Why Dante’s Inferno gave me agita as opposed to other titles that pervert original work I can’t say. Honestly, I’ve never played the game. Maybe between all the shoddy adaptations released by the motion picture, video game, and literature industries, this was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Despite my usual tendencies to pick up the sticks and play, seeing Dante Alighieri’s poem perverted broke my heart, and I couldn’t find it worth my $60 to support that type of effort from the publisher.

More questions come to mind than answers. Why would EA use the Divine Comedy to make an action title? In no way is main character Dante depicted as a crusader mercenary in the poem. He’s not even brave. He’s flawed, frail, and faces Hell with the same naked fear any average mortal should. I’d love to play a flawed, sympathetic character like Dante in a non-action game. The video game industry being bloated with sword toting alpha-males, it is my opinion that  using The Inferno to expand beyond sword fighting archetypes would honor Dante Alighieri’s masterpiece and the video game industry at the same time.

If EA bought rights to the IP, why not use all of its components to make a dramatic experience closer to Heavy Rain or Mass Effect using emotions as a weapon, rather than a bone scythe? As famous as it is, EA didn’t need to use The Inferno’s name to make sales, because the work is far enough removed from the gamer population to not immediately ring a bell. But, rather than breaking barriers with classic literature through the lens of a video game, EA turned the Divine Comedy into a bad joke guised as an adaptation for “a new generation and a new medium.”

Assuming that the Divine Comedy’s story doesn’t fit today’s culture not only insults the literature, but it insults us. We can handle a deep and real experience with life, death, sin, and virtue. We don’t need publishers to dumb down content by making it into a generic action game. We can handle more. In fact, we’re craving more.

To be fair, reading the Divine Comedy isn’t easy–even interpreted versions tax the reader while its brilliance enlightens us. So, livening up the work can be excused. But, EA and Visceral Games changed virtually everything except for the setting–which was heavily altered to fit the vision of the designers. The best case scenario would be to use video games as a method to tell Dante Alighieri’s story as it should be told. To show gamers the fascinating world of The Inferno would be a remarkable step forward for the industry and prove yet again the power of video games to enrich people’s lives. Similarly, Beowulf released as a 3D motion picture and did the original poem justice, profited, and entertained all at the same time. I’m sure a rich company like EA can accomplish the same feat.

This is not to say that the game was a failure or a broken product. What I am saying, is that if EA wanted to sell a game where players fought their way out of hell, you don’t have to use The Inferno to achieve that. Any generic story filled in with hellish creatures pit against a righteous warrior would do. Why, oh why, use coveted literature?

Would stopping the American government from being overthrown be enough motivation? In Splinter Cell: Conviction, toying with what’s left of rogue spy Sam Fisher’s life makes for a high-stakes adventure clad with knee-jerk shooting, espionage, sabotage, and jaw-dropping brutality. 

Conviction starts out as a manhunt to find your daughter’s killer. But Third Echelon, the agency that betrayed you, gives you a whiff of your daughter Sarah’s trail, but like a typical covert ops agency Third Echelon dangles your daughter Sarah’s life in front of you like a carrot, coaxing you back into a fight you’ve left behind. Because of his past, Fisher resembles a rampaging bear woken early from hibernation more than a human. Ubisoft went a bit overboard with reveals and twists in Conviction, but the story lays the brick and mortar for Fisher’s remorseless, even ruthless killing.

What sets Conviction apart from other action games are the game mechanics designed to emphasize Fisher’s many talents as an iron chef of death. The mark and execute feature tilts the odds in Fisher’s favor no matter how many baddies flood the scene. Mark and execute allows players to tag up to four enemies and waste them with the click of a single button. But, to earn mark and execute, players must first pull off a silent takedown, which seamlessly joins stealth gameplay with unleashing hell on enemies. 

I thought mark and execute would dampen the experience since manually aiming dominates most shooting experiences in games. But, with the pace of fight sequences requiring lightning-quick reactions, mark and execute makes the entire game work and proves to be a breath of fresh air for a stale, overused mechanic in games. Combining mark and execute with the plethora of gadgets at Fisher’s disposal, players can easily turn any skirmish into a domino-effect of destruction.

The ability to take down an entire squad with two button clicks delivers the feeling of true assassin and calls for fist pumps throughout the game. Ubisoft’s also dreamed up last known position, a mechanic that shows players where they were last spotted with a white shadow. This makes for great counter situations if you can react fast enough. In the slowest part of Conviction, players are treated to visceral interrogation sequences. These scenes show just how ticked off Fisher is, and how creative a rogue spy can be with everyday household items.

For all of its brilliance, Conviction rebels against its Splinter Cell lineage in that silence is no longer crucial to success. Fans accustomed to the sneaky Sam Fisher will be jarred from those comfy dark corners and into fast-paced encounters with the enemy. And let’s face it, the other Splinter Cell games rocked, so some people will be understandably upset with Ubisoft’s new direction for the series’ crescendo. 

What I missed most from other Splinter Cell titles was the hacking, file scrounging, and other side missions that encouraged a spy feel to the game. Because they require steel nerves, ninja stealth, and patience, those side missions would pump the brakes on Conviction, so omitting those missions isn’t surprising. 

What would make mark and execute even better? Co-op mark and execute. Ubisoft brings back a co-op story line to satisfy players’ undeniable thirst for tag team spy action. Co-op story mode keeps Conviction breathing after the first play through, while online modes such as Hunter and Deniable Ops are challenging objective based modes requiring teamwork and mastery of mechanics.

Apart from empowering game mechanics, Ubisoft streamlined the experience by adding on-screen objectives and cutscenes. This keeps the player at the helm virtually all of the time, cutting down on pausing and watching cutscenes. Unfortunately, players don’t have much control over the final scene, as it is all but a scene on train tracks. But, the weight of the story and blistering action leading up to the climax forgive a passenger-side feel to the final minutes of Conviction.

Having played all the Splinter Cell games, it was difficult to play Sam as an action-hero rather than a covert operative. The suit fits the bill, however, given the stakes and the deterioration of Fisher’s humanity. But, with all the action games out there, Splinter Cell held the crown as the best action title that didn’t call for buckets of blood. Once a good soldier capable of sparing the lives of his enemies (when possible), Fisher became what he hunted–a killer only concerned with his agenda.

At the same time, Ubisoft did well to honor the series by giving the Splinter Cell series a natural progression you’d expect from literature. Whether an old school Splinter Cell fan from 2002 or a newcomer joining the dance at the end of the song, Ubisoft delivers a heavy-hitting title with fluid action. From predatory stealth kills to explosive sabotage tactics, Conviction boasts balance in all approaches to the game and clear polish throughout the experience.

Under Marlowe’s helmet, players discover a national security risk that only Bad Company can handle. As America’s last hope against sneaky Russians with a WMD, players chase the Russians around the globe, blowing up everything and everyone in the way. And Battlefield’s Frostbite engine does a stellar job at turning every moment into an explosive fiesta Michael Bay would be proud of.

Mastering the terrain and finding the perfect sniping perch or weaving gracefully from cover to cover all play part in a FPS. But, because of the destructible environments, Battlefield forces players to stay on their toes, or else they’ll literally be blasted off of them. The boards are living, breathing characters, which adds a level of tension that other shooters simply don’t deliver.

For all of its destructible glory, Marlowe’s compadres are ironically indestructible. It’s no surprise that ally AI don’t die in Battlefield, but not only are they bulletproof, they know it. These guys are more exposed on the battlefield than Jenna Jameson’s private bits. They’re singing in the rain while Marlowe is eating all the bullets! It almost gets to a point where I felt like I was being mocked by Bad Company for not being as impenetrable as my squad. A little more AI programming would go a long way to enhance the realism factor.

Developer DICE did well to vary the pacing of each level. Almost every stage incorporated tact, strategy, and all-out mayhem–if not all at once then incrementally throughout each mission. Utilizing land, sea, and air vehicles, Battlefield achieves depth by both giving a feel for the expanse of the world–and players get to blow baddies to smithereens with tanks.  Shaky controls bog down the fun from behind the wheel. The tanks are too hard to maneuver while jeeps are out of control. But, that’s a small price for road kills.

Battlefield carried a decent story. While the characters are generic, I actually liked the mixture of Bad Company’s cookie-cutter soldiers with a sci-fi military premise that reaches as far back as WWII–which was a playable prologue thank you very much. 

While story did enough to warrant a playthrough, it played second fiddle to gameplay and multiplayer. DICE did right by the players in bringing all the volatility of the destructible environments and vehicles to multiplayer. These elements equalize the field and keep even newbies in the action. Campers beware: expect a timely bazooka blast, mortar strike, or tank bombardment to rip your cozy perch apart if you linger too long.

Deathmatch is a three-course meal of close combat, sniping, and vehicle rampages. Rush mode pits teams in attack/defend scenarios that require teamwork and deliver tension as the defending squad have to deplete the attackers’ well of respawns before losing all their bases. Conquest brings a king-of-the-hill vibe to Battlefield that proves for frantic skirmishes and more flailing bodies than a Cirque de Soleil show.

Quick loadouts and weapon unlocks really make multiplayer tick. Rather than pre-setting loadouts before matches, players can change equipment in between spawns. This keeps the player under control and allows use of all the great toys DICE treats players to.

You won’t love the characters. There isn’t a heart-pounding climax or genre-pushing animations and drama. But, it’s a fun, dynamic shooter that gives as much as it takes. And the true barometer or today’s FPS games, multiplayer, is a smash that carries enough variety, packs enough punch, and is complete enough to take claim as the best multiplayer to date since Left 4 Dead.

Not my PC, but I'm sure whoever owns it gets a LOT of those screens

Glitches. Mentioning the word wrinkles my brow and ignites a burning flame of frustration in my eyes. Like mosquitoes on a serene evening stroll, glitches have become a persistent nuisance for the gaming community.

The greatest trick the devil pulled was convincing the world he doesn’t exist. Likewise, glitches are reputed as innocent bugs happened upon only by the strangest of circumstances. On the contrary, glitches are not anomalies. Glitches play a part in almost all of the video games of recent memory–triple-A titles and bargain bin games alike. From system freezes to stuck PCs to “bamfing” through walls and floors like Nightcrawler during a seizure, glitches happen every day and it’s not cool.

For all their glorious advancement, games haven’t progressed that far beyond the 8-bit glory days because of glitching. Shouldn’t glitches be the first thing eradicated from the gaming experience? Rather they’re surviving and evolving as well as Mario. Why does today’s buggy gaming remind me of blowing into my NES game cartridge and tapping on the console two times to boot up the main screen? Shouldn’t we be past that?

Either publishers irresponsibly launch games with glitches and rely on software patches, or QA teams aren’t getting the job done. Do the developers care enough about their consumers to protect them from glitches? With a $60 price tag, aren’t gamers entitled to cleaner software?

Unfortunately, glitching seems to be here to stay. Like a Siamese twin’s parasitic sibling, glitching survives and mars the gaming experience. I’ve been ridiculed by my family and friends for my criticism and sensitivity towards glitching. And they’re right, I am critical of my video games. I expect more, even demand it. If it’s a matter of man power, I’d gladly sacrifice some bells and whistles for a glitch-free play through. Or, let some gamers beta test for free. Isn’t it worth it?

Comparing apples to oranges never fully illustrates a point, but if a motion picture released and the film skipped frames at pivotal moments, there would be a recall, refunds, and troubleshooting, right? And unlike comic books, owning a flawed video game doesn’t increase its value.

Glitches even make horses sad. Who would want to hurt a horse?

Next thing you know, glitches will start phasing gamers behind lawnmowers, chiding us to be more productive in the real world. Exterminate these horrid glitches, please!

You might be saying, “All sequels correlate with the original game, dummy!” Yes, they do, but not like ME2. A typical sequel will be a mixture of tweaked game mechanics, new features, improved graphics, and progressing the story. But sequels never port the main character and  the outcome of the story from the first game created by the player. A typical sequel will have a linear connection from game to game or  jump time forward and use a new main character. ME2′s story is dictated by the decisions you make in ME1. And if you didn’t play ME1, or want to start fresh, that’s cool too as Bioware creates a past for you. 

In short, ME2 bring your unique universe from the first game to the second–which puts this sequel in a class of its own. For those comparing ME2 to ME1, you won’t miss anything Bioware slipped from the sequel (such as roaming planets with the Mako). Blue-blooded RPG fans will miss the customizable loadouts, but ME2′s loadout-lite is enough to get RPG fans by.

There’s a lot going on in ME2. Between playing psychiatrist for squad mates, freelancing your badassery to the galaxy’s underworld, and saving the universe from decimation, Commander Shephard’s day planner is packed. With all the side missions and distractions, you may not be able to tell the difference between Reapers and Collectors by the end of the game. But, that’s okay. ME2 still makes it easy to get drawn into the story. And let’s face it–gamers are desensitized. You may not know the canon cover to cover, but you will feel the weight of the world on Commander Shephard’s shoulders–which is a feather in Bioware’s cap.

For those who don’t give a hoot about story and just want to put pissed off aliens on ice, the  dynamic gameplay incorporates a trifecta of cover-based shooting with Jedi-like powers and squad-based tactics. Cover-based shooting turns into a fireworks display when combined with special powers. Mastering Biotic and Tech powers augments the trigger squeezing. Freeze, fry, toss, slam, and blast baddies to your heart’s desire. And when that gets boring, combine powers to treat enemies like your personal test dummies.

My personal favorite, punching frozen enemies, shatters aliens to little alien bits. Who wouldn’t want to explode an alien ice sculpture with your bare hands? Delightful. Also, Bioware swapped out grenade disks for heavy weapons like a flame thrower and laser. Thank you, Bioware!

In the middle of gunfire, I would have liked to see my AI compadres react a little better. Often, I’d catch a teammate standing on top of cover–getting blasted and not returning fire–rather than covering. They’re guns, for the most part, may as well have been water guns for all they were used. Instead of having a true squad of intergalactic warriors, squad mates are best used manually by the player for their special powers. That’s nice, but we need a little more intelligence behind the AI.

While irrational on the battlefield, teammates came to life during dialogues. Each and every character in the game–even the ship’s AI–has a unique personality that adds a dimension to ME2 that most other games do not even attempt. It’s a testament to how action games do not have to rely solely on blood and guts.

Because Bioware created a universe that reacts to the decisions of the player, every action taken (or rejected) shifts the makeup of the galaxy. Neglected to help an innocent no-name while saving a planet from destruction? Guess what: that dude died because you were chasing bigger game, and his death is going to come full circle on you at some point. It’s a completionists dream come true.

Not only do the little people hang in the balance, your team is at your mercy as well. And for once, even the untouchable PC himself can die–and not the kind of dying where you respawn at a checkpoint. DIE die. Now, who doesn’t want a piece of that action? 

I don’t know if it’s a strength or a weakness, but ME2′s dialogue and branching storylines are more exciting and alive than the fighting. Not that the action isn’t fun and compelling, but ME2 is different breed of action. Shooting things is an overplayed mechanic in video games, so it’s a revelation to see storylines and dialogue getting along with mowing down hundreds of enemies. 

ME2 evolves the gaming experience past mindless shooting. There is a deeper reward behind ME2 than other games almost akin to reading your favorite book. Wait, video games creating emotional responses similar to reading? I must have lost my marbles.

Maybe it’s just me, but from what I’ve seen from video games in the last 20 years, today’s video games haven’t progressed much further than the pudgy, bushy mustached plumber and the wooden-sword toting elf that captured the hearts of gamers back in the 80s. Of course there were games before Super Mario Bros. and The Legends of Zelda, but the big question is, has there been games after? 

This begs the question: how far has the apple fallen from the tree? Are game studios merely churning out iterations of Super Mario and Zelda with different faces, fireballs, swords, and princesses swapped out for Mario and Link’s adventures? And if we are playing unique games, how are these games shaping tomorrow’s video game experience?

Understand Your Past
Whether you are old enough to recognize it or not, if you’re playing a modern action or RPG title, chances are there’s a few italian and elf chromosomes in the game’s DNA. The improvements behind graphics and popular mechanics like swordplay, shooting, and leveling up is nice, but unless you’re eight and you just got your first game console, chances are you’re playing the same type of games over and over. Any kung-fu master would protest that understanding the past is the first step in shaping the present and guiding the future–but 30 years of playing the same thing is overkill. 

Anyway, setting aside racing, sports, and puzzle games, any game with swordplay, fireballs, open world maps, upgradeable weapons, unlikely heroes (like plumbers), killing enemies by jumping on heads, and a laundry list of other dried up game elements is a game bumming off of Super Mario and/or Zelda. That being said, how many games can you connect to those two franchises? Run out of fingers and toes to count on yet? 

Keeping Games Fashionable
Don’t get me wrong, I love today’s AAA games. There’s a meticulous blend of features from successful, classic games with current trends. But, the video game industry spawned out of creativity and ingenuity, and we have to ask ourselves if we’ve seen originality behind games lately. To me, it feels like innovation rather than creation–and there’s a big difference between the two.

It’s my belief, however, that these recycled game mechanics survive not out of lack of effort, but out of corporate politics. Game studios are probably sitting on hundreds of golden geese right now, but The Man is probably keeping those fresh ideas locked up tightly. It takes serious sales numbers, a few sequels, and millions of frothing fans to get game publishers to listen. A creative idea of itself, unfortunately, is not enough to make it in today’s world

If you’re like me, you love playing games and punching, slashing, blasting, and levelling up are your favorite pasttimes. But, if you’re like me, you’re also wondering how much longer you can tolerate the same game experiences over and over.

Thankfully, some new ideas are dripping down into the swampy pool that is the redundant game experience. Little Big Planet, Fallout 3, Splinter Cell, Mass Effect, and maybe a few others have the ability to take what’s old, improve on it, and shape the new games of tomorrow.

Read “Game Mutations and New Sensations” for more

There’s a fine line between building an original gaming experience and making permutations of old experiences. We see new features added to games every day. For instance, RPG games are flying off the shelves, so non-RPG games are implementing RPG elements. How else can you explain Halo: Reach’s armor upgrades for multiplayer? You can’t get any more FPS than Halo, but even that franschise has adopted an RPG system. How about allowing players to purchase weapons, clothes, and even build a city in Assassin’s Creed 2? I love me some RPG, but I am still waiting for bigtime games to start busting out new mechanics.

With its Forge feature, Halo has tried to branch outside of the normal FPS routine. Forge allowed gamers to create levels, which is great for gamers that are interested. But, it does little to enhance the core game experience. Little Big Planet, too, does not totally diverge from classic game mechanics as it is still a 2D platformer at the end of the day. But, it’s ludicrously popular level building platform gives gamers new reasons to turn on their PS3s after beating storymode.

Fallout 3, like LBP, goes along with some conventional game elements, but its scope has pushed the envelope of what RPGs should be. By rule, RPGs include leveling-up stats. But, Fallout’s Perks system revitalizes the experience and allows players to put their own stamp on their character. Bethesda created a dark-toned game with a lighter feel via level-ups–not an easy thing to do. Oh, and their ridonculously large open-world map isn’t too shabby either.

Long gone should be the days of playing AAA titles that have empty plots. Much of today’s games still put story in the backseat to mechanics, but Mass Effect values both, which is critically important to advancing the gaming experience and creating new experiences for gamers. ME’s fighting is fun, but saying that steering the storyline and molding the universe with your decisions is empowering would be an understatement. Flat out, I find myself celebrating more victories in Mass Effect because of the value behind the story. Who doesn’t like fist-pumping after every mission?

Now, all we need to see is a publisher willing to let gamers create their own levels for a spy/espionage game with amazingly fun level ups, and an Oprah-bookclub worthy story. And let’s not forget killing enemies by jumping on their noggins for ol’ times sake.

New Blood
It would be too hard to recite all of the games that follow suit after the likes of Super Mario or Zelda, and as fun as that would be, I’m not writing a book about it (yet). Still, comparing games from the 1990s and 2000s , it’s difficult to find original titles other than the innovative titles mentioned above. But, a few things do come to mind.

From an angle of gameplay, many FPS titles can technically be considered as original, simply because the player’s point of view is different–which really does change the way a game is played.

According to the Free Info Society, the first FPS game  was created by id studios in 1992. So, Wolfenstein 3D can make claim to that title, but true-to-form FPS games are pretty much a one-trick-pony. As enjoyable as they are, most FPS games are copy and pasted games consisting of a military force fighting against either zombies, nazis, aliens, or military opponents. Halo and Call of Duty made the genre unbelievably popular, but gameplay for all intents and purposes, is basically the same.

Some nice departures from standard FPS games include hits such as Mirror’s Edge, The Darkness, Portal, and Aliens vs. Predator. Darkness and AvP add monstrous abilities to the typical gun blasting fare, while Mirror’s Edge challenges players to conquer the rooftops with quickness and agility. Portal is a puzzle-based game that has created a lot of buzz as a cult hit. However, despite popularity and even success, these games are the exception, not the rule. Still waiting for a new FPS game to break the mold and create a new species of games of the FPS lineage.

Splinter Cell interweaves novel-quality storylines (a la Tom Clancy) with intense, precise gameplay. Most games require players to spray bullets everywhere or bash an enemies brains out. But, Sam Fisher showed the world that a tactical takedown can be more rewarding than button mashing and flailing about like a rabid Schwarzenegger. Spy/espionage games like Thief or Splinter Cell have a nice mix of non-linear level approaches to missions on set stages, unique gameplay, and a mix of action, strategy, and platforming. Though running around enemies was commonplace in the original Zelda game, I don’t recall Link ever sneaking around a dungeon or castle. However, like the FPS games mentioned above, stealth games are few and far between despite their popularity.

Point of Diminishing Return
It’s no coincidence that there are a bazillion post-apocalyptic games out there. It’s a simple formula that gamers recognize, and it sells. The 0nly conceivable explanation for this redundancy is that video game publishers don’t want the industry to change yet. Afterall, why mess with an industry that has quantified its profits so much over the past 30 years? When will we see a change? Probably when the bucks stop rolling in.

There has to be a tipping point where gamers become bored with the same game themes and mechanics. The beauty of video games is that the gaming experience is limited only by the boundaries of the studios making games, and the fences built by the industry’s publishers. As history shows, the first to explore new ideas are the first to reap the benefits. All gamers can do is hope that new ideas will eventually filter through the publisher firewall and a new genre or two will be born!

Image source: www.ragingmouse.com

According to consumer market research company NPD, video games sales in April 2010 plummeted 26% for software and 37% for hardware compared to April 2009. Whereas the jury is out as to the exact cause, NPD predicts that video game retail store GameStop will experience the brunt of this staggering drop in consumer sales.

The most likely suspect behind the industry’s recent woes is a lack of AAA titles released in April. NPD also points to Easter coming at a different date this year as a possible explanation behind the lack of video game purchases as gifts. But, being that Easter was still in April, that could be an overly optimistic opinion. A third factor, the emergence of free online games on social networking sites such as Facebook, is a viable culprit as well.

Between online gaming and a low-tide of new releases, the dip in sales shouldn’t be much of a shock to stockholders, but will most likely effected stock prices on Wall Street nonetheless. If the Wall Street suits cared to pop into a GameStop however, they’d see that behind Ubisoft’s Splinter Cell: Conviction, April’s lineup of games boasted little more pop than a sparkler on a rainy day.

Nintendo’s Monster Hunter 3 injected some life into the shelves, but being that both Conviction and Monster Hunter were sold exclusively for XBox 360 and the Wii respectively, there simply wasn’t much out there to buy. Nier, a PS3 title with a decent buzz fizzed out, and Dead to Rights: Retribution held a ton of potential as the third installation to the hellagood franchise from the mid 2000s.

According to a report by CNBC, software sales slipped to $398.5 million, while hardware sales dropped to $249.3 million. These numbers may seem fantastic for a month’s worth of revenue, but being that they’re lower than ’09′s numbers, that’s enough to get the market wondering if Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are going to consider price drops for consoles and games.

No doubt gamers spend dozens, if not hundreds of hours velcroed to their couches to shoot, slash, and slay the night away. But bigger maps, broader stories, iconic characters, technological progress, and even achievement hunting have been the brick and mortar for deeper gaming experiences. Gaming experiences that often lead players to reading.

Hardcore gamers ultimately strive for enhanced immersion in a game and conquest of a virtual reality. To rule these realms, gamers not only need to be capable gamers, but they rely on game guides and other reading materials. Enter the studious gamer.

We are obviously in the middle of an unstoppable shift towards a digital culture driven by images, not words. But, that doesn’t mean the written word is going the way of hieroglyphics. Thanks to game guides, gamers are passively incorporating reading, critical thinking, and even map reading into their diet–not too bad for a couch potato if you ask me. 

For instance, try playing open-world RPGs Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion or Dragon Age: Origins without a game guide. Without a guide, traversing these enormous maps would be like driving cross-country without GPS. Reading up on these worlds allow players to uncover key strategies for battles, and unearth hidden missions, equipment, achievements, information, and even characters that are often totally neglected. If you haven’t played games like these (or at least watched someone play games of this magnitude) it’s hard to understand, but believe that reading is essential to not just exploring these robust worlds, but surviving them.

Another angle to examine the value of a game guide is from a financial perspective. It’s not impossible to play an open-world game without a game guide, but gamers (or a gamer’s parents) pour serious money into a year’s worth of games. So, spending the extra cash on a guide helps players squeeze every penny out of their $60 investment. Even when it comes to more linear games like Batman: Arkham Asylum–game guides help players through side missions that enhance the story and encourage players to try more minigames such as in-game puzzles and easter egg hunts. Bottom line: reading game guides help players enjoy games on new levels.

Nowadays, game developers go way beyond just creating a fun, empowering video game. They build libraries of history and deliver it piecemeal to gamers through in-game data files. Assassin’s Creed and Fallout 3 are great examples of games that incorporate history (sometimes even real historical contexts) into the gaming experience.

While game guides and in-game data files are directly connected to a game, what about other reading materials that get gamers to turn off their consoles or computers? Publishing houses have been snatching up game titles and putting them to binding ever since Nintendo sparked the “Nintendo Comics System” with Valiant Comics back in 1990.  Today’s popular titles often come packaged with publishing deals to create a deeper experience for gamers and reading buffs alike–and of course to boost profits. 

Dead Space. Mass Effect. Halo. Prototype. Half-Life. Star Wars. All these AAA titles extend their boundaries via novels, comics, and graphic novels. These don’t even touch on the hoard of Marvel and DC franchises that have been brought to life in video games.

Of course, not every gamer reads. Some players just don’t care to dig deeper into a game and the fiction behind it. Games have come a long way to incorporate fully-fledged worlds, even galaxies, into the experience. Whether it’s a comic, novel, or game guide, the depth of development going into a singular game franchise is astounding–and gamers would be well served by paying attention to the bigger picture, if only to enjoy the button smashing experience that much more.

It all boils down to human nature. We are all  bubbling with curiosity and imagination. Literature, games, and comic books all channel the imagination and pull us into faroff worlds. We can argue if cake is better than pie–cake being games and pie being books of course–but in the end it’s all brief, sweet, and blissful indulgence.

After that slap on the wrist, nowadays gamers load the nearest checkpoint, resurrect their hero, and give it another go. Die and replay. It’s a part of life for gamers–and so are the phoenix-like heroes that are revived unscathed. The question is, does the repetition of die, resurrect, replay instill the wrong lessons in gaming communities?

Who is more likely to learn from their mistakes: a child who gets a five-minute timeout, or a child who fetches a switch for his own flogging?

Many games try to teach mechanics that allow players to master a game and maximize the gaming experience. But, when gamers have the luxury of retrying the same scenario over and over, what’s stopping them from relying on the same old techniques and forgoing proper game mechanics?

It’s an extreme example, but what about young gamers abusing respawns? Are they learning problem solving skills? Are they learning that life is as flexible as a video game? I certainly hope not.

The Hack Gamer
With enough respawns, poor techniques eventually win out. It’s not pretty, but it works–and many gamers stick with that method over understanding mechanics and learning. Rather than searching for a doorway, these gamers are going to keep running their heads into a metaphorical wall until either the head or the wall cracks. That’s not worth the $60 charge for a game or the frustration family members go through enduring gamer meltdowns.

For these hard-headed gamers, unfortunately, wasted time is the only real punishment. And if a checkpoint is close enough and the load times are fast enough, then time is hardly a punishment at all. There’s a huge difference in a gaming experience where players have to adapt versus players jamming their style into a game. For the latter, the experience becomes redundant, monotonous, and even worse, gamers aren’t analyzing games and thinking anymore.

Games in the end are all puzzles. Discovering the mechanics, weapons, and strategies needed for a each board results in fluid gameplay, domination, and fun. So, who is more likely to fist-pump after beating a game: a gamer who learned nothing and spent hours dying and respawning, or the player who learned, adapted, and overcame? 

Kickin’ It Old School
When it comes to “Game Overs,” it’s hard to miss the old school games from first- and second-generation consoles like NES, SNES, Genesis, and the other various consoles of the 80s and early 90s. These games  had far more dire consequences. After players depleted all the extra lives, gamers couldn’t forge on. Back to Level 1 and better luck next time. It was a cruel system that deprived many gamers (myself included) from beating games. The benefit to this dog-eat-dog gaming experience, though, was learning the value of precious extra lives and the practice required to beat a game. 

Consequences = Fun?
Despite all the lifelike character models and meticulously realistic level designs, when it comes to life and death, video games are at best the evil doppelganger of real life. Some may argue that games are special because they dip into fantasy, extremism, and the impossible. There’s nothing wrong with that. But, are game developers short-changing players by relying on Game Overs?

In other words, Game Over is a tool that is roughly 30 years old at this point. Graphics have evolved. Gameplay has gone through several paradigm shifts. Stories have grown to Hollywood proportions. Can we handle injuries and deaths a little better than using the same Game Over screen that Super Mario Bros. and Pitfall used?

Fallout 3, for example, implemented an interesting damage system where the hero’s limbs and head could be crippled.  This opened the gates for crippled aiming, impaired sight, and limping. Purists may feel that injuries hamstring gameplay. But the fact is these injuries added drama to every firefight and evolved the game beyond a normal shooter. Every battle has the potential to be original. These injuries could be alleviated with a quick injection of a stimpak (health) to those limbs, but limb damage gave Fallout’s hero a whole new dimension. Players still need to load checkpoints after dying, but hey, it’s a start.

Herc’s Adventures was a classic action game for PSOne, and that game took an original spin on deaths. After death, the hero is cast into the Underworld where he could fight his or her way out. Even better, in co-op games, partners could plunge into the underworld and help pull comrades out of Hell. Isn’t that more exciting than watching a load screen?

Imagine a world that takes Fallout’s damage system one step further. Heroes that have to live with mistakes after a respawn. Imagine heroes having to undergo surgery, traction, rehabilitation, prosthetics, and even the afterlife. Imagine a hero that had to learn how to fight with one lung, one eye, a biotic limb, etc. The possibilities are endless. 

This new direction would demand respect from gamers. Closely studying encounters would have a whole new meaning because failure has consequences. Heroes would be more dynamic and personal to the player. Gameplay would ebb and flow with the scarring and bruising of the hero. Replay value would skyrocket. And beating a game would truly feel triumphant and victorious.