How the heck can the Wii help us have more games with sex & violence?
Perhaps this is more hope than theory, but even die-hard cynics are allowed occasional dalliances with pleasant speculation.
How the heck can the Wii help us have more games with sex & violence?
Perhaps this is more hope than theory, but even die-hard cynics are allowed occasional dalliances with pleasant speculation.
This is a landmark comic for me. Stolen Pixels has now reached 144 strips, which is where DMotR ended. Assuming The Escapist doesn’t axe me before next Tuesday, this will be my longest-running and most prolific series. High five. Happy one gross, etc.
People have asked where Travis went. It’s been 30 strips since he showed up, and I don’t see him cropping up in the next couple of weeks. He’s still an arrow in my quiver, but the Breen monologues are stealing most of his “current events gaming news” material. Pretty much the only time I need him now is for industry events (like E3) and end-of-year wrap-ups.
The EA guy is probably the character I miss the most. It’s been a year since he last showed up. I’m still on the lookout for chances to use him, but these days Activision is the one really pissing in the gaming well and then doing press releases about the delicious flavor and nutrient value of their piss. There might have been a joke in there somewhere when EA went after Tim Langdell, but I’d already done a lot of stuff on Langdell and I didn’t want to obsess over the guy. The only other really big EA news this year was the recent string of layoffs and studio closings, which have been an absolute bloodbath. That news will become more meaningful over the next year. We’ve seen what they cut, but it will really hit home when we see what they didn’t cut. Or rather, what games those layoffs made possible. When the odious fruit of that rotten tree finally ripens, it might be time to bring back the EA guy. (Unless they turn out a string of stellar games, in which case: That’d be really cool too.)
The Extra Life made me laugh, all the more so because we were just talking about mouse-inverting the other day.
And as a follow-up to that: I’m working on moving to WASD. It’s going a lot better than I expected. I’ll probably never be as fluid with WASD as I was with the numpad (or it will take a long time) but I’m pretty much to the point where I can play without finger fumbles, which is all I really need. The only trouble is that you need to use your pinky, and I’m not used to doing that. So my pinky finger is really stupid and slow and not getting with the program. Other than that, the process of playing a few hours of a simple game and moving forward is working really well.
This advertisement is beyond the ken of my feeble human mind, and I demand that someone explain it to me:
Link (YouTube) |
I can’t even tell if they’re making fun of or celebrating the games depicted. Or how either of them relates to fried potatoes in a can.
Via.
The four playable characters / classes of borderlands are:
![]() |
Lilith is a crit-stacking character with some area-of-effect spells. Mordecai is the sniper. (He also has the pet bird which is either completely worthless or the single most powerful attack in the game, depending on how you spend your skill points.) Despite being the “soldier”, Roland is actually the team medic / re-supply engineer. Brick is Brick. Brick punches. Brick also use rockets.
I’ve clocked some serious hours on this game. I’ve taken two different characters (a Brick and a Lilith) into their 20’s as part of a group. I’ve taken a single-player character (another Brick) to level 40. (The initial play-through ends in the early 30’s.) I’ve also taken a Roland and a Mordecai into their 20’s solo. That, and I have a couple of characters in their teens. I haven’t done the math yet, but that’s a lot of play time.
One of the things that is greatly confusing the discussions about the game mechanics is the number of different versions of the game. I’ve been told there are pronounced differences between the PC and Xbox offerings, which is further complicated by the fact that the PC version was patched at some point and important changes were made. (And the “full patch notes” are not actually entirely full. For example, try driving the car pre-patch and you’ll notice how easily it was to get caught on the most trivial scenery. Yet changes to the car aren’t even mentioned in the notes. What other slight changes or fixes are in there?)
So when we’re arguing about what weapons “work” or are “unbalanced” we’re not the group of blind men describing different parts of an elephant. We’re blind people describing what could be entirely different creatures, which may not even be part of the same zoo.
![]() |
Guns each have stats, some of which (like accuracy) are shown in the interface and some (like reload speed) which can only be determined through use.
In the patched version, the sniping mechanics are broken. I wondered why I was having so much trouble sniping in this game. I’ve done a lot of FPS sniping in my day, and I’m familiar with how this usually works. I had a lot of instances where I was pretty sure I should have hit someone but didn’t. But you normally can’t make an accusation like this on the internet, or the people who have lashed their self-esteem to their “skillz” will dogpile with accusations of sucking, newbishness, and whining. But the vanishing sniper bullet has happened often enough and reliably enough that I’m prepared to say the hit detection is, in fact, utter hogwash. Far too often I find myself thinking, “What IS this dude’s hit-box shaped like? Because it’s not shaped anything like his body.“
I was giving the game the benefit of the doubt, assuming that the “accuracy” stat of the gun was throwing off my aim so that I’d miss even when I had the target all lined up. That’s plausible enough, although the misses and hits were often grouped suspiciously.
After spending many hours with the sniper rifle, I’m convinced it’s a simple hit-box problem and not some slight subtlety with the accuracy rating. In short: Sometimes you just can’t hit a dude, no matter what. He’s behind some knee-high cover and I’m shooting at him over the top of (say) a box or something. Yet round after round will magically pass through him. Did I miss? Did the gun miss? Did I blink? Then, I move into the open and he stops standing behind the knee-high wall and suddenly I can repeatedly ding him in the forehead without fail.
I satisfied my doubts on this last week when I found myself above some dudes. I aimed downward, put the dot right on the head of my target, pulled the trigger, and “missed”. Again. And again. Every time. He was standing still and he wasn’t that far away. And my aim wasn’t off. The bullet was passing through his skull and striking the ground behind him. I couldn’t see the bullet impact (which was obscured by his head) but I could see the dirt it kicked up, which from my vantage point formed a halo of dirt around his cheating, lame-ass skull. I aimed center-torso, and still hit nothing. Then the two of us changed position and I dropped him with a single shot. Hmmm.
I suspect there is also a maximum distance, after which the bullet abruptly vanishes rather than dropping and losing effectiveness, but I don’t know. It’s a bit hard to study when people are trying to kill you, and when people aren’t doing that there’s no way to study.
This is not to say that the sniper rifle is underpowered. Aside from frustrating hit-detection shenanigans the thing is perfectly serviceable, and sometimes a sniper rifle is the perfect tool for the job. But the dodgy hit mechanics really are a killjoy sometimes. It’s like playing sports with a bad referee.
![]() |
Depending on how you look at it: Either the rocket launcher is lame or the shotgun is overpowered. A standard-issue shotgun is going to have roughly the same damage output as a launcher of the same quality and level. Except that rockets pass through standard guys, so you must aim at their feet to deal splash damage. This means anyone behind a waist-high barrier or at the top of a small rise will be immune to rockets. Launchers fire more slowly and have a smaller capacity than shotguns, and the rounds themselves are rarer and you can carry less of them. Worst of all, rockets can’t ever score critical hits, which are a huge part of the game. (And rockets also have the obvious disadvantage that you can hurt yourself with them.) Wall-based splash damage is kind of dodgy and suspect, and a few times I had rockets go through a mook and strike the wall a meter behind him without dealing any damage whatsoever. So rocket launchers deal the same damage as shotguns, aside from all of their various disadvantages that make them less reliable, efficient, and versatile.
I stacked all of my skill points into the rocket-launcher focused branch of Brick’s skill tree, and it was never a contest: The shotgun outperformed it every time, going all the way from level 20 to level 40, through several generations of weapons. There was never a time when a launcher was my weapon of choice, because I always had a shotgun that outperformed it.
Another thing confusing the discussion on weapon mechanics is the extreme randomness of the weapon stats. The more you use a type of weapon, the more you’ll gain skill-ups in that weapon class and thus the better you’ll be at it. But when it comes to choosing a good weapon, you’re really at the mercy of the random number generator. As you level, you’re going to find truckloads of ordinary weapons, and a very small number of godlike foe-blasting treasures. It’s possible you’ll want to focus on sniping, but find yourself with an SMG so exceptional that it’s just not worth getting out your good-but-not-remarkable rifle. This is particularly true in the early game, when you’ll outgrow weapons rapidly and your arsenal will see a lot of turnover.
250 damage at level 7 is huge, and I wish I’d screenshotted it. It was a one-shot killing machine for several levels after that, and Lilith used that sniper rifle for over ten levels. She also had a really good shotgun and never found an exceptional SMG, despite the fact that her powers are built around crit-stacking the SMG and adding elemental effects to rapid-fire shots.
In Diablo 2, you usually stuck to your class weapon. It doesn’t matter if you just found a super-extra-double rare two-handed sword, your sorceress probably wasn’t going to use it. In Borderlands we have the same looting & leveling pace, but the stats of the stuff you find will often overshadow your core skills and abilities. It doesn’t matter that you’re a Mordecai focused on sniper rifles, because that combat rifle you just found is so good it will outperform your sniper rifle anyway.
Thankfully, re-arranging your skill points is very cheap, so you can experiment and move points around to match your weapon loadout. There’s nothing wrong with this approach, it just feels… strange. In Borderlands, you are your guns, and everything else is secondary.
So when I see lots of comments from people saying “the rocket launcher is AWESOME” and others saying “the rocket launcher is balls”, it’s obvious that at least one of these two people had their opinion shaped by an exceptional weapon, or lack thereof.
![]() |
Now, all of this sounds really bad, but the truth is the game is a blast anyway.
There. I spent one sentence telling you the game is awesome and 1,400 words telling you how broken it is. Which of those is going to leave a bigger impression in your thoughts? Because the one-sentence thing is probably the most important, but I couldn’t offer that without giving you the other stuff.
Who cares if the weapons aren’t balanced? Once in a while you’ll find the Holy Grail of Rocket Launchers and you’ll be blasting people to bits with it. Other times you’ll find that one shotgun that seems to be the Solution to All Problems, and you’ll use that. The latter is far, far more likely, but they’re all fun to use.
While writing my Borderlands review (more coming later today) and reading the comments from my previous post on the game I suddenly realized that I seem to have lost sight of the original goal I had in reviewing games.
My original goal was to just put games under a microscope and go over why various mechanics work, or not. I didn’t intend to review games in the sense of “thumbs up / thumbs down” sort of way, because the internet is lousy with that sort of business and lots of people do that better than I do. (Hint: Most people don’t want to read 5,000 words over the course of two weeks to determine if they should get a game or not.) But I seem to have gravitated towards that lately. I’m not sure if this is just an easy and welcoming rut for a writer, or if my approach has been shaped by feedback.
Kind of odd. I feel like someone who has just arrived in New York, put his car into storage, secured a hotel room, and unpacked his bags. And then he suddenly remembers he’d meant to go to Nashville.
Here is part 2 (of 3) of Dr. Breen interviewing Mario.
These Breen comics are a lot of fun, and much easier to write than the normal stuff I do. (Partly it’s because it’s not such an uphill battle getting screenshots.)
I'm not surprised a fighting game has an absurd story. I just can't figure out why they bothered with the story at all.
An ongoing series where I work on making a 2D action game from scratch.
There's a wonderful way to balance difficulty in RPGs, and designers try to prevent it. For some reason.
My picks for what was important, awesome, or worth talking about in 2015.
For one of the most popular casual games in existence, Match 3 is actually really broken. Until one developer fixed it.
Denuvo videogame DRM didn't actually kill piracy, but it did stop it for several months. Here's what we learned from that.
A long-form analysis on one of the greatest horror games ever made.
Obviously they are. Right? Actually, is this another one of those sneaky hard-to-define things?
What are publishers doing to fight piracy and why is it all wrong?
My picks for what was important, awesome, or worth talking about in 2012.