starting nation is more to do with your play style than any real national pride. each nation has a special unit and differing ‘starter technology’ that can make or break an early ‘war’ in a game.
I continued to scratch my head as i played making some little decision's each turn then hitting the enter key to let the other nations have a crack at world domination. i made some more little settlements and some workers, warriors, shops and alliances. as i played i researched new technology and eventually had access to the printing press.... before i realised i was having fun it was bed time. the following day at work i sat thinking about how strange the game was and could to wait to come home and start again now i knew what i was doing. 
I have been playing Duke Nukem Forever (rented it, did not buy), and well, it’s rubbish. It is a very generic okayish looking shooter that is full of misogynistic jokes that aren’t even remotely funny. It is devoid of new ideas or even a decent amount of polish. Now what I am saying isn’t unique, go to pretty much any games site and you will find remarkable similar opinions.
spite the lack of glowing reviews, and all three games had very large marketing pushes. Interestingly L.A. Noire also had a big marketing push, I wonder if it would have sold as well if it had not. I suppose what I am suggesting is that you don’t really need a good game if you can get your game famous, or notorius in dukes case, enough.
I have been resisting the temptation to write this for quite some time, but I can no longer restrain myself (I am also drunk which may have something to do with it). You see my bested friend in the entire world and co-podcaster/blogger Hex is now community manager of mmo voices, as you will have no doubt noticed.
I, well I don’t want to say rant, but that would be a lie, about games developers and their lazy use of words. Here is a link to what the word 

This morning as i stumbled towards to coffee making thing in the kitchen I heard my phone make a noise (actually it said ‘some one would like to speak with you master’ a sample from the amazing ‘i dream of genie’ show – retro win) that signified the news of an arriving e-mail.