Duty Calls.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/02/free-duty-calls-game-promotes-bulletstorm-mocks-war-gaming.ars

The Duty Calls trailer and download:

http://www.thedutycalls.com/download.html

And Bulletstorm, the new videogame being made by Epic Games and EA which is attempting to change how we think about shooters:

http://www.bulletstorm.com/#

The makers of Bulletstorm actually made a short game making fun of traditional first-person-shooters, like Call of Duty. Their short game mocks the fact that typical shooters take themselves way too seriously, and place way too much emphasis on realism. At first, I thought the game looked completely ridiculous, and was slightly offended, given the fact that I LOVE serious shooters like Call of Duty Modern Warfare (1 and 2). But they make a good point; after what we have learned in class so far, I have begun to question the importance of realism (in terms of graphics) when it comes to making a good, fun game. But, is realism in terms of the degree to which gameplay represents reality the same thing? Part of me enjoys the realism of games like Call of Duty, and I find it to be extremely engaging. But many great games also emphasize fantasy, which is also very engaging. Halo is an example of a shooter that I think is more focused on fantasy than realism (and is arguably the most well-known videogame of all time), but Bulletstorm seems to take it to the extreme.What do you guys think? Does Bulletstorm look like it’s pushing too far away from realism? Or do you think it will actually be a popular release?

Your Identity (as Master Chief)

I recently came across an article interviewing Bungie‘s Joseph Staten about the creation of Master Chief, the protagonist of 3 of the Halo games and one of the most recognizable characters in video game history. Here’s the link:

http://www.industrygamers.com/news/be-yourself-or-not-halo/

I found it interesting that they specifically talk about the players identifying with Master Chief, that they intentionally left him as more of a blank slate so people would see themselves as Master Chief (I know it worked on me!). Remember Gee’s principle of Identity, that good learning comes from being able to take on new identities related to the task at hand.

The part about Cortana’s evolution intrigues me, too. She started off as a person in your ear, just telling you what to do. But by the end of the 2nd game (even the 1st game, to some extent) you saw more of a human side of her, and that in turn brought out more of the human side of John (Master Chief’s real name).

I initially thought that humanizing Chief more would make him less relatable. However, after I thought about it, I realized it actually made him MORE relatable, at least for me. If the character I’m playing as has no backstory, if he/she is just some nameless person with no personality, I don’t get as attached (this excludes games like Fallout or Oblivion, where you create your character and there is some minimal, general backstory). But when I see that the character acts more like a human, and I can get involved in their backstory (for example, that Master Chief was (supposedly) the last Spartan made him totally awesome, like he was badass enough to survive. I say supposedly because in the Halo books/graphic novels we learn that there are still other Spartan-IIs surviving, and an entirely new program of Spartan-IIIs). The fact that John shows his human side around Cortana, and they have an emotional relationship, made it easier to think of myself as Master Chief.

As a sidenote, if you couldn’t tell, I really enjoy the Halo series. I know there are a lot of people who despise and hate it, but it’s been one of my top game series for a very long time now.

Archives